A 'gift of God'?: The public health controversy over leaded gasoline during the 1920s.

A recent article in the American Journal of Public Health noted the high correlation between the lead content of soil in urban areas and the elevated blood-lead levels of children in these cities . ' An editorial in the same issue of the Journal suggested that the "use of leaded gasoline and [high] traffic density" he lped explain th is observation.2 For most public health expe rts, the controversy over the possible adverse effec ts of leaded gasoline began in the 1970s. What we intend to show in this pa per is that as early as the 1920s public health experts , government officials, scientists, corporate leaders, labor, and the public were acutely aware of the dangers posed by the introduction of lead into gasoline. The depth of concern was manifes ted by the fact that leaded gasoline was banned in New York Cit y for over three years and in many states and other municipalities for shorter periods of time. In 1925, the production of leaded gasoline was halted for over nine months, During the 1920s, the petrochemical and automobile industries emerged as the corporate backbone of the United States. Because the acceptance or rejection of leaded gaso~ line had profound implications for these industries . a spirited and often heated controversy arose. Public health professionals found themselves under intense pressure to sanction and minimize the hazards associated with the manufacture and use of this new potentially (oxic substance and the pages of the American Journal of Public Health were compromised during the months and years when the fate of leaded gasoline was being decided. The debates of that era centered on issues of health and public policy that remain current today. Numerous questions arose regarding the evaluation of health hazards assoc iated with new and potentially harm~ fu l substances, including: How can scientists evaluate the relative importance of acute and chronic effects of toxic subs tances? What should constitute adequate proof of safe ty or harm? What business, profess ional, or government agen~ des should be responsible for evaluating possibly dangerous substances? How does one study potentially toxic s ub~ stances while protect ing the right to health of human subjects? Does industry have to prove a new substance safe or do public health experts have to prove it dangerous? In the face of scientific uncertainty concerning the safe ty or dangers posed by leaded gasoline , and the perceived need for