Lead and other toxic metals in plastic play foods: Results from testing

Overview

This source page is a mechanical bulk-ingest record for a PDF in the research-pulls corpus. It preserves source-level identity, routeable product/analyte scope, and exact extracted numeric lines for later human or fresh-context audit. It does not derive HMTc thresholds, percentiles, or brand-by-brand comparisons.

Key numbers

The worker extracted the full PDF text with layout preservation twice and compared extraction hashes before commit. The following lines are copied from numeric/table-bearing regions of the PDF and retain the source units and wording where legible:

occurring arsenic in PFTs. The XRF analysis found 8.63% (17/197) of PFTs from the childcare center con
concentrations ranged from 6.14 ppm to 11,999.00 ppm with a median of 40.00 ppm. Additionally, 7.10% of all
PFTs tested had detectable levels of arsenic which ranged from 9.30 ppm to 1134.42 ppm and had a median
value of 113.20 ppm. Arsenic concentrations in 6.60% of PFTs’ exceeded the US voluntary standard for arsenic in
reflects on the utility of portable XRF and SKC Full Disclosure® Lead found contaminant exposure from 126 chemicals in plastic toys through
products by setting a threshold of 90 ppm of lead in paint and painted
Lead is a well-documented neurotoxicant that delays and reduces items, effective from 2009, as well as a reduction in acceptable lead
dangerous to children” (606 CMR 7.00, n.d.). However, toys and Stage 1 (n = 12 PFTs) prompted the testing of all PFTs in the childcare
few affordable, easy-to-use, and accurate kits available for childcare refers to any XRF reading above the limit of detection (LOD). In Stage 2
nishings, materials, or equipment. To close that gap, the SKC Full cataloged (Table 1), and sampled using XRF. Based on further positive
be used in identifying surface lead on walls, toys, and playground ma newly purchased PFTs for comparison (Table 1).
colorimetric results (see Fig. 2). We combine the wipes with portable purchased similar PFTs also contained lead and arsenic. The used
followed in Stage 2. The XRF results for all three stages were compared in the part per million (ppm) range.
across stages, colors, paintedness, and mass categories (Table 1).
Table 1: provides details on the PFTs tested in this study including 2.1.1. XRF calibration
portable Thermo Niton XL3T XRF (Thermo Fisher Billerica, MA). XRF ferences between samples to allow for the variations in sampling pa
analysis is very high. emissions in the 8–15 keV range.
ment of the lead beta peak at 12.6 keV to ensure correct fitting of the sample for lead means that the sample was above 18 μg and appears
lead alpha at 10.55 keV while in the presence of arsenic. The arsenic reddish orange when sprayed with the disclosure sprays, while a nega
et al., 2011; Beaucham et al., 2017). A pre-cleaned wipe is used to any toys tested and their corresponding error ranges. The CSV sheet was
then sprayed with potassium rhodizonate solution, and then 5% acetic number” and the “sample number” physically registered on each sam
lead over 18 μg, yellow for no lead or <18 μg). Color intensity is pro samples testing above the Level of Detection (LOD) for each element
portional to the amount of lead in the wipe, and color calibrations (from were calculated and recorded (in Supplemental tables S1 and S2 - except
Preparation of materials and sampling of the surfaces was conducted of “>threshold” between new and old toys (Table 2).The Z score test
normal distribution centered ~700.00 ppm, well over the CSPIA lead or arsenic. Brown, orange, and red PFTs in our Stage 1 and 2
threshold of 100.00 ppm. Therefore, running a one-sided z-score test samples were most likely to test positive for lead. Brown toys were most
results, and in an additional model we were able to represent < LOD concentration measured by XRF (details in Appendix 1). No other var
point estimate concentration typical of XRF readings. Basic descriptive Table 2: Percentage of PFTs with lead and arsenic concentration over
statistics were generated for the total sample, as well as each subset of CPSIA upper threshold for lead (100 ppm) and US Voluntary Standard
the sample, stratified by color, material, batch, how damaged they were for Arsenic (25 ppm) respectively.
(usedness), whether they were painted (paintedness), and mass Table 2: Rate of XRF PFTs concentrations measured above CPSIA
(Table 1). Cumulative frequencies were calculated using the same strata upper threshold for lead or the US Voluntary Standard for arsenic.
(Table 2). Color intensity from the wipes was summarized to be “Used” refers to samples from the childcare center, “New” refers to
were assessed, one replacing “<LOD” lead readings with 0.00, one cat In Stages 1 and 2, 197 PFTs were tested using the portable XRF in
egorical model using “<LOD” vs “>LOD” as a dummy variable, and one strument. The US maximum threshold for lead in paint is 90 ppm, and
model was most preferable, due to the very high proportion of “<LOD” as of 2014. In Stage 1, 6/12 toys tested positive for lead in Stage1 (range:
In total, 35 PFTs tested above the XRF LOD for lead, 14 of which also itive using XRF from Stages 1 and 2. All colorimetric wipe tests showed
tested above the LOD for arsenic. We describe the XRF findings no detectable levels of lead. While 17.77% of used toy samples had
arsenic threshold (25 ppm) for new and used PFTs by color, paintedness,
and weight (Table 2). No new PFTs tested positive for lead or arsenic. Of
Fig. 3. Lead XRF concentration results for PFT samples above limits of detection (n = 35) across Stages 1 and 2 (Batch A). The red threshold line indicates the range
(9.30 ppm–1134.42 ppm, median: 113.21 ppm). All of these PFTs also however, there was no statistical difference (using the Fischer exact test)

Methods (brief)

Health courses in Masters of Public Health programs at Northeastern ture on lead in plastic toys, a student group in the class sampled a small
Oftentimes, these sources of exposure can be community dependent. A contaminants in toys make it practically impossible to sample all toys,
likelihoods of containing lead. For instance, in polyvinyl chloride (PVC) ence projects involve image analysis, water sample collection, or air
lead in plastic metallic costume jewelry (Guney and Zagury, 2012; Yost methodologies tested more than 1000 drinking water samples from
PFTs are frequently mouthed by children as they mimic preparing and only participate in sample gathering, they can be excluded from the full
where none professionals do more than just gather samples (Hendricks (with the initial exposure study counting as Stage 1), between March
rative community science is improved if expensive laboratory analysis is pling method was used. In Stages 1 and 2, a large, stratified sample of
few affordable, easy-to-use, and accurate kits available for childcare refers to any XRF reading above the limit of detection (LOD). In Stage 2
nishings, materials, or equipment. To close that gap, the SKC Full cataloged (Table 1), and sampled using XRF. Based on further positive
Fig. 2. Images of SKC Full Disclosure® Lead Detection wipes showing a negative sample test (a plastic pretzel) compared to a positive control (lead solder). The
positive control is red confirming the presence of lead and the negative sample is yellow suggesting no lead. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure
cataloged and sampled using XRF, following the identical procedure range. The detection limit for most measurable elements in the PFTs was
portable Thermo Niton XL3T XRF (Thermo Fisher Billerica, MA). XRF ferences between samples to allow for the variations in sampling pa
from an x-ray tube. The x-rays from the device interact with the sample etc). The calibration normalization to the Compton scattering peak of
surement. The XRF measures about 1 cm2 area of the sample, but with taking photos of the labeled wipes for record keeping (Full Disclosure
the calibration and normalization procedure, units are given in parts per Kit, n.d.). We did not record an area since the samples were irregularly
million and comparable to microgram per gram. The detection limit shaped, however, wipes were used to sample all outer surfaces of the
does depend on the thickness of the samples themselves, as more sam sample for at least 10 s. Positive and negative controls were also sampled

Implications

This page makes the source discoverable for category-level evidence routing. Values remain source-native and should be used only with the stated matrix, species, basis, geography, and censoring context from the paper. The page does not convert total mercury to methylmercury or use total arsenic as inorganic arsenic.

Wiki pages this source may touch

Verification notes

Identity check: DOI, raw handle, candidate cite-key, and SHA-256 were compared against existing wiki/sources/ pages before creation.
Full-PDF read: pdftotext -layout was run on the full PDF twice; extracted text hashes matched before the page was written.
Numeric verification: numeric/table-bearing lines were selected mechanically from the verified extraction and preserved without unit conversion or rounding.
Brand firewall: the worker skips PDFs when extracted numeric lines appear brand/manufacturer-sensitive; this page contains category-level or species-level evidence only.
HMTc firewall: no threshold, percentile, pass/fail, clean/dirty, or certification math is stated.

Update history

The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git. When DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.

Commit	Date	Change	Description
b01ec52c	2026-08-04	major	2 sections added
d49e450f	2026-08-03	major	5 sections added; narrative text revised