Very relevant , you stated 12 months ago you were only shooting for family so don’t matter if it’s copper or lead ? No you’re against it I’m just asking what’s changed in the space of a year ?
Latest article on lead micro and nano particles in deer and grouse
- Thread starter Heym SR20
- Start date
tackb
Well-Known Member
absolutely, but like with the climate change nonsense it would make sense to deal with the major sources first or the major offenders , like we are responsible for so little climate change if we sank into the sea tomorrow it would make zero difference to the world but would inconvenience 70 million people for no benefit.
i'm sure there is larger sources of lead than shot game so why not deal with them before trifling round the edges for no real discernible benefit despite inconveniencing a lot of people and lowering animal welfare ?
the same as until china (and others) deal with their climate destroying behaviour anything we do is a waste of time and crippling us financially as a country.
Its irrelevant to whether ingesting lead is a good idea or not. I know its hard to believe but there you go.
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
Maybe he read some of the studies and decided that they couldn’t all be wrong?
Possibly so but I’d sure like to hear the answer from the horses mouth , I think more likely he’s been influenced by others
I understand your point and to an extent don't disagree with it.
I suppose if we could remove all sources of poisons the question is why wouldn't we?
The fact is in reality in many cases we have little choice, or rather the choices we have are limited by decisions made that we have no control over.
So can you answer why you were fine with it 12 months ago and feeding it your family ?
Were all influenced by others, even you. It neither makes you or me right nor wrong in general terms.
As i have pointed out repeatedly, and although i disagree with much of Althorpe's arguments, the available evidence tells everyone that lead is harmful. He has helpfully posted info today that puts his position into a context in that metallic lead is less harmful than (some or all?) lead compounds.
So why were you willing to feed it your family 12 months ago by your own admission?
tackb
Well-Known Member
you kind of were forced then eh?
lead absolutely is the best for projectiles and frankly thats not really disputable your one example is from two deer that you recovered so how much better could either bullet have performed ?
as an aside i used sst's for a while and personally thought them a little fragile for general deer stalking , good for longer range where the bullet has slowed down though.
palmer_mike
Well-Known Member
I’ve not heard of that ammo, had a little google an couldn’t find it either?
What sort of primers does it use?
Sorry i have no idea, heres a link Expansion Tip® Bullets
To confirm i am uk based these are stocked by ISS my local RFD.
Best thing you’ve said so far
Yes. If you were to eat some lead, depending on various factors, some of the lead will react with stomach acid and so on, and become Pb2+ ions which are toxic, and you'd absorb that. (Those ions can be partially removed with chelation therapy (basically attaching them onto a material and preventing them from acting any further on the body.) The lead metal itself is not toxic, so long as it's metal. Inorganic lead compounds are much more toxic - Buchan says 14x more toxic for lead carbonate which is fairly insoluble - other inorganic lead compounds will be much more soluble and therefore much more toxic. Lead nitrate in particular. Some lead compounds were made of lead and other toxic heavy metals. They are again another category more toxic. Lead paint is very toxic and no laughing matter if ingested. These forms of lead ingestion are slightly cumulative, but 99% of it is excreted within a few weeks.
Then there are organolead compounds, this is lead bound to organic molecules which can be absorbed and transported in animals very much more easily. These are highly toxic and include TEL which was the form in leaded petrol - and they are cumulative, they cannot be removed from the body. There are dangerous and you want to be extremely careful to avoid exposure to them.
So when we think about lead in ammunition and say it's crazy that we've banned lead in petrol and paint but not in ammunition, it isn't crazy. It's appropriate, because some forms are very,very much more toxic and a severe risk, and lead in ammunition is a minor risk easily managed by following normal and longstanding good practice. There will perhaps come a day, where we've regulated every greater risk out of existence and it's time to turn to lead ammunition, but it's not any time soon.
For the time being, on the available scientific information, it is very much more dangerous to breathe air than it is to eat game shot with lead (particularly if you are not silly enough to fail to trim away the meat surrounding the wound channel, as has been normal practice for goodness knows how long. I rather wish air was cleaner,but the risk is acceptable in this country.
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
Your quite right, a pricket did fall over this morning
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
I also stopped using they years ago for the same reason.
I switched to Speer. Seemed to stay together better in my rifles.
Yes, but unreasonable to argue that we don't need to deal with the sources of harm in order of severity and there's no objective reason to put lead before other harmful chemicals.
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
Not forced, I just looked at the trend and shifted before I I had to.
I was also questioning whether the lead I’d been consuming all my life was doing me harm.
I decided it might be, so I stopped.
Just not true, lead begins to strip and melt in the bore once velocity gets to around 1600fps.
You absolutely need to jacket it to go faster.
It’s also way too soft on its own. It relies on the jacket to control expansion.
It is demonstrably better at retaining energy and velocity due to its density.
I quoted 2 examples, that is 2 from many hundreds taken with lead and around 100 taken with copper.
Both bullets recovered bullets performed as designed, I prefer the copper on game, happy to use lead on the range
Agreed, they do tend to create quite a bit of damage and mess with limited penetration.
I find the copper far more predictable in performance and it virtually always exits, thats why I only found 1, the rest are out there somewhere.
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
SST and Speer are too soft in my opinion, I like the sierra GK lovely bullet
tackb
Well-Known Member
i'm sorry i assumed we were talking about modern bullets not pure lead projectiles which are not really used for deer stalking in todays world
the other stuff we agree you're just not willing to say that out loud yet
Similar threads
