Incredibly interesting article about a new (glowing!) Lead testing product…
This is an ad-free article.
To make a contribution to help us keep our most widely-read articles ad-free, click here. Thank you.
Amazon Affiliate Link for This Product
https://amzn.to/46zT2ai
Published: Tuesday — November 28, 2023
I have been aware of this new Lead-testing technology for most of this year (2023), as I have been collaborating with the U.S. distributor for the product on several projects. I have not yet used the product personally — but I have seen it in use and I look forward to trying it out in person (and comparing the qualitative results of this new product to the quantitative results for testing the same items using XRF technology)!
In the meantime, please do read this incredibly interesting article (link below). If you choose to buy some of this product to test it out, here’s the Lead Safe Mama, LLC Amazon affiliate link: https://amzn.to/46zT2ai — I look forward to hearing back from you with your experience using this product, too! Click the image below to read the article.
Update: I have asked the distributor for a copy of the MSDS (Materials Safety Data Sheet) for the product, and will publish it here as soon as I have a copy of it. Please do keep the questions coming as we are putting together a FAQ list for the manufacturer/ distributor and I’m certain they will get us answers.
Here are some of the questions posed by the Lead Safe Mama community so far:
- Is it safe?
- Is it safe to use around children?
- Does one need to use safety precautions when using the product? (Gloves, mask to prevent inhalation, etc.)
- Does it damage the item that the product is sprayed on?
- Can the product be safely (and completely) wiped off the item tested (not leaving any residue behind)?
- Can it safely be used on things like toys (that will then be returned to the child to play with after it has been used)?
- Can we review the MSDS (Materials Safety Data Sheet)?
- How has the safety been tested (especially in terms of safety for use around children)?
- One reader commented that one of the ingredients in the compound is an eye and skin irritant (possibly a respiratory irritant, too. Is that true of the final product? If so, what are the precautions one should use?
- What’s the low threshold of detection in ppm?
- Can it find Lead in toys at levels as low as 90 ppm and lower?
- Can it find Lead in new products — like dishes (where the surface is not deteriorated at all)?
- Will it detect Lead on new condition, high-fire Lead-containing ceramic tiles (like for modern bathroom floors)?
- Once you have sprayed the substance on an item, how long does it glow for (does it glow until you wash it off)?
- Will the spray work on lower-level Lead in glassware (vs. Leaded crystal)? For example, glassware that is between 1000 and 10,000 ppm Lead (vs. crystal which is typically 100,000 to 500,000 ppm Lead)?
- Will it work on enamel paints applied to metal (in new condition, not deteriorated at all)?
- Does it have different low thresholds of detection on different types of items/ products (metal, painted wood, painted metal, ceramics, soil, etc.)?
Do you have a question not in the above list? Please add it to the comments on this post. Thank you!
Tamara Elise Rubin
Owner
Lead Safe Mama, LLC
Amazon links are affiliate links. If you purchase something after clicking on one of Lead Safe Mama, LLC’s affiliate links, Lead Safe Mama, LLC may receive a percentage of what you spend at no extra cost to you.
For those new to the Lead Safe Mama website:
Tamara Rubin is a multiple-federal-award-winning independent advocate for childhood Lead poisoning prevention and consumer goods safety, and a documentary filmmaker. She is also a mother of Lead-poisoned children (two of her four sons were acutely Lead-poisoned in 2005).
- Tamara owns and runs Lead Safe Mama, LLC — a unique community collaborative woman-owned small business for childhood Lead poisoning prevention and consumer goods safety.
- Since July of 2022, the work of Lead Safe Mama, LLC has been responsible for six product recalls (FDA and CPSC).
- All test results reported on this website are science-based, accurate, and replicable.
- Please check out our press page to see some of the amazing coverage of our work so far this year!
Never Miss an Important Article Again!
Join our Email List
Oh my goodness!
Have you tried this, yourself, Tamara?
I am agog to hear how reliable it is!
Please let us know your experience with it and how it compares to test results with XRF!
It’s quite promising – but I don’t have any personal experience with it yet.
T
Do you know if the contents are considered non-toxic or at least benign enough for me to use around house like the 3m swabs were? I will buy and report back what I find 😉
I believe they are safe – but I haven’t seen the data sheets on that. I will look into that for you. That’s a great question.
It seems it contains methylammonium bromide. This is rated as an irritant. https://www.chemicalbook.com/msds/methylammonium-bromide.htm
Not to be confused with methyl bromide which is a highly toxic pesticide used to fumigate pallets.
It seems to be more sensitive and work on a greater range of materials than LeadCheck or Scitus.
Fascinating stuff! It’s a great discovery. However, I’m guessing because it’s so sensitive it will have the limitation that anything that naturally contains lead will light up and for some things it won’t be useful because we won’t know if the level is concerning or not, eg a ceramic But a great test nonetheless.
Tamara’s testing is still going to be the standard because of the other chemicals in (almost) everything! But for Lead only, I think it sounds quite interesting.
p.s. Tamara, I really appreciate the links you’ve been giving us, I’ve ordered quite a few things on Amazon.
I certainly second all the questions asked above. I’m extremely interested in ordering a Lumetallix kit, but I think I need Tamara to test it herself and let us all know if the product itself is safe – inhalation/can it be totally rinsed off a dish/can a tested dish (one that obviously tests free of lead) then be safely used after washing? I’ve written to Lumetallix and been told just spray, wash and rinse and off you go – but I will be reassured with what Tamara concludes after doing the test herself on dishes.
A couple of us in the LEAPP Alliance have made contact with the developers and will be testing the product soon
I will be very interested in your findings! Where would you post them?
Tim Pye, would you tell us a little about your background? Are you a scientist? I would love to know that someone with a scientific background was going to test this product.
Hi Victoria Lee,
I can put BSc (Hons) behind my name if that counts. I will use a scientific method including controls, but not in laboratory conditions. Probably the same as this test on Scitus swabs…..
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=630688652600161&set=a.377767521225610&type=3&ref=embed_post
Tim Pye
Thanks for that info, Tim Pye. What was your BSc in? You seem very knowledgeable, which is why I was wondering in which field you were educated/worked in. I am very much looking forward to seeing your results!
To Early Adopters-a review was posted on Nov. 28 for this product on Amazon. The safety data sheet warnings appear “light weight” when contrasted with those for Clorox bleach which is in daily use in some homes. https://www.thecloroxcompany.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Clorox-Disinfecting-Bleach_EN2.pdf
That said, I am chemically sensitive and do not use Clorox or any other “cleaning” chemicals from the grocery aisle. The biggest concern in my mind is HOW to most assuredly remove residual methylammonium bromide from test objects.
To Tamara (for questions to be directed to company): What solutions would best facilitate removal of residue? Can hypochlorous acid be safely used in applications where washing test surfaces with mild detergent is not an option? Ditto for diluted white vinegar.
For anyone new to hypochlorous: It is used topically and can be safely sprayed into the mucosa in the proper dilution. (Curativa Bay and Briotech body sprays have salt added.) BrioTech’s hypochlorous acid for sanitizing is most cost effective in gallon concentrate ($30 + shipping) for dilution with distilled water. “Acidic water” for cleaning/sanitizing is available at The Water Store locally. ZeroRes carpet cleaning uses hypochlorous. Household and commercial hypochlorous generators are available from Ecoloxtech.
Thanks to all who have shared info here!
Paula,
I will post the results on the LEAPP Alliance web site. https://leappalliance.org.uk/
Tim Pye
1) The product info says that before using this on glass, the glass may need to be roughed up (such as with sandpaper). Obviously, that would ruin a drinking glass; is there a workaround?
2) If it detects lead on a porcelain or ceramic plate, is it detecting leached (bioavailable) lead on the surface (immediate danger: discard the plates), or is it working similarly to an XRF by detecting lead deeper within the glaze or substrate that might leach in future?
3) Just confirming: seems like an accurate solution for materials that are a challenge for testing with swabs, such as painted objects (not house paint) and vintage vinyl.
The XRF instrument I use generally detects surface levels (it does not do deep readings on substrates like ceramic for example.)
T
Thanks; to clarify: so a positive XRF reading doesn’t distinguish b/w leached, bioavailable lead, versus lead encapsulated in surface glaze (being incapable of reading beneath that to the base material)—but this new spray might solely indicate leached, bioavailable lead on a surface, being incapable of detecting lead still held in the glaze?
Also, new question: it seems that the spray will be effective on non-painted metal surfaces?
No – not exactly. Most surface glazes / coatings ARE the leaded component (with dishware.) They apply a coat of Leaded gloss (especially for vintage items) that is then bioavailable as it IS the surface coating (like with Franciscan China). Alternately, on some substrates (with some coatings) the substrate is read (by the XRF instrument) through the coating, because the coating is thin – like on wood, – or coated aluminum cookware. I think this ideation (in your question) is a bit of an over-simplification and the considerations cannot be addressed that simply unfortunately. Does that make sense? I think different items (types of substrates, usage-patterns, types of coatings, etc.) need to each be evaluated based on separate considerations when it comes to determining likely bioavailability.
Here’s the link for Franciscan china: https://tamararubin.com/category/franciscan/
Tamara, thx for detailed info (I know you’re busy!). Replying to myself b/c there’s no “reply” button for you–hope this Q&A helps others too. You said, “[dishes have] a coat of Leaded gloss (esp. vintage) that is then bioavailable as it IS the surface coating.” I’m confused by the stmt that lead in glaze is immediately bioavailable for all dishes (even those new enough to have passed leach testing initially); could you pls make sure I (& maybe others) don’t misunderstand? Here’s what I thought was true:
1) Dishes predating leach-testing regulations are a nonstarter. Don’t use.
2) Dishes (modern) having passed initial leach tests, but w/ lead in glaze, might be OK when in perfect shape, but the wild card is that we don’t know exactly when they’ll wear down enough that the glaze no longer encapsulates its lead.
3) Acidic foods can speed the process in #2 above.
I’ve spent lots of time on your LSM & FB, & appreciate your help in making sure I get it right. Thank you!
Tim Pye, will you please post a comment on here to let us know when you have published your results on the LEAPP Alliance web site? Thank you for doing the testing!
Oh snap! How exciting! I look forward to seeing what you think when you get a hold of this.
I should be getting some this coming week. I will use it to make videos a.s.a.p.
What can or should be used to clean it off the item that was tested?
We received and used the Lumetallix: Instant Lead Test Kit. I purchased a 92 piece set of HK301 Cameo Platinum china directly from Mikasa (email dated 11/17/09 for item HK301-092 for $674.99 from Lifetime Brands) in November of 2009. My husband used the Lumetallix: Instant Lead Test Kit and used it to test 5 different pieces of my Mikasa HK301 Cameo Platinum china set. All the pieces tested negative. Do you think it is safe to use?
We also tested lots of other things in our house and only found one thing with lead in it: a vintage brass reindeer I had purchased on eBay many years ago. It is a Sarreid style reclining reindeer. Are you still accepting donations for your museum? I can send it to you. If not, I am just going to throw it out.
I’m also interested in Tamara’s opinion, as she has tested Cameo Platinum w/ XRF & found it to be high-lead. So I wonder if these results mean that your Cameo is high-lead (per XRF), but it’s just not leaching yet (per Lumetallix)? Meaning possibly safe for now, but it might begin leaching someday (we don’t know when)?
I found an article that answers some of the questions above.
“We selected methylammonium bromide (CH3NH3Br) dissolved in isopropanol (IPA) as a reagent that is readily available, relatively safe (corrosive, not toxic), and cheap”
“Note that methylammonium bromide is corrosive, isopropyl alcohol is flammable, and UV light is harmful to one’s eyes. Therefore, for practical application of this testing method we recommend the following precautions: (1) wear safety glasses; (2) use in well-ventilated spaces; (3) keep reagent away from sparks, open flames, and other ignition sources, (4) test on less visible areas and wash afterward with water, and (5) do not look in the UV light”
“The testing method shows a sigmoidal-like response in PL (photoluminescence) as a function of the concentration of lead. The brightness is lower at lower concentrations of lead, and the PL dims over time, but the PL, and therefore the presence of lead, is easily detectable even by the naked eye (Figure 2). Bright PL over the entire sample is immediately visible down to concentrations of 10 ng/mm2, while PL becomes inhomogeneous but is still clearly visible down to lead concentrations of 1 ng/mm2.”
“our luminescent lead testing method has a more than 1000 times increase of sensitivity compared to the current state-of-the-art in coloring tests. ”
“We find that spraying the reagent on specimen such as paints, glassware, pottery, soil, batteries, and electrical cables results in bright PL (Figure 4), which is consistent with the verified lead content using XRF”
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.3c06058#
I’m not finding the test results from this product consistent with XRF technology for use with pottery / dishware – am continuing to experiment with it however.
I contacted the author of that study with questions. Here is his response:
Dear Victoria,
Many thanks for your interest in our work. Sorry for the slow reply, last few weeks have been quite busy. Indeed while we were working on the invention we decided to start a company named Lumetallix to make a test that can be used by everyone. In the last two years we worked with NGO’s (especially Pure Earth) to see how the test works best.
1. I read in your study that the ceramic plate and the glass that you tested (Figure 4) were of extremely high lead content, viz, glass 191,835 ppm; plate 226,579 ppm.
Would this test be able to detect lead in a glassware or dishware item whose lead content was 100 ppm and below, in a way that would be obvious to the human eye? You make reference to using a camera lens for low levels of lead detection, but I would not have access to such a camera, nor would I have confidence in my ability to use a camera this way.
The choices of the lead concentrations in these objects was quite random, we just took examples that we could find and had laying around the house (the teakettle was for instance from Lukas’ roommate) We did a series of tests on NIST standardised tests for plastics of children toys and found that we could detect lead between ca. 90 – 300 ppm. However, this detection limit is quite depending on the kind of material that is tested and where exactly the lead is located. For instance in glasses we can detect lead if the glass is not used to much, but for instance my parents leaded wineglasses tested initially negative—most likely because the lead already leached out from the outer layers (bit disturbing). When we scratched glass it tested positive in most cases, and when we would break it you would see very bright luminescence from the exposed interior parts of the glass. We also just worked together with Prof. Lex van Geen on a paper on testing in a wide range of lead paint samples: https://chemrxiv.org/engage/chemrxiv/article-details/6580a658e9ebbb4db938e76a.
For lead dust we are very sensitive, the forensic police in the Netherlands is currently starting up a pilot study to identify shooters using our technology. The ppm values are so low that it is difficult to measure, but we can easily detect it: https://chemrxiv.org/engage/chemrxiv/article-details/658ec226e9ebbb4db9fc48b8
So on the ppm level I think it strongly matters where the lead is located in the material: we can easily detect glazing (see for instance attached movie of a glazed plate from a friend), but we need to further benchmark the test for specific materials. If you want to detect very low concentrations of lead, the easiest way is to do test in a dark place (or at night). Your eye is very sensitive to the green light, so if you do not need to record the signal I think you can already see very low concentrations in this way (in fact we often had the problem that our cameras would get overexposed due to the brightness of the luminescence). If you want to use a camera it can be recommendable to add a sort of UV filter to block out the UV light from the lamp. In general, the testing results are much more convincing in real life than on photos and videos as you can very clearly see that the sample is not just changing color, but instead emitting light.
2. Would the lead have to be present in the glaze of a dish to be detected by the Lumetallix? Or would lead BENEATH the glaze (lead that was present in the substrate) of a ceramic dish be able to be detected by this test?
On the outside it works very well (see the attached movie). When lead is in lower layers it will be a bit more tricky as the reagent needs to reach the lead, but you may in many cases get a faint green glow (we also see this when we test through paint layers). It can be helpful to test the bottom side of the dishes, as there is often a somewhat rougher surface. From experience, we find quite a lot of lead in glazing from for instance south American pottery, prints on dishes (from basically everywhere), and on prints of mugs, glasses etc. Also new aluminum pots from for instance India almost always tested positive. To test this the dripper is especially useful, as you can apply the reagent in a particular spot. In rare cases, some samples it can take a while (even hours) before the perovskite is formed. For instance lead in plastics such as PVC often reacts very slowly. If you test dishes, you can wash the dishes afterwards and use them again. At the moment we are very interested in investigating if the reactivity of the lead also gives an indication of how dangerous it can be.
3. Do you happen to know what the lowest limit of detection would be for Lumetallix in terms of ppm? I am used to reading about lead content as detected by XRF technology, so I wish to have a fair basis of comparison.
This is a very difficult question, and we are working on this extensively. In general the luminescence signal can be benchmarked for concentrations of lead as measured by XRF. We did a first comparison in the supporting information of the paper (see also attached supporting information figure S4) and in the new work with Prof. van Geen. However, care needs to be taken in these comparisons as the techniques are quite different, for multiple reasons:
1. the Lumetallix test mainly works on the surface, while the XRF samples a volume. Exposed lead is easily detectable with luminscence, even in very low concentrations, but if the lead is for instance covered by a layer of paint it will most likely not react. In contrast, XRF can give the same reading in both situations.
2. The Lumetallix test becomes more sensitive the finer the lead is distributed, while for XRF the signal remains the same for different distributions of lead in the sampling volume. The perovskite semiconductor that is formed during the reaction with the reagent emits more light when the particles are smaller. As a result it is possible to detect very fine dust. This can be very useful also to test for lead dust around construction sites and for instance situations with occupational lead hazards (e.g. mining, shooting, construction) and we are currently trying figure out the best way to quantify these concentrations.
Thank you so much for any information that you could provide, to help “shine a light” on my questions.
Many thanks again for contacting and let me know if you have further questions (or find lead in places where which we did not light up yet).
best wishes,
Wim
Of especial interest is the author’s reporting that sometime it takes hours for the reaction to occur in plastics such as PVC.
Also interesting: the author reports that the test identifies lead dust very easily.
What about now? Tamara did you test this product? does it work? what are your comments about this product because it seems many people are buying it but we don’t know how effective it is because no one is comparing the results with other effective tests because we don’t have the machine that you have. People do think the test works, but how do we really know?
I made a bunch of videos comparing the test kit across different types of items tested. They are all on the Lead Safe Mama You Tube channel.
Oh good! I could not find the video about you testing Lumetallix, but if you made a video of testing with it and finding out if it is effective, I would really be interested to watch it. I did order the test directly from the company since Amazon does not sell it to Canada right now. But I would not know if the results are correct if I don’t see your results. I know you have the capacity to know if that test is good because you can compare with the results you get with the other kind of testing. I would really appreciate if you could share a link to watch that video. Thank you very much in advance.
There are about 30 videos of me using it on the YouTube channel.
Here’s the YouTube Video feed link… just start with the second video in the feed and watch from there: https://m.youtube.com/@LeadSafeMama/videos
Thank you very much! I will watch them. I was doing my research only on your website and Facebook. And then you mentioned Youtube, so I tried to find the titles mentioning this particular test and could not find any video mentioning it in the title. I think I have never listened to any of your videos that are not on your website. I now see that I have some videos to watch. My lumetallix is coming by mail, so I will know what to expect after I see your videos. Thanks again.