Nice rant, Keith. But it doesn't change the fact that you're still wrong on the "lead is toxic, toxic = bad" statement. If I believed that myself, I'd be 100% anti-lead. 90% anti-lead doesn't make sense, based on that statement. But then neither do you.

I don't care about anti-lead studies unless it's something I feel a need to deal with. Like about upland game. And given the fact that I can quote two state wildlife agencies that say there isn't any good evidence in that area, I'm not too worried.

And I see you're still dodging the issue of the contrarian biologist who will debunk the lead ban on waterfowl as junk science. Carry on. Unless you can come up with same, nothing else of any interest to read from you on the subject.