How did the Roman cities that used aqueducts drink so much water contained with lead and not see a significant decrease in population?

by Eviscerate_Everyone

Lead is very detrimental to neurological development in children. Are there any records that indicate a significant decrease in population or the effects of lead poisoning?

"Lead poisoning can be a serious public health threat with no unique signs or symptoms. Early symptoms of lead exposure may include:

  • persistent fatigue
  • irritability *loss of appetite
  • stomach discomfort and/or constipation
  • reduced attention spaninsomnia

Failure to treat lead poisoning in the early stages can cause long-term or permanent health damage, but because of the general nature of symptoms at early stages, lead poisoning is often not suspected.

In adults, lead poisoning can cause:

  • poor muscle coordination
  • nerve damage to the sense organs and nerves controlling the body
  • increased blood pressure
  • hearing and vision impairment
  • reproductive problems (e.g., decreased sperm count)retarded fetal development even at relatively low exposure levels

In children, lead poisoning can cause:

  • damage to the brain and nervous system
  • behavioral problems
  • kidney damage
  • hearing loss
  • hyperactivity
  • developmental delays in extreme cases
  • death "

My source

Thanks to everyone who answers!

BaffledPlato

You might be interested in this post by /u/Talleyrayand .

Basically, the Romans weren't in that much contact with lead.

  1. The Romans knew lead was dangerous and didn't use it much for containers.

  2. Water continually flowed in their system. It did not sit idle in lead pipes, so it didn't have time to be contaminated.

  3. Much of the water was hard and thus coated the inside of the pipes with minerals, so the water wouldn't be in direct contact with the lead anyway. You can see an example of what would happen inside an aqueduct here .