We had the pleasure of speaking with Dr. Paul B. Allwood, who has recently published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH, ISSN: 1660-4601). Here, he shares insights into his academic journey, research focus, and the motivation behind his recent work.

Name: Dr. Paul B. Allwood
Affiliation: National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA

“Association Between Low-Level Lead Exposure and Serum Gamma-Glutamyl Transferase Concentrations as a Biomarker of Oxidative Stress in U.S. Adolescents Aged 12–19 Years”
by Wenping Hu, Tanya T. LeBlanc, Audrey F. Pennington, Cheryl R. Cornwell and Paul B. Allwood
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2026, 23(1), 28; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph23010028
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/23/1/28

Below is the interview with Dr. Paul B. Allwood:

1. Congratulations on your recent publication! Could you briefly introduce yourself and your current research focus?

I'm the branch chief for the Lead Poisoning Prevention and Surveillance Branch at CDC’s National Center for Environmental Health. My team and I work on CDC's Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program. Our mission is straightforward: to eliminate lead exposure as a public health threat for children. This study came out of that work. We're constantly looking at the data to understand how lead affects children's health, even at levels that were once considered safe. Understanding these effects helps us develop better strategies to protect children across the country.

2. What inspired you to focus on low-level lead exposure in adolescents rather than adults or occupational groups?

Most research on lead and oxidative stress has focused on adults in occupational settings—workers who face relatively high exposures. But adolescents are going through critical developmental changes, and their bodies may be particularly vulnerable to even small amounts of lead. What's more, adolescents are encountering lead in their everyday environments: homes, schools, and neighborhoods. We wanted to better understand whether the lead that persists in our environment today negatively impacts adolescents aged 12-19 years. The short answer is we have confirmed that even low levels of lead in the bloodstream are hazardous to a child’s health. This validates our position that there is simply no safe level of lead exposure.

3. What are the potential public health implications of linking low-level lead exposure to oxidative stress in young people?

The implications are significant. Oxidative stress is essentially cellular damage. It’s linked to a range of health problems, including cognitive difficulties, cardiovascular issues, and kidney dysfunction. If we're seeing signs of oxidative stress at lead levels five times lower than the current CDC blood lead reference value of 3.5 ug/dL, it confirms our current position that no amount of lead exposure is safe for children. From a public health perspective, this reinforces the urgency of eliminating remaining lead sources, such as paint from before the 1978 ban, aging water infrastructure with lead or lead-coated pipes, and contaminated soil, as well as emerging sources like food, cookware, cosmetics, some imported toys and jewelry, and some imported candies and traditional medicines. It's not just about preventing the dramatic lead poisoning cases we saw decades ago; it's about protecting every child and teen from subtle, chronic damage that could affect their long-term health, learning, and quality of life.

4. Your research suggests that lead might be quietly affecting our bodies in ways we don’t immediately see. What would you say is the most underappreciated source of lead exposure today?

I think many people assume lead is a problem of the past because we removed it from gasoline and paint. But lead doesn’t disappear; it persists in the environment for generations. The most underappreciated sources are probably the “invisible” ones: lead service lines delivering water to homes, deteriorating lead paint in older housing (especially in lower-income communities), and contaminated soil around homes and play areas where lead paint chips have accumulated or where leaded gasoline residue settled decades ago. These sources don't make headlines, but they result in ongoing, low-level exposures that add up over time. Children in older neighborhoods are particularly at risk, and many families have no idea they're being exposed.

5. Where do you see the field of environmental health moving in the next 5–10 years, especially regarding low-level toxin exposure?

I think we’re entering an era of greater precision and integration. Our team has worked to address this issue by lowering our blood lead reference value in 2021 and launching the Lead Detect Prize in 2023 to promote the need to enhance the detection of low levels of lead exposure through blood tests administered where medical care is given. I expect we’ll see more research on how lead, cadmium, mercury, and other environmental contaminants interact in the body. We’ll also leverage better biomarkers and more sophisticated data analysis to detect subtle health effects earlier. Technology will play a role, too, with access to better screening tools and real-time environmental monitoring. Ultimately, I hope the field moves toward true primary prevention: removing hazards before exposure occurs, rather than just managing them after the fact.

6. For researchers considering where to publish, what would you say are the strengths of IJERPH compared to other journals in environmental health?

We sought to publish in a journal that had three key features: open access, an interdisciplinary approach, and a reasonable timeframe from manuscript submission to actual publication. Open access is important so our findings can reach the widest possible audience. An interdisciplinary approach is important because it enables us to bridge environmental science, epidemiology, toxicology, and public health practice. A reasonable timeframe is important because it is important to get findings out to inform current prevention efforts.