In the given set of information, both the reading passage and the lecturer discuss lead poisoning of the Roman Empire. The lecturer, however, casts doubt on the author's assertion on several possible reasons why lead poisoning was extensive among Roman upper class.
First, the lecturer asserts that cosmetics used by Romans are unlikely to cause lead poisoning. Although small amount of lead was included in cosmetics, lead would only cause flaking and scarring of skin, and not poisoning. Also, lead poisoning develops when lead is injected into the blood stream, which Romans never did. This refutes the author's claim that lead poisoning was widespread because cosmetics containing lead was used by Romans.
Second, the lecturer claims that lead poisoning due to the supply of water through lead pipes is problematic. This is because pipes composed of calcium was covered with minerals in the inside wall, protecting water from direct contact with lead. This counters the author's statement that lead pipes for delivering water through the city was the cause of lead poisoning.
Lastly, the lecturer indicates that sapa, a syrup that Romans mixed with their wine, contained too little lead to be considered toxic. Excessive lead would be removed while boiling wine, and trivial amount of lead remained in wine. This refutes the reading passage's claim that Romans that enjoyed drinking sapa was poisoning themselves with lead.
감사합니다! |