DescriptionDespite federal, state and municipal policies implemented since the early 20th century to reduce the prevalence of lead poisoning there are still many people living in the United States who are at-risk of being exposed to lead. In an effort to reduce lead poisoning risk further in the United States this thesis examines how various lead poisoning experts in Mercer County, New Jersey define and perceive the “lead-poisoning risk-subject.” By means of analyzing how lead poisoning experts perceive the risk of lead poisoning this research works towards understanding and deconstructing the underlying assumptions pervading within experts’ discourses surrounding who lead effects, where it is most prevalent, and what the most effective solutions are in reducing the sources of lead exposure. This research adds to the current lead poisoning literature by means of pointing out the limitations of using risk factors to define lead poisoning risk and offering a new framework through which lead poisoning risk may be more productively measured. Furthermore, this research argues that in order for there to be a permanent reduction of the sources of lead exposure the “lead problem” needs to be re-politicized and constructed as a problem which effects a variety of people living across geographical, racial and class boundaries. By means of making lead poisoning into a problem the public can “see” we may be able to truly make lead poisoning a thing of the past.