Lead Free Bullets Study.

[Fionn]

. If people always hunt from choppers then they must be s**t at actual hunting and are therefore cowards.

Seriously like WTF?

[Tomotron]

. If people always hunt from choppers then they must be s**t at actual hunting and are therefore cowards.

Seriously like WTF?

Go on?

[Fionn]

. If people always hunt from choppers then they must be s**t at actual hunting and are therefore cowards.

Seriously like WTF?

Go on?

No, you made the claim, explain it!

[Tomotron]

. If people always hunt from choppers then they must be s**t at actual hunting and are therefore cowards.

Seriously like WTF?

Go on?

No, you made the claim, explain it!

Firstly, you should have kindly said please as per basic decency taught by our parents. Secondly, I don't think "Seriously like WTF?" was an appropriate response for you to make. It could have been worded as "Please explain further".

There are hunters out there who rely too much on helicopters to do the work for them. They could just as easily ride on quads or bikes and complete the work in a similar manner while abiding by the honorable sporting aspect of hunting. From an honorable point of view, it is not fair for us hunters to have the "high ground" in a helicopter as it does not give prey the chance to react to us since we have an unnatural line of sight from such a high angle.

[straightshooter]

Stellar research and comm's work here by the GMA.

https://www.facebook.com/GameManagementAuthority/posts/pfbid02Sugsyp1uPdUoEdyD3cNCjQUMU5YGHTtCdPjKQ3HNmF6KVBeH6Gz1tnKfUnZbv6DNl

In preparation for the peak deer hunting period, we’re encouraging hunters to visit to their local shooting range and trial lead-free bullets to see which ones perform best in their firearm.

Lead fragments from lead-based bullets pose a risk to wildlife scavengers, like Wedge-tailed Eagles, and humans who consume meat from shot animals.
Researchers from the GMA and University of Melbourne recently x-rayed the carcasses of Hog Deer shot with both lead-based and lead-free bullets. They found that lead-based bullets contaminated the carcasses with metallic bullet fragments significantly more than lead-free bullets.

We’re recommending that all wildlife managers and recreational hunters in Victoria consider transitioning to lead-free bullets.

GREAT
Just when copper prices are set to go through the roof due to all the save the world palaver we must transition (there's that word again) to all or nearly all copper bullets.
It might end up being cheaper to use silver bullets.

[Oldbloke]

Stellar research and comm's work here by the GMA.

https://www.facebook.com/GameManagementAuthority/posts/pfbid02Sugsyp1uPdUoEdyD3cNCjQUMU5YGHTtCdPjKQ3HNmF6KVBeH6Gz1tnKfUnZbv6DNl

In preparation for the peak deer hunting period, we’re encouraging hunters to visit to their local shooting range and trial lead-free bullets to see which ones perform best in their firearm.

Lead fragments from lead-based bullets pose a risk to wildlife scavengers, like Wedge-tailed Eagles, and humans who consume meat from shot animals.
Researchers from the GMA and University of Melbourne recently x-rayed the carcasses of Hog Deer shot with both lead-based and lead-free bullets. They found that lead-based bullets contaminated the carcasses with metallic bullet fragments significantly more than lead-free bullets.

We’re recommending that all wildlife managers and recreational hunters in Victoria consider transitioning to lead-free bullets.

GREAT
Just when copper prices are set to go through the roof due to all the save the world palaver we must transition (there's that word again) to all or nearly all copper bullets.
It might end up being cheaper to use silver bullets.

Potentially pricing people out of shooting or at least discouraging some from taking it up.

[Lazarus]

1. OK, so I'm sure eaten plenty of shotty pellets of lead from rabbits ducks. But not intentionally.

2. Hunters don't deliberately swallow lead from game. They remove the lead damaged meat. Do you eat the bruised lead filled meat?
3. If I had a concern, which I don't , I would visit my Dr and arrange a blood test. If it was elevated I would identify the source and eliminate my exposure. And after a few months Pb levels would return to normal. THATS WHAT HAPPENS I INDUSTRY where the exposure levels are MUCH higher.

You have been conned.

OK, mate.

I'll err on the side of caution, and decades of research.
Are you aware that lead is now considered such an issue, even at miniscule exposure, that building codes have been changed, any copper alloy pipes or fittings with as little as 0.25% are now no longer considered safe to use.

You go with whatever you choose to believe for your own reasons, that's one of your few rights.

[Lazarus]

1. OK, so I'm sure eaten plenty of shotty pellets of lead from rabbits ducks. But not intentionally.

2. Hunters don't deliberately swallow lead from game. They remove the lead damaged meat. Do you eat the bruised lead filled meat?
3. If I had a concern, which I don't , I would visit my Dr and arrange a blood test. If it was elevated I would identify the source and eliminate my exposure. And after a few months Pb levels would return to normal. THATS WHAT HAPPENS I INDUSTRY where the exposure levels are MUCH higher.

You have been conned.

OK, mate.

I'll err on the side of caution, and decades of research.
Are you aware that lead is now considered such an issue, even at miniscule exposure, that building codes have been changed, any copper alloy pipes or fittings with as little as 0.25% are now no longer considered safe to use.

You go with whatever you choose to believe for your own reasons, that's one of your few rights.

https://www.abcb.gov.au/news/2022/advic ... quirements

[bladeracer]

I agree with the study, however, non-lead ammunition is still not widely available in rimfire cartridges. Also, there should always be a choice between lead and non-lead ammo while encouraging people to adopt or favor the latter through gradual education. As for chopper culls, I don't see it as honorable as there's normally a sporting aspect to hunting which gives the prey time to react. If people always hunt from choppers then they must be s**t at actual hunting and are therefore cowards.

There are several non-lead .22LR options but none of those I've tested shoot all that great for me. I'd rather kill the animal with a lead bullet through the brain than wound it with a non-lead bullet through the gut.

Helicopter culling isn't supposed to be hunting, it's supposed to be a time and cost effective way to knock off lots of invasive animals in a very short time. Much the same way that letting a thousand hunters into the area would do but with more agreeable outcomes in animal welfare overall, and very likely a financial profit instead of a loss.

[mchughcb]

If all hunting is done from a Helicopter its going to price me out of hunting. Forget the copper projectiles.

[Oldbloke]

1. OK, so I'm sure eaten plenty of shotty pellets of lead from rabbits ducks. But not intentionally.

2. Hunters don't deliberately swallow lead from game. They remove the lead damaged meat. Do you eat the bruised lead filled meat?
3. If I had a concern, which I don't , I would visit my Dr and arrange a blood test. If it was elevated I would identify the source and eliminate my exposure. And after a few months Pb levels would return to normal. THATS WHAT HAPPENS I INDUSTRY where the exposure levels are MUCH higher.

You have been conned.

OK, mate.

I'll err on the side of caution, and decades of research.
Are you aware that lead is now considered such an issue, even at miniscule exposure, that building codes have been changed, any copper alloy pipes or fittings with as little as 0.25% are now no longer considered safe to use.

You go with whatever you choose to believe for your own reasons, that's one of your few rights.

https://www.abcb.gov.au/news/2022/advic ... quirements

Yes I was aware there was a change.

Err, are you aware that an adult consuming small lump of lead, say a couple of #6 shot occassionally will do you almost no harm at all. And that your body removes any absorbed Pb pretty quickly. And that because your brain is no longer growing will most likely have no effect short or long term.

But a pregnant woman or child consuming tiny amounts of disolved Pb especially daily is waaay more dangerous to the childs CNS? And will likely cause permanent CNS damage, usually a lower IQ.

And do you understand that all safety related standards always have AT LEAST a two fold margin of safety built into them.

I'm afraid you have little understanding.

It needs to be "managed" not eliminated.

[straightshooter]

1. OK, so I'm sure eaten plenty of shotty pellets of lead from rabbits ducks. But not intentionally.

2. Hunters don't deliberately swallow lead from game. They remove the lead damaged meat. Do you eat the bruised lead filled meat?
3. If I had a concern, which I don't , I would visit my Dr and arrange a blood test. If it was elevated I would identify the source and eliminate my exposure. And after a few months Pb levels would return to normal. THATS WHAT HAPPENS I INDUSTRY where the exposure levels are MUCH higher.

You have been conned.

OK, mate.

I'll err on the side of caution, and decades of research.
Are you aware that lead is now considered such an issue, even at miniscule exposure, that building codes have been changed, any copper alloy pipes or fittings with as little as 0.25% are now no longer considered safe to use.

You go with whatever you choose to believe for your own reasons, that's one of your few rights.

https://www.abcb.gov.au/news/2022/advic ... quirements

Actually only organic lead compounds are considered seriously dangerous but to keep it simple enough for the"know nothings" to grasp then any form of lead must be vilified.
It just so happens we have a ready replacement for our plumbing.
Plastic pipes.
Who knows what chemicals will leach out of the plastic (especially if made in China) and what illnesses the leachates may be responsible for.
Now as shooters you should be aware, unless you are a "know nothing", that the principal component of most primers is lead styphnate.
So Danger Will Robinson every time you fire a shot you are blowing a mist of LEAD into the air in your immediate vicinity that you will breathe especially if the wind is blowing into your face.

[Lazarus]

1. OK, so I'm sure eaten plenty of shotty pellets of lead from rabbits ducks. But not intentionally.

2. Hunters don't deliberately swallow lead from game. They remove the lead damaged meat. Do you eat the bruised lead filled meat?
3. If I had a concern, which I don't , I would visit my Dr and arrange a blood test. If it was elevated I would identify the source and eliminate my exposure. And after a few months Pb levels would return to normal. THATS WHAT HAPPENS I INDUSTRY where the exposure levels are MUCH higher.

You have been conned.

OK, mate.

I'll err on the side of caution, and decades of research.
Are you aware that lead is now considered such an issue, even at miniscule exposure, that building codes have been changed, any copper alloy pipes or fittings with as little as 0.25% are now no longer considered safe to use.

You go with whatever you choose to believe for your own reasons, that's one of your few rights.

https://www.abcb.gov.au/news/2022/advic ... quirements

Yes I was aware there was a change.

Err, are you aware that an adult consuming small lump of lead, say a couple of #6 shot occassionally will do you almost no harm at all. And that your body removes any absorbed Pb pretty quickly. And that because your brain is no longer growing will most likely have no effect short or long term.

But a pregnant woman or child consuming tiny amounts of disolved Pb especially daily is waaay more dangerous to the childs CNS? And will likely cause permanent CNS damage, usually a lower IQ.

And do you understand that all safety related standards always have AT LEAST a two fold margin of safety built into them.

I'm afraid you have little understanding.

It needs to be "managed" not eliminated.

My understanding is not at fault OB, you talk about managing risk, then dismiss an attempt to do so as some sort of anti-gun plot, and when I agree with managing the risk, you claim I'm conned.

Your circular argument is making me dizzy.

[Jorlcrin]

There are hunters out there who rely too much on helicopters to do the work for them. They could just as easily ride on quads or bikes and complete the work in a similar manner while abiding by the honorable sporting aspect of hunting. From an honorable point of view, it is not fair for us hunters to have the "high ground" in a helicopter as it does not give prey the chance to react to us since we have an unnatural line of sight from such a high angle.

I've seen a lot of people shoot from helicopters in this area the past 20-odd year, but not one of them was hunting.
Culling:- Yes.
Pest Control:- Yes.
But not for hunting as described above.

Given the expense of a helicopter, about the only reason I can imagine you'd use one for hunting(as described above), would be really rough terrain.
But again; cant imagine it being the preferred method, unless there was some restriction/limit on using other methods.

[Oldbloke]

They are not managing a risk. The risk to hunters is minuscule. That's my point. It is minuscule.
They are attempting to eliminate a hazard/risk that does not exist.

You have been conned.

[Lazarus]

They are not managing a risk. The risk to hunters is minuscule. That's my point. It is minuscule.
They are attempting to eliminate a hazard/risk that does not exist.

You have been conned.

Repeating yourself doesn't prove your point OB, it just makes us wonder if your disregard for the dangers of lead exposure have come at a cost.

[Lazarus]

They are not managing a risk. The risk to hunters is minuscule. That's my point. It is minuscule.
They are attempting to eliminate a hazard/risk that does not exist.

You have been conned.

First up OB, apologies for intimating you have cognitive issues, it was a cheap shot.

I seem to recall you stating you work/ed in OHS.
If that is in error , then please disregard these questions, but I believe that hazard and risk are two separate things and not interchangeable as you have conflated them above, are they not?

Lead is a known hazard, in OHS philosophy, is it not policy to manage hazards so that they don't become risks?

Other than the obvious price of raw materials issue, what do you see as the major downside to a transition to lead free?

I imagine most on here who hand load would have enough lead filled pills to last their lifetime, I know I have a lifetime supply of them, unless the Kiwis decide to invade us, so it wouldn't effect me.
It's not like the powers will be knocking on our doors to search our homes for the dreaded lead.
Like every change it would be phasing one out and the other in.

Here's another thought, probably never going to happen in our lifetimes

[Oldbloke]

I wasnt going to make any more comments.However.

Resized_tempFileForShare_20240113-100109_64566199175924(1).jpeg (291.04 KiB) Viewed 3407 times

My issue with the potential banning of lead in hunting bullets is that there is close to zero risk to hunters.
There is no science behind their claims. They are nonsensical and have no scientific basis. It is scaremongering, or propaganda as fionn rightly said.

If it was that hazardous/high risk I would be using copper now.

I am not saying it is not hazardous. But it is only hazardous or high risk if you prefer to humans under the right circumstances.

Otherwise sinkers would have been banned a long time ago.

Unfortunately the general population often think that some substances are risky under any circumstance and that is rarely the case.

As I tried to articulate in an earlier post.
e.g. We can't live without salt, but too much kills you.
The same applies to iron IIRC.

It is usually all about the dose/amount.

No more today. It's my grandsons 18th

[Lazarus]

I know the difference OB, that's why I pointed out your conflation.

Did you even open the link?
Mate you have the bull firmly by the balls.
I just reread it, NO mention of risk to hunters.

You keep repeating, ad nauseam, that hunters are not at risk, and you don't care if foxes eat lead.

It's mainly, as I read it, the NATIVE WILDLIFE eating carcasses with lead contamination that is the central concern.
Obviously hunters are at very low risk from the hazards of lead, if they take minimal precautions, but an eagle, or a quoll will just see an easy meal.

Like the business of losing our ICE vehicles, not gunna happen.

Perhaps we should save the righteous outrage for something that wiil actually effect us

[bladeracer]

My issue with the potential banning of lead in hunting bullets is that there is close to zero risk to hunters.
There is no science behind their claims. They are nonsensical and have no scientific basis. It is scaremongering, or propaganda as fionn rightly said.

As I said a couple of times, though they include the human element to push the agenda I don't believe anybody considers lead bullets to be a hazard for hunters or any other adult human consuming the meat, we have hundreds of years of empirical data to decry that furphy. It's entirely about the welfare of the animals that feed off the shot-damaged meat that we leave in the bush. And I do think it is a valid concern, but something that should be educated about rather than apply draconian laws to it. And I think a better attempt should be made to gather data and study it more realistically before any such laws are forced onto the population. One thing I do think is that a lead bullet is much more likely to contaminate the surrounding meat with particulate (which will have zero effect on an adult human consuming) it than a copper bullet . But this bloody and bruised section of contaminated meat gets tossed over your shoulder and left in the bush for the animals to find. It's not that difficult to do better. Drop it into a plastic bag and chuck it in your pack so you can dispose of it properly at home, or simply bury it 300mm deep and drop a big log or stone on top. Or simply use copper or brass bullets if you can't be bothered cleaning up after yourself. Not only are you protecting the native wildlife but you also remove a piece of ammunition from the arsenal of the anti-hunters.

[Lazarus]

My issue with the potential banning of lead in hunting bullets is that there is close to zero risk to hunters.
There is no science behind their claims. They are nonsensical and have no scientific basis. It is scaremongering, or propaganda as fionn rightly said.

As I said a couple of times, though they include the human element to push the agenda I don't believe anybody considers lead bullets to be a hazard for hunters or any other adult human consuming the meat, we have hundreds of years of empirical data to decry that furphy. It's entirely about the welfare of the animals that feed off the shot-damaged meat that we leave in the bush. And I do think it is a valid concern, but something that should be educated about rather than apply draconian laws to it. And I think a better attempt should be made to gather data and study it more realistically before any such laws are forced onto the population. One thing I do think is that a lead bullet is much more likely to contaminate the surrounding meat with particulate (which will have zero effect on an adult human consuming) it than a copper bullet . But this bloody and bruised section of contaminated meat gets tossed over your shoulder and left in the bush for the animals to find. It's not that difficult to do better. Drop it into a plastic bag and chuck it in your pack so you can dispose of it properly at home, or simply bury it 300mm deep and drop a big log or stone on top. Or simply use copper or brass bullets if you can't be bothered cleaning up after yourself. Not only are you protecting the native wildlife but you also remove a piece of ammunition from the arsenal of the anti-hunters.

[Oldbloke]

In sorry, apparently I can't read. I must imagine that it says "and humans that consume contaminated meat" (hunters)

tempFileForShare_20240113-141524_69488226690910.jpg (207.74 KiB) Viewed 3389 times

Regarding wildlife, IDGAF if foxes or dogs eat lead. And im yet to see blood tests of dead wedge tailed Eagles. Not that I've seen too many in deer habitat.

"Pose a risk". Meaningless. So does driving, smoking swimming etc, etc. It's a joke.

Show me the the biological/Scientific evidence that it's killing Eagles and hunters or even making them ill.

[bladeracer]

In sorry, apparently I can't read. I must imagine that it says "and humans that consume contaminated meat" (hunters)

The attachment tempFileForShare_20240113-141524_69488226690910.jpg is no longer available

Regarding wildlife, IDGAF if foxes or dogs eat lead. And im yet to see blood tests of dead wedge tailed Eagles. Not that I've seen too many in deer habitat.

"Pose a risk". Meaningless. So does driving, smoking swimming etc, etc. It's a joke.

Show me the the biological/Scientific evidence that it's killing Eagles and hunters or even making them ill.

Agreed, I didn't see mention of humans either, you brought human effects into the debate with your first comment.

Screenshot 2024-01-13 150739.jpg (63.26 KiB) Viewed 3386 times

But I think including the human element is valid as that is how they push the agenda, to appeal to people's higher value of themselves than the wildlife around them.

The largest investigative study I'm aware of is California's work to protect the condor, and I think it does have significant validity, though I would've preferred it didn't due to my personal bias against California. Whether it can be extrapolated to include other birds I don't know, which is why I would prefer a much, much better investigation before pushing laws. The condor specifically eats carrion. Our predatory birds and animals certainly will eat carrion but I don't know that it's a staple diet as they also hunt live birds and animals. So it may well be an issue, but perhaps a much smaller issue than with the condor. With the huge helicopter culls that litter large areas of bush and farmland with carcasses containing lead fragments it shouldn't be that difficult to do a proper study, but probably very labour intensive so would have to be undertaken by volunteer groups, like hunters.

[bladeracer]

Considering the many thousands of foxes are shot and scalps handed in for the bounty every year in Victoria it should be relatively easy to add a questionnaire regarding where and when each animal was shot. But is there enough "material" in a fox scalp to indicate lead levels? And even if there is, how do we determine such a level was actually detrimental to the fox before it was shot.

Parts of the US have catch/neuter/release policies for feral cats so perhaps they are better placed for such a study as they are working with live predatory animals.

[Oldbloke]

Considering the many thousands of foxes are shot and scalps handed in for the bounty every year in Victoria it should be relatively easy to add a questionnaire regarding where and when each animal was shot. But is there enough "material" in a fox scalp to indicate lead levels? And even if there is, how do we determine such a level was actually detrimental to the fox before it was shot.

Parts of the US have catch/neuter/release policies for feral cats so perhaps they are better placed for such a study as they are working with live predatory animals.

Usinging lead toxicity in a condor and equating it to an eagle (or fox) here is like saying there are too many firearm deaths in US so we need tighter firearm laws here. It is unlikely to translate accurately.

Who knows, but:
There scavenging habits could be different.
There sensitively to lead could be different.
Where they live in relation to hunting areas could be different. (Opportunities)
One is endangered and the other not?
What other scavengers do they compete with.
How fast it passes through their digestive system into the blood stream may be different.
How much lead does an eagles body absorb compared to a condor?
EDIT to add:
What us the natural life span of the animal.
How quickly dies the animals kydney/liver remove the toxins.

It's bloody complicated.

Foxes, yes, samples could be collected by hunters. I would be happy to do that. But I think one or more of the following samples may be needed.

Fur, so, perhaps scalp will work.
Bone
Liver
Kidney
Blood
CNS

And they may well need to be frozen.
But I'm only guessing.

P.S. IIRC hair and bone retain good records on toxic compounds.
P.S. Do we care about foxes. IMO if these types of programs are to be conducted it MUST include the native predators that we are concerned about that are at risk of lead poisoning. Not just any animal.

[Oldbloke]

My issue with the potential banning of lead in hunting bullets is that there is close to zero risk to hunters.
There is no science behind their claims. They are nonsensical and have no scientific basis. It is scaremongering, or propaganda as fionn rightly said.

As I said a couple of times, though they include the human element to push the agenda I don't believe anybody considers lead bullets to be a hazard for hunters or any other adult human consuming the meat, we have hundreds of years of empirical data to decry that furphy. It's entirely about the welfare of the animals that feed off the shot-damaged meat that we leave in the bush. And I do think it is a valid concern, but something that should be educated about rather than apply draconian laws to it. And I think a better attempt should be made to gather data and study it more realistically before any such laws are forced onto the population. One thing I do think is that a lead bullet is much more likely to contaminate the surrounding meat with particulate (which will have zero effect on an adult human consuming) it than a copper bullet . But this bloody and bruised section of contaminated meat gets tossed over your shoulder and left in the bush for the animals to find. It's not that difficult to do better. Drop it into a plastic bag and chuck it in your pack so you can dispose of it properly at home, or simply bury it 300mm deep and drop a big log or stone on top. Or simply use copper or brass bullets if you can't be bothered cleaning up after yourself. Not only are you protecting the native wildlife but you also remove a piece of ammunition from the arsenal of the anti-hunters.

Correct and they have no evidence. If they did they would be spruking it with a loud speaker.

It is just an anti agenda.

[bladeracer]

P.S. Do we care about foxes. IMO if these types of programs are to be conducted it MUST include the native predators that we are concerned about that are at risk of lead poisoning. Not just any animal.

No, nobody cares about foxes. But they are a plentiful animal that we know will eat carrion, perhaps even have some preference for it, that are very regularly shot, and have parts kept for the bounty. Just seems like test material ready made. If we studied those then we'd have at least have some easy data that might determine if there is any need to do similar studies on other predators. For all we know perhaps these animals are smarter than we think and simply spit out any lead particles that happen to contaminate their food like we do ourselves.

As an aside, the family was discussing last week about the silver cutlery we use and that it has a distinctive "flavour". Seems some of us can't pick it up at all and some of us can, and one family member actually finds it distasteful enough to ruin a meal, very strange. I get nothing from stainless cutlery but the silver stuff definitely has a "flavour" - but only if it actually touches my tongue. Perhaps some animals find lead distasteful in a similar way and spit it out.

[animalpest]

So the question is - do we "transition" to non-lead bullets when hunting?
And if we do, will that mean there will be more wounded animals and poorer animal welfare outcomes?

[Oldbloke]

P.S. Do we care about foxes. IMO if these types of programs are to be conducted it MUST include the native predators that we are concerned about that are at risk of lead poisoning. Not just any animal.

No, nobody cares about foxes.

1. But they are a plentiful animal that we know will eat carrion, perhaps even have some preference for it, that are very regularly shot, and have parts kept for the bounty. Just seems like test material ready made. If we studied those then we'd have at least have some easy data that might determine if there is any need to do similar studies on other predators. For all we know perhaps these animals are smarter than we think and simply spit out any lead particles that happen to contaminate their food like we do ourselves.

2. As an aside, the family was discussing last week about the silver cutlery we use and that it has a distinctive "flavour". Seems some of us can't pick it up at all and some of us can, and one family member actually finds it distasteful enough to ruin a meal, very strange. I get nothing from stainless cutlery but the silver stuff definitely has a "flavour" - but only if it actually touches my tongue.

3. Perhaps some animals find lead distasteful in a similar way and spit it out.

1. Perhaps worth considering. True it would be cheap & easy, but in the end the results would be useless regarding Eagles for example. As you say, just preliminary at best.

2. Can't really help with that. Are you confident that the Mrs isn't feeding you strange mushrooms or perhaps rat sack?

3. You could be onto something thete. Lead tastes a bit like mercury. Eaten heaps and do all my casting in the laundry with the doors closed to the smell doesn't annoy the Mrs. But hasnt effected me to date. I have also replaced my mercury fillings with lead. Cheap and fantastic DIY job. So I am slowly getting used to the flavour. Perhaps foxes do too?

BTW can someone pls give me some medical advice I'm becoming forgetful, short tempered, not the wiz at mental arithmetic I used to be, regular gut pain and can't sh1t.
In addition, pins and needles in the fingers, migrains and collapsed a few days ago but have no recollection of it.

There must be Dr here?

[bladeracer]

So the question is - do we "transition" to non-lead bullets when hunting?
And if we do, will that mean there will be more wounded animals and poorer animal welfare outcomes?

Why do you assume there will be more wounding from non-lead bullets? From what I've seen copper/brass bullets have more reliable deformation, more retained mass, and a larger wound channel than the average jacketed lead bullet. They also tend to be very accurate allowing better placement.