“Leaded fuel bans successful based on hair analyses”
Straightforward, albeit somehow clunky.
“HTMA shows success in leaded fuel bans”
That does leave an acronym to be deciphered, so maybe not the best.
“Hair records leaded fuel ban effectiveness”
Almost as pithy, and creatively accurate. Because hair does act as something of a record of what happened to the body.
I think the entire speed bump of the original could have been removed by replacing “shows” with “demonstrates”. A longer word, yes, so less ideal in our brevity-obsessed media, but one that dramatically prunes away other possible misinterpretations. And replacing “lead in fuel” with “leaded fuel” would have definitely reduced clunkiness as well.
Shows about hair are now banning lead?
Like, what kind of shows? Hairstyling shows?
What a strangely phrased title.
WTH? Why were you downvoted for that? The Web is such a strange place. Like you, I didn’t understand the title.
Re-phrasing it:
“Leaded fuel bans successful based on hair analyses”
Straightforward, albeit somehow clunky.
“HTMA shows success in leaded fuel bans”
That does leave an acronym to be deciphered, so maybe not the best.
“Hair records leaded fuel ban effectiveness”
Almost as pithy, and creatively accurate. Because hair does act as something of a record of what happened to the body.
I think the entire speed bump of the original could have been removed by replacing “shows” with “demonstrates”. A longer word, yes, so less ideal in our brevity-obsessed media, but one that dramatically prunes away other possible misinterpretations. And replacing “lead in fuel” with “leaded fuel” would have definitely reduced clunkiness as well.
Ah, thanks. Nice clarification.