Yes - the quantification of the problem helps with comprehension but also opens the door for balancing trade offs in a manner we'd likely find distasteful. If the lead industry generated 60 billion of completely new money I'd still be in favor of outlawing it even if it was a net loss for the economy - since general quality of life is lowered by lead poisoning (especially since it has been linked strongly to anger issues).

I don't see it as disturbing, just focused. This phrasing helps to put the problem into perspective from one particular point of view—the cost in economic productivity. It does not imply that this is the only cost, or that there aren't other equally valid perspectives to consider.