Link between lead exposure and violent crime

[Michchamp]

was reading this article in Mother Jones, and found a copy online. haven't finished the entire thing yet.

supposedly, a number of researchers working independently have found strong correlations between exposure to lead and violent crime rates.

They looked at levels of atmospheric lead (mainly contributed by leaded gasoline) and found that 20 years later, the levels of violent crime closely parellel them. lest this be dismissed as merely a false correlation, they found that the same thing happened in every country they studied. there was not a single exception to the rule.

and the same thing applied in urban versus rural areas, i.e. there were lower crime rates in rural areas, as there were fewer drivers & less lead during those times... now that lead has been reduced in urban areas, the crime rates in both have begun to dovetail.

all those "tough on crime" mayors and sheriffs really didn't do much. we all owe a debt of gratitude to the EPA, even dumbass pro-business republicans and big polluting corporations.

however, this is still no reason to have an assault rifle, high-capacity magazine, exempt private gun sales from background checks, or fail to fund background check programs that include mental health checks. of course.

 

[redandguilty]

This is a good article. I'm not done reading it. If got tripped up where the author wrote "In a 2000 paper (PDF) he concluded that if you add a lag time of 23 years, lead emissions from automobiles explain 90 percent of the variation in violent crime in America." because that's not particularly scientific and I suspected it's a statement about correlation that the author isn't being careful enough with. Specifically, it's the word "explain" that gets me. What is meant by "explain"?

Anyway, I clicked the link to the actual paper and haven't found the answer to that question, but I found something far more surprising. The paper goes farther than just pointing to correlation. It claims lead lowers IQ, IQ correlates to crime. Then there's this bombshell:

?In the case of the self-report data, higher socioeconomic status was associated with higher reported crime after controlling for IQ. In the case of incarceration, the role of socioeconomic background was close to nil after controlling for IQ, and statistically insignificant. By either measure of crime, a low IQ was a significant risk factor? (Herrnstein and Murray).

I always thought economic status was the chief driver of crime and several other undesirable things. This claim is shocking to me.

 

[Michchamp]

This is a good article. I'm not done reading it. If got tripped up where the author wrote "In a 2000 paper (PDF) he concluded that if you add a lag time of 23 years, lead emissions from automobiles explain 90 percent of the variation in violent crime in America." because that's not particularly scientific and I suspected it's a statement about correlation that the author isn't being careful enough with. Specifically, it's the word "explain" that gets me. What is meant by "explain"?

Anyway, I clicked the link to the actual paper and haven't found the answer to that question, but I found something far more surprising. The paper goes farther than just pointing to correlation. It claims lead lowers IQ, IQ correlates to crime. Then there's this bombshell:

I always thought economic status was the chief driver of crime and several other undesirable things. This claim is shocking to me.

yeah, I thought so too. But if I'm reading that correctly, then brain-damage due to lead is brain-damage due to lead, regardless of how well-educated you are or how privileged your upbringing. Also makes sense, since the lead exposure is due to atmospheric lead, which everyone in a city is going to breathe, rather than, say, eating lead paint chips, which you figure mostly poor kids are going to be exposed to.

sidenote: GrandpaMichiganChamp was a health inspector in Detroit in the 60's and 70's and was one of many similarly situated people across the country that started collecting data on this and pushing for bans on lead additives in products. he even co-authored a chapter in a very boring book on the subject.

it's sad that these days, he's a staunch republican who favors cuts to the sort of public services that he himself made a career in, and that provided so much benefit to the people. benefits that go unheralded and unrewarded since no one personally profits from them, even though their results are very real and measurable.

 

[redandguilty]

City data crime index:

Ann Arbor, MI = 168.4
Columbus, OH = 557.9

...looks like there's more lead in Columbus.

 

[Michchamp]

I think though that while economic status IS a factor in undesirable behaviors, things like lead exposure play a bigger one.

like I said, makes sense; if you have behavioral problems due to brain damage, that's not going to change no matter how much money you have.

The article didn't limit the correlation to crime; other things are also mentioned, from IQ to higher teen pregnancy rates.

i guess it does tie together...

lower IQ = less thoughtful actions = more impulsive actions = more crime = more unprotected intercourse = more substance abuse = etc. etc.

 

[redandguilty]

I think though that while economic status IS a factor in undesirable behaviors, things like lead exposure play a bigger one.

like I said, makes sense; if you have behavioral problems due to brain damage, that's not going to change no matter how much money you have.

The article didn't limit the correlation to crime; other things are also mentioned, from IQ to higher teen pregnancy rates.

i guess it does tie together...

lower IQ = less thoughtful actions = more impulsive actions = more crime = more unprotected intercourse = more substance abuse = etc. etc.

The article skipped the IQ - crime correlation, it's a part of the 1st paper it links to. But the paper it links to cites another paper that claims that if you control for IQ, there is no socioeconomic correlation to incarceration. That's shocking. No matter how well IQ correlates with criminal behavior, you'd expect socioeconomic to play a significant role in who actually gets incarcerated (because rich people hire expensive lawyers).