nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The lead-crime link hypothesis

JupiterKid

I was browsing the web last night and reading up on the huge rise in crime, including violent crime, in western countries between the 1940s and early 1990s and the subsequent sharp fall in crime rates since then. Both the rises and falls have been very dramatic. The rise-fall curve is particularly dramatic in the USA.

Many criminologists and sociologists have put forward numerous theories for the causes and factors in this trend. Increasing urbanisation, the after-effects of the liberal 1960s, social and racial inequalities, decline of organised religion, increase in drug use, changes in policing and incarceration rates, migration patterns within cities (i.e. "White flight" in the 1950-80 era) and so on.

But there is one startling correlation - that of lead in the environment, particularly in petrol (youngsters may not know that lead in petrol was the norm until the late 1980s) and crime rates. There appears to be a 20 year lag between environmental lead levels and crime rates. We now know that lead is a potent neurotoxin which alters and damages the human brain, especially that of babies and children. Indeed, many if not most posters on here over the age of 35 - me included - were probably exposed to too much lead in our environment.

Basically the lead-crime hypothesis asserts that children born when petrol lead was the norm were poisoned by this lead, leading to reduced intelligence and higher risks for criminal and violent behaviour. This would be especially marked in locations with high air lead pollution levels, such as major cities.

Conversely, since the phasing out of lead in petrol in the past 30 years, crime rates have fallen - sharply in places. All despite differing policing and sentencing regimes.

Now, I find this theory very interesting. Personally, I think the crime curve trend was caused by a multiplicity of factors but the lead pollution correlation is startling. Yes I know correlation does not mean causation, but it is very interesting all the same.

Which leads me to ponder what sort of other known pollutants/toxins in our environment- such as PCBs, female-mimicking hormones in pesticides, pthalates and so on - could be affecting human development and behaviour. We are being poisoned - but how is that playing out?

Link here:https://youtu.be/SYUgGs9IStY

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Erik Shin

Conspiracy theories are over there ===}

[Deleted User]

Erik Shin wrote: »

Conspiracy theories are over there ===}

It's 2017. How on Earth can you not know what a conspiracy theory is?

You should be downright embarrassed if you're a native speaker.

silverharp

mostly demographics I'd imagine

eviltwin

Males a change from blaming computer games and single mothers I suppose.

tomwaterford

I heard there's mercury in the flu jab :eek:

(My housemates are insane)

Erik Shin

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's 2017. How on Earth can you not know what a conspiracy theory is?

You should be downright embarrassed if you're a native speaker.

They're all out to get me!

Kintarō Hattori

Interesting thread.... most likely in the wrong forum.

Bob the Builder

I think you'll enjoy this website: http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

fizzypish

yaargg..... bildabergs..... higher crime..... more money..... keeping us down.... lizard people.....

There's your conspiracy!

JupiterKid

I think it's a very compelling argument.

If this was whimsical speculation with flimsy research to back it up, I'd also agree that it should be seen as a "conspiracy" theory. But the research carried out to date appears quite extensive, robust and, above all, compelling.

Basically, no lead level in the environment is safe for a child. And that means lead in the soil left there by 60 years of leaded petrol in the air. Do people want to accept that there may be a cause for concern or else is it an interesting but ultimately speculative connection?

Obviously more research is needed but if I was a parent I'd be pretty concerned.

begbysback

Bob the Builder wrote: »

I think you'll enjoy this website: http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

Can you really die from becoming tangled in the bed sheets?

osarusan

begbysback wrote: »

Can you really die from becoming tangled in the bed sheets?

Only if people are eating a lot of cheese.

[Deleted User]

JupiterKid wrote: »

I think it's a very compelling argument.

If this was whimsical speculation with flimsy research to back it up, I'd also agree that it should be seen as a "conspiracy" theory. But the research carried out to date appears quite extensive, robust and, above all, compelling.

Basically, no lead level in the environment is safe for a child. And that means lead in the soil left there by 60 years of leaded petrol in the air. Do people want to accept that there may be a cause for concern or else is it an interesting but ultimately speculative connection?

Obviously more research is needed but if I was a parent I'd be pretty concerned.

It would belong in After Hours, tbh.

Good post.

[Deleted User]

Bob the Builder wrote: »

I think you'll enjoy this website: http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

America is the prime example of this lead thing because of it's cheap oil, oversized engines, strong lead-lobbying in the past, and more densely populated cities while lead was being used, compared to the rest of the world.

It's not a spurious correlation at all.

The_Kew_Tour

I actually know of a lad who is convinced of the Chemtrials theory.

[Deleted User]

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

I actually know of a lad who is convinced of the Chemtrials theory.

What does that have to do with this? Are we talking about a conspiracy theory here? If so, who conspired and who tried to hide it?

Anyways, to anyone who has ever doubted Reddit, this pathetic joke of a thread is a prime example of the main failing of a message board: Spanners who don't even understand what's being discussed getting a word in for no reason.

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/23o7de/did_removing_lead_from_petrol_spark_a_decline_in/

https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/40yjd6/new_study_casts_doubt_on_lead_theory_of_us_crime/

https://www.reddit.com/r/history/comments/6cciwp/why_did_crime_rise_so_rapidly_in_the_1960s_and/

https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/24s7st/til_the_removal_of_lead_from_gasoline_correlated/

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3l2025/what_caused_the_crime_rate_in_the_united_states/

https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueReddit/comments/166er5/yes_lead_poisoning_could_really_be_a_cause_of/

Turtyturd

JupiterKid wrote: »

Obviously more research is needed but if I was a parent I'd be pretty concerned.

I'd be concerned too...who'd be watching the kid while you're starting all your threads?

Shenshen

It's an interesting hypothesis, but I am not sure about one of the main aspects of it - lead making people aggressive and criminal.
One of the historically confirmed effects of mercury poisoning is Erethism, or Mad Hatter disease. The symptoms include "irritability, low self-confidence, depression, apathy, shyness and timidity" - those don't sound consistent with violent crime.

And while I know there are studies in the US linking high lead concentration in the blood of children to aggressive and bullying behaviour, the same studies in China found links between high levels of lead in internalising disorders such as depression, extreme shyness and low self-confidence.

Either way, I think it will be hard to drawn any definite conclusions retrospectively. Keep in mind that between the 1940s and the 1990s, lead was certainly not the only poisonous chemical we got exposed to. It could well have been an interaction of various substances, or indeed have been caused exclusively by social factors.

seamus

Shenshen wrote: »

It's an interesting hypothesis, but I am not sure about one of the main aspects of it - lead making people aggressive and criminal.
One of the historically confirmed effects of mercury poisoning is Erethism, or Mad Hatter disease. The symptoms include "irritability, low self-confidence, depression, apathy, shyness and timidity" - those don't sound consistent with violent crime.

Lead and Mercury aren't the same thing though.

It's known that lead is toxic and can have severe developmental effects on children, leading to developmental delays & lowered intelligence.

Both of which are strongly associated with criminal and anti-social behaviour in teenagers and adults.

Tbh, it's a fairly sound theory, and those who dismiss it as simple correlation miss the fact that you can draw a direct cause-and-effect line from lead exposure in childhood to criminality in adulthood.
That is, lead exposure as a child is known to put you more at risk to become a criminal as an adult.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080527201839.htm

Therefore it's a very plausible theory that general elevated levels of lead in an environment are going to lead to a more general risk of criminality within a population.

And likewise a reduction in lead in the environment creates a reduction in criminality.

[Deleted User]

JupiterKid wrote: »

But there is one startling correlation - that of lead in the environment, particularly in petrol (youngsters may not know that lead in petrol was the norm until the late 1980s) and crime rates. There appears

I think the lag is because, whatever the cause in the decrease, it would take 18 years before the affected children became adults and of an age when they are more likely to commit crimes that show up in statistics.

Wasn't this all explained by another very compelling sounding argument in Freakonomics? Afair not only did they pin it on abortion being made freely available, they researched the years when abortion became available, those cities that introduced it earliest saw the first decreases in crime. Again, all only a hypothesis.

[Deleted User]

The decrees in crime ( some sort of crime anyway ) is a very complex area but it is happening.

There are hundredths of reasons why it is happening all small but they interlock with each other. A few examples.

Consumer good are very cheap now making robbing them not worth while, the availability of information make robbing cars not worth it, to commit financial fraud today you need to be seriously intelligent its not like the simple check fraud of the past, laundering money is difficult because of technology, less of a cash based society, life has become much more policed and people are better educated.

A very interesting one: In today's society there is an almost complete divide between legitimate and nonligitimate lifestyles where as in the past even in the recent past people moved between legitimate employment and petty criminality in a way that doesn't happen today.

An individuals past follows them around in today society so its very hard to escape and start again.

In the eighteen century there was lots of evidence of individual of involved in petty criminality such as pick pocketing or prostitution who ended up owing a pub or boarding house and become respectable member of the community.

[Deleted User]

http://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-crime-state-papers-2494610-Dec2015/

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/the-animals-who-prowled-1930s-dublin-26878497.html

sbsquarepants

JupiterKid wrote: »

But there is one startling correlation - that of lead in the environment, particularly in petrol (youngsters may not know that lead in petrol was the norm until the late 1980s) and crime rates. There appears to be a 20 year lag between environmental lead levels and crime rates. We now know that lead is a potent neurotoxin which alters and damages the human brain, especially that of babies and children. Indeed, many if not most posters on here over the age of 35 - me included - were probably exposed to too much lead in our environment.

Link here:https://youtu.be/SYUgGs9IStY

AFAIK there's a fairly sell established link between leaded petrol use and lower IQ's. Nasty stuff the auld lead!

Fun fact - the same man who invented leaded petrol also invented CFC's - he is widely thought of as the man responsible for most damaging the environment worldwide!

He died in somewhat bizarre circumstances, he had contracted polio and came up with a Wallace and grommet style system of ropes and pulleys to help him get out of bed, however he became entangled in it and it strangled him to death!

paulbok

JupiterKid wrote: »

But there is one startling correlation - that of lead in the environment, particularly in petrol (youngsters may not know that lead in petrol was the norm until the late 1980s) and crime rates. There appears to be a 20 year lag between environmental lead levels and crime rates. We now know that lead is a potent neurotoxin which alters and damages the human brain, especially that of babies and children. Indeed, many if not most posters on here over the age of 35 - me included - were probably exposed to too much lead in our environment.

Link here:https://youtu.be/SYUgGs9IStY

No arguments here.

[Deleted User]

I remember the car stickers "I got the lead out"'in the late 80s. A scissors or knife and you could could simply take the "e" out, move the two ends closer together, and you had a nice "I got the lad out" message.

gar32

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmOuV-6NRWQ

So also possible like the CIA here. Vaccines could be use to change behavior and turn us all into sheep.

Who know what the F they could be putting into them.

Ubbquittious

mariaalice wrote: »

The decrees in crime ( some sort of crime anyway ) is a very complex area but it is happening.

There are hundredths of reasons why it is happening all small but they interlock with each other. A few examples.

Consumer good are very cheap now making robbing them not worth while, the availability of information make robbing cars not worth it, to commit financial fraud today you need to be seriously intelligent its not like the simple check fraud of the past, laundering money is difficult because of technology, less of a cash based society, life has become much more policed and people are better educated.

A very interesting one: In today's society there is an almost complete divide between legitimate and nonmalignant lifestyles where as in the past even in the recent past people moved between legitimate employment and petty criminality in a way that doesn't happen today.

An individuals past follows them around in today society so its very hard to escape and start again.

In the eighteen century there was lots of evidence of individual of involved in petty criminality such as pick pocketing or prostitution who ended up owing a pub or boarding house and become respectable member of the community.

There are still plenty of simple scams that people fall for and plenty of people living a life of crime on the side. In the 1800s it was harder to up sticks and everyone knew you, people called round more often. Now society is more anonymous and nobody gives a damn unless you're causing an obvious disturbance. Even a famous Dublin crime gang boss could easily get a job in another EU country doing plastering with the help of a chape Ryanair flight if he was feeling the heat back home.

begbysback

seamus wrote: »

Lead and Mercury aren't the same thing though.

It's known that lead is toxic and can have severe developmental effects on children, leading to developmental delays & lowered intelligence.

Both of which are strongly associated with criminal and anti-social behaviour in teenagers and adults.

Tbh, it's a fairly sound theory, and those who dismiss it as simple correlation miss the fact that you can draw a direct cause-and-effect line from lead exposure in childhood to criminality in adulthood.
That is, lead exposure as a child is known to put you more at risk to become a criminal as an adult.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080527201839.htm

Therefore it's a very plausible theory that general elevated levels of lead in an environment are going to lead to a more general risk of criminality within a population.

And likewise a reduction in lead in the environment creates a reduction in criminality.

I used to eat my pencils in school and it hasnt done me any harm...

RobbingBandit

Probably all the reverse vampires living again, damn zombie bastids.

Capt'n Midnight

begbysback wrote: »

I used to eat my pencils in school and it hasnt done me any harm...

That's because they've been using something different since they discovered a load of graphite back in 1564.

You could use lead in pencils. But lead is expensive.

Lead acetate is sweet. You get it from acetic acid which you get from vinegar which you get from wine. It sweetens the wine. Romans liked the sweetness and some of them went mad as hatters but that's a mercury story.