Plan B Forum

Another reason the environment matters.

And something we should congratulate ourselves for as well.

This was mentioned only briefly in part of a short article in The Economist a few weeks ago about how the few last countries are banning tetraethyl lead. I'm glad to see a much longer treatment here. Apparently we've done ourselves a lot more good by getting lead out of paint and motor fuel than we thought. And a reason to look twice more at new regulations which might have as great a benefit.

___________________________________
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2 ... connection

Crime Is at its Lowest Level in 50 Years. A Simple Molecule May Be the Reason Why.

—By Kevin Drum
| Thu Jan. 3, 2013 3:06 AM PST

I've written several posts recently about the idea that America's great crime epidemic, which started in the 60s and peaked in the early 90s, was caused in large part by lead emissions from automobiles. Long story short, we all bought lots of cars after World War II and filled them up with leaded gasoline. This lead was spewed out of tailpipes and ingested by small children, and when those children grew up they were more prone to committing violent crimes than normal children. Then, starting in the mid-70s, we all began switching to unleaded gasoline. Our kids were no longer made artificially violent by lead poisoning, and when they grew up in the mid-90s they committed fewer violent crimes. This trend continued for two decades, and it's one of the reasons that violent crime rates have dropped by half over the past 20 years and by more than that in our biggest cities. It's one of the great underreported stories of our time: big cities today are as safe as they were 50 years ago.

That's the short version of the story. The long version of the story is on the cover of the current issue of Mother Jones, and today it's available online for the first time. Click here to read it. The chart on the right illustrates the basic data that inspired the lead hypothesis: it shows lead emissions starting in 1935 overlaid with the violent crime rate 23 years later. The two curves match almost perfectly. ... ".

3

This link has the full article:

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/ ... k-gasoline


"...
"Gasoline lead may explain as much as 90 percent of the rise and fall of violent crime over the past half century."

intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the same upside-down U pattern. The only thing different was the time period: Crime rates rose dramatically in the '60s through the '80s, and then began dropping steadily starting in the early '90s. The two curves looked eerily identical, but were offset by about 20 years.

So Nevin dove in further, digging up detailed data on lead emissions and crime rates to see if the similarity of the curves was as good as it seemed. It turned out to be even better: 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. Toddlers who ingested high levels of lead in the '40s and '50s really were more likely to become violent criminals in the '60s, '70s, and '80s.

And with that we have our molecule: tetraethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented by General Motors in the 1920s to prevent knocking and pinging in high-performance engines. As auto sales boomed after World War II, and drivers in powerful new cars increasingly asked service station attendants to "fill 'er up with ethyl," they were unwittingly creating a crime wave two decades later. ... "

"... The answer, it turned out, involved "several months of cold calling" to find lead emissions data at the state level. During the '70s and '80s, the introduction of the catalytic converter, combined with increasingly stringent Environmental Protection Agency rules, steadily reduced the amount of leaded gasoline used in America, but Reyes discovered that this reduction wasn't uniform. In fact, use of leaded gasoline varied widely among states, and this gave Reyes the opening she needed. If childhood lead exposure really did produce criminal behavior in adults, you'd expect that in states where consumption of leaded gasoline declined slowly, crime would decline slowly too. Conversely, in states where it declined quickly, crime would decline quickly. And that's exactly what she found.

Meanwhile, Nevin had kept busy as well, and in 2007 he published a new paper looking at crime trends around the world (PDF). This way, he could make sure the close match he'd found between the lead curve and the crime curve wasn't just a coincidence. Sure, maybe the real culprit in the United States was something else happening at the exact same time, but what are the odds of that same something happening at several different times in several different countries?

Nevin collected lead data and crime data for Australia and found a close match. Ditto for Canada. And Great Britain and Finland and France and Italy and New Zealand and West Germany. Every time, the two curves fit each other astonishingly well. When I spoke to Nevin about this, I asked him if he had ever found a country that didn't fit the theory. "No," he replied. "Not one." ... "

"...Other recent studies link even minuscule blood lead levels with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Even at concentrations well below those usually considered safe—levels still common today—lead increases the odds of kids developing ADHD.

In other words, as Reyes summarized the evidence in her paper, even moderately high levels of lead exposure are associated with aggressivity, impulsivity, ADHD, and lower IQ. And right there, you've practically defined the profile of a violent young offender. ... "

___________________________________



yrs,
rubato

Been to Oakland, lately?

San Jose?

How about Chicago, or Detroit?

Crime stats would indicate otherwise.

More nonsense from Ma Jones rag (why am I NOT surprised?)

What a load of crap!

Maybe you should find someone who knows how and can stand your company, to read it to you.

Before you attempt further comment.

yrs,
rubato

I'd MOVE if I were you, rube!

I would learn to read, if I were you.

The smartass routine is a little thin. This is an important article about a subject of great importance to us as a nation and in the rest of the world. It represent a significant leap in understanding and suggests a way we can reduce crime and other problems in the future.

Sober up, and read it then. But shut the fuck up if you have not actually read the article.

yrs,
rubato

I would learn to read, if I were you.

But in your case, (as you've proven many times) apparently you don't see that skill as a necessity.

Sober up, and read it then. But shut the fuck up if you have not actually read the article.

yrs,
rubato

I did read it.

Like I originally posted, it's a load of unadulterated crap.

Instead of Ma Jones, why not post a few PEER REVIEWED sources from scientific journals.

You claim to be a "scientist" (that's a laugh) after all.

NOW, GET TO IT!

You did not read it. You are a liar.

The article references a number of papers from peer-reviewed journals as well as DOJ data. I'm sorry Bosco/dales but you're just a pathetic liar.

http://pic.plover.com/Nevin/Nevin2007.pdf
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 2012000566
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/inf ... ed.0050101
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/city.cfm
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 970700842X


It is a pity because this is not only a great success for us for getting lead out of fuel, but points the way to a far cheaper way to reduce crime in the future.

yrs,
rubato

Sorry rube.

Just yanking on your chain (it's so fun to do).

You're SO PREDICTABLE.

Thanks for playing along.

I don't have time to go into it in detail now, but I looked through both of Nevin's studies earlier this morning, (the 2000 and 2007 ones) and I have to say that compared to the usual flaw riddled garbage rube brings to the table here masquerading as "scientific studies," these actually use sound methodology and have some credibility..if not causation they certainly show strong correlation and control for a number of other possible factors (though the claim that 90% of the crime decline can be explained by early-life lead levels seems over stated.)

I think the "blind sow/acorn principle" may be at work for rube here...

This is the previous article in The Economist in December. It has some additional historical information which is interesting.

http://www.economist.com/news/21566385- ... trol-toxin

They mentioned that the alchemical symbol is the curved scythe, a symbol of death so I looked it up:





http://66.147.244.135/~enviror4/about/e ... -timeline/

2011 April –The estimated global annual impacts of lead in vehicle fuels were found by Hatfield and Tsai in a United Nations-commissioned report to be:

Close to 1.1 million deaths;
A loss of 322 million IQ points;
Close to 60 million crime cases;
Economic loss of USD 2.4 trillion per year (4% of global GDP)



yrs,
rubato

There's no question that relatively high levels of lead in the blood stream early in life, negatively affect IQ...(there have been numerous studies done on this; it's pretty well established as a scientific fact, and has been for several decades...even when accounting for other factors...)

And numerous studies have also shown that relatively high levels of lead in the blood stream early in life correlate with a whole host neurological disorders...

And it's obviously not a far leap to conclude from those established facts, that folks with lower IQs and neurological disorders are more likely to turn to a life of crime... (In fact, the available evidence suggests that people with lower IQs and mental problems are in fact the folks who are most likely to engage in crime... )

The Nevin studies do an excellent job of creating a strong correlation between between levels of lead in the blood stream early in life and criminal behavior later in life...(across a number of different countries; which mitigate the contribution of other societal factors)

What the Nevin studies don't do as well, (though in all fairness, they make a strong correlation case) is specifically relating the presence of lead in gasoline, and it's relationship to the crime rate...

There is a definite apparent correlation between the removal of lead from gasoline, (in a number of different countries) and lower crime rates.

But the relationship between lower levels of lead in the blood of children, and the removal of lead from gasoline, (and thus auto emissions) is not as well established. (In fact, except for showing the graph vector correlations, these studies don't seem to address that more discreet question)

Nevertheless, as much as it pains me, (and believe me, it pains me) If I'm going to be intellectually honest, I am compelled to conclude that rube may have got hold of the right end of the stick on this one...

I remember back in the 60's commercials telling us kids not to eat paint chips which may have lead in them. Read the studies posted, eyes glazed over (I was drinking water from a pewter cup) and just couldn't continue. LordJim sumed it up well. I thought most if not all the lead was burned off, I could be wrong, but it certainly stopped the valves from knocking.

I didn't see in the studies (as I said I got bored reading them) but inner city youth are exposed to more carbon burning emmisions than their suburban counterparts, and there is more crime in the inner city. But there also is more poverty in the inner city than in the suburbs. One might be able to coorelate lead in gasoline to lower income too.

Lord Jim wrote:But the relationship between lower levels of lead in the blood of children, and the removal of lead from gasoline, (and thus auto emissions) is not as well established. (In fact, except for showing the graph vector correlations, these studies don't seem to address that more discreet question)

Part of the problem that prevents such an established connection is that leaded gasoline wasn't the only source of lead that was banned at the time. Lead was also used in paint and had other industrial uses.

But the reason that lead started getting removed from general usage was because of the discovery of leaded gasoline polluting the environment. Clair Patterson started running into a lot more lead than expected while trying to more accurately determine the age of the planet. Ice cores in Greenland eventually showed a large increase in lead pollution that closely correlated with the introduction of leaded gasoline.

And the removal of lead from gasoline and other sources resulted in a nearly 80% drop in blood lead levels in just over a decade.

So there's no clear-cut established connection, but there's a large number of dots that can be connected. Lead was being deposited all over as pollution in a significant amount, the primary source being leaded gasoline. The removal of wide spread usage of lead resulted in a very large drop in blood lead levels.

__________________________________
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... CMP=twt_fd
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2 ... g-evidence
Lead and Crime: Assessing the Evidence

—By Kevin Drum
| Tue Jan. 8, 2013 10:51 AM PST

Over at the Guardian, George Monbiot read my article on lead and and thought it sounded preposterous:

The hypothesis was so exotic that I laughed. The rise and fall of violent crime during the second half of the 20th century and first years of the 21st were caused, it proposed, not by changes in policing or imprisonment, single parenthood, recession, crack cocaine or the legalisation of abortion, but mainly by ... lead.

....It's ridiculous — until you see the evidence....I began by reading the papers. Do they say what the article claims? They do. Then I looked up the citations: the discussion of those papers in the scientific literature. The three whose citations I checked have been mentioned, between them, 301 times. I went through all these papers (except the handful in foreign languages), as well as dozens of others. To my astonishment, I could find just one study attacking the thesis, and this was sponsored by the Ethyl Corporation, which happens to have been a major manufacturer of the petrol additive tetraethyl lead. I found many more supporting it. Crazy as this seems, it really does look as if lead poisoning could be the major cause of the rise and fall of violent crime.

It's important to understand that there are at least three independent strands of evidence linking lead to violent crime:

Ecological studies. These look at correlations between lead exposure and crime rates at a population level. There are now multiple rigorous studies using different methodologies that demonstrate this correlation at the city level, the state level, the national level, and in different countries at different times.
Longitudinal studies. A University of Cincinnati team began following a group of children starting in the early 80s. Every six months they measured lead levels in their blood. At age 7, kids with higher lead levels were doing worse in school. At age 17 they were more heavily involved in juvenile delinquency. At age 27 they had higher arrest rates for violent crimes.
Imaging studies. The Cincinnati team recently did a series of MRI scans of their subjects and found that participants with higher childhood lead levels had permanent damage to areas of the brain that are responsible for things like impulse control, judgment, and emotional regulation. We've long known that lead poisoning at high levels makes you more aggressive and prone to violence, and this study strongly suggests that the same thing is true even at moderate levels.

For a more skeptical take on this, check out this post by Scott Firestone. I think he's right to question this stuff, but I also think he might be a little too skeptical here. If there were only one study showing a single correlation, that would be one thing. But there are multiple high-quality population studies showing the same result, and there also longitudinal studies and imaging studies to back them up. And beyond that, there are plenty of studies I didn't cite in my article that point in exactly the same direction. It's really a pretty strong body of evidence—much stronger, I think, than any of the traditional explanations for the huge crime wave and crime decline of the past 50 years.

That said, Firestone is right to want further research. In particular, he's right to point out that my cost-benefit numbers involved a fair amount of handwaving. That's because no one has done a truly comprehensive analysis that I could draw on. So the truth is that we're both on the same track here. My goal wasn't to pretend that a magazine article can make an airtight scientific case for the association of lead and crime. My goal was to lay out the evidence and get the scientific community to take it seriously enough to take the next step. That next step would be to conduct a rigorous review of the evidence and a rigorous analysis of the costs and benefits of cleaning up the remaining lead in our environment. At the very least, I think the work on lead and crime done over the past decade demands that we do at least that.
... "
___________________________


yrs,
rubato

oldr_n_wsr wrote:I remember back in the 60's commercials telling us kids not to eat paint chips which may have lead in them. Read the studies posted, eyes glazed over (I was drinking water from a pewter cup) and just couldn't continue. LordJim sumed it up well. I thought most if not all the lead was burned off, I could be wrong, but it certainly stopped the valves from knocking.

I didn't see in the studies (as I said I got bored reading them) but inner city youth are exposed to more carbon burning emmisions than their suburban counterparts, and there is more crime in the inner city. But there also is more poverty in the inner city than in the suburbs. One might be able to coorelate lead in gasoline to lower income too.

Pewter does not always contain lead. My wife has modern two ornamental pewter cups. I called the company which made them to ask about lead and they said they never used lead because of its known toxicity.

Lead cannot be "burned off" it is an element. When motor fuel is burned the lead is volatilized and blows out your tailpipe and coats everything in the world around the highway:


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 2775900579
"...
Abstract

The lead content of soil and vegetation along part of a State Highway passing through an uninhabitated area of New Zealand has been investigated. The region studied is 20 km from the nearest town and is traversed by a single highway carrying an average of 1200 motor vehicles/day (1973).

Analysis of vegetation samples showed that elevated levels of lead occur within 100 m of the edge of the highway, the decrease of lead levels in vegetation being approximately an exponential function of distance. Elevated levels of lead in soils were also found within 100 m of the highway, but only down to a depth of 5 cm. The total amoung of lead in excess of background soil values, contained within 250 m of the roadway and within 6 cm of the surface, represents a significant proportion of the total lead emitted by all vehicles that have traversed the highway since the introduction of lead tetra-alkyls into motor fuel. ... "

Lead in tree rings from a park in Stockholm.

In short, some trees show a pattern of much lower lead levels before the introduction of tetraethyl lead in tree rings and much higher there after.


http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4 ... 1553435261



The environmental contamination of lead from motor fuel has been studied extensively as has the lead levels in children exposed to pollution from cars.

yrs,
rubato

Did the trees exhibit anti-social behaviour?

Funny you should ask that question Dale...

The answer is yes; there have been extensive studies done on this...

It's been found that trees that have been exposed to high levels of lead particulates do not play well with the other trees...

They insult the other trees at random, believe they know more than the other trees, (when in fact they know considerably less; less in fact than the average bush) and brag about how much fertilizer they have received...

Don't forget about producing "deformed" acorns.