Rank Location 1 Algeria 2 Iraq 3 Yemen 4 Myanmar 5 North Korea 6 Afghanistan
From https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-that-still-use...
Also I found this: https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/prediction-te...
Very interesting indeed.
I am hoping you are not attributing violence and instability in some of these countries to lead based gasoline. Sure, there may be correlation, but these places are centuries old. There are many factors like culture, religiosity, socio-economic status , history, contemporary culture, so on and so forth.
Lead affects impulse control and could be a factor in certain civil phenomena. It's easier to whip up a mob when there's a lot of lead poisoning.
Different states introduced and subsequently banned leaded gasoline on different schedules, so this was a 'natural' experiment, unless you can think of some other causative factor that precisely explains the timing of the rise and fall of crime.
I don't understand this content-free 'correlation does not equal causation' argument.
Sure, in the absence of other evidence and a mechanism of action, we should have healthy skepticism, but it's known how lead affects brain development, particularly how it screws up development of the frontal cortex, lowering both intelligence and social inhibition.
Did they also account for changes in how crime rates are reported over time?
One would have to account for hundreds of different variables before you could ever conclusively prove a connection between lead and crime.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics conducts a yearly survey asking people about the crimes they were a victim of in the past year regardless if the crimes were reported. The Bureau of Justice survey shows a much more dramatic reduction in crime than if you just look at reported crimes.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/30/5-facts-abou...
>Using the FBI numbers, the violent crime rate fell 48% between 1993 and 2016. Using the BJS data, the rate fell 74% during that span.
It's been done before by people with more credibility than a message board user.
Before there were studies like the ones mentioned in the article people wouldn't believe it for cities like Flint in the states neither. I’m still not 100% convinced that there is causation. But if those studies are no fakes and hold up for repetition then I’d argue that there is some truth behind the theory
Yes, unless you have a secret way of ruling out the other much more likely factors (i.e what GP mentioned).
You could argue that those countries still use leaded gasoline because the political turmoil/violence within them makes folks prefer the cheaper, easier fuel to produce.
I wonder what fraction of TEL consumption worldwide is due to aviation vs. these few remaining countries that use it in motor gasoline?
It seems plausible that high environmental lead levels contribute (with at least a small effect size) to violence and crime.
If a lead-free environment is already violent and insecure, would you expect adding environmental lead to make it less violent, more violent, or the same?
The effect of lead residuals on brain is pretty well known..
I like the trick to select a control group by acidity in the water.
So your point is?