> There are known environmental factors in IQ (most notably, early childhood environment factors), and because of de jure and de facto segregation (including re

> There are known environmental factors in IQ (most notably, early childhood environment factors), and because of de jure and de facto segregation (including redlining) Redlining doesn't really have much to do with early childhood malnutrition[0], which is the majority of "early childhood environment factors". Though pollution[1] seems to cause problems as well, which would have more to do with the neighborhood someone lives in. > so adjusting for socio-economic status other than race does not actually control for the environmental factors that contribute to IQ. I'm not sure this follows. Why wouldn't controlling for socioeconomic factors (such as parental income) be able to control for an environmental factor that has been shown to lower IQ (such as malnutrition)? Some of the lines of logic that this would result in are kind of disturbing. It almost seems like you are suggesting that black people being segregated (via redlining) to be around other black people will make them have a lower IQ, even if they are just as wealthy as the white people across the railroad tracks. Perhaps they are on a more polluted side of the tracks? Though it doesn't seem that pollution would account for the standard deviation difference. Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding what you are saying. [0]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2628311 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2628311 [1]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/air-pollution-in-womb-linked-to-low-iq/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/air-pollution-in-womb-linked-to...