I think we agree more than we disagree. I believe we need to seriously study the effect of microplastics on the human body. I believe the federal government sho

I think we agree more than we disagree. I believe we need to seriously study the effect of microplastics on the human body. I believe the federal government should follow California's example (at a minimum) and take a heavier hand in regulating PFAs and testing water for microplastics. Microplastics are causing a number of negative health effects, some of which are known, many of which are unknown. I don't think we should throw our hands up and give up, not at all. And yet the study you shared about lead actually proves my point. The meta-analysis showed that the impact of lead on crime is overstated in the literature. And I know a number of sociologists/criminologists, and (though this is anecdotal) they take the lead hypothesis far less seriously than this meta-analysis does. Partially that's due to the fact that this was written by economists, the natural enemy of sociologists. But I digress. My argument is that simple "scientific" answers to complex social problems get overstated, while the messy stuff gets overlooked. It's a cognitive bias that especially affects the kinds of people on this website, because it substitutes complex social scientific problems with "simple" chemical cause and effects. It doesn't means we we shouldn't address the very real public health crisis. But remember, Rome wasn't built in a day, and it wasn't destroyed by lead pipes. That's a myth.