4 ms·
Although I acknowledge that lead is nasty stuff, something about this issue bothers me. According to some studies, increasing exposure to lead at low levels (
by ern 14y ago
Although I acknowledge that lead is nasty stuff, something about this issue bothers me.
According to some studies, increasing exposure to lead at low levels (1-10 micrograms/dl) shaves 4-7 points off IQ scores[1].
Yet, as population blood lead levels have plunged in recent years, there haven't been proportionately massive gains in IQ in the population. Indeed, the Flynn effect may have stalled in recent years[2].
This either means that there are confounders or some other effect is in place. But I'm no expert, and I'd value the input of someone better informed.
[1] http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa022848 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa022848
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect#Possible_end_of_progression http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect#Possible_end_of_pr...
- maxerickson 14y agoIf the lead exposure is a threshold effect, most of the population might have already banked the benefits of going below it. If it mostly impacts development (rather than ongoing performance), even more so.
- ern 14y agoIf the lead exposure is a threshold effect, most of the population might have already banked the benefits of going below it. Experts claim there is "no threshold"[1]. [1]http://www.chem.unep.ch/pops/pdf/lead/leadexp.pdf http://www.chem.unep.ch/pops/pdf/lead/leadexp.pdf