There’s reason to believe the very real crime spike in the 80s/90s was people from the 60s/70s quite literally going insane due to their lead exposure.
The survivors are both traumatized by the experience and suffering from a lower but still harmful dose of brain damage. They express this through short tempers and irrational anxiety, which they then rationalize as justification for bigotry.
Ie, going into hysterics when you see black people because your brain is polluted, but then reinforcing the anxiety with a nightly dose of Tucker Carlson.
Freakonomics gave almost complete credit to abortion, with some wonky numbers, not really mentioning lead or other factors. That whole book is interesting, but very slipshod…
Leaded fuel or leaded pipes didn’t matter to that generation, so why do their bigoted, stuck-up views still matter now?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead–crime_hypothesis
There’s reason to believe the very real crime spike in the 80s/90s was people from the 60s/70s quite literally going insane due to their lead exposure.
The survivors are both traumatized by the experience and suffering from a lower but still harmful dose of brain damage. They express this through short tempers and irrational anxiety, which they then rationalize as justification for bigotry.
Ie, going into hysterics when you see black people because your brain is polluted, but then reinforcing the anxiety with a nightly dose of Tucker Carlson.
I believe the authors of the first Freakonomics book did delve into this phenomenon.
Freakonomics gave almost complete credit to abortion, with some wonky numbers, not really mentioning lead or other factors. That whole book is interesting, but very slipshod…
I like this analysis. Fun, but dangerous to take at face value.