Back in the 1990's, there was a surprising phenomena in New York City, formerly the crime capital of the world. Crime rates, which had been going up, were suddenly falling at a dramatic rate. Mayor Rudy Giuliani, of course, was quick to tout his get tough on crime initiatives as the cause. But it turns out that this was happening all over the country. It turns out from scientific research that there is a strong correlation between crime and exposure to lead.
There is a good explanation for this -- lead affects the part of the brain that is most responsible for making judgments. In 1986 and 1987, the US phased leaded gasoline out of cars, which dramatically decreased exposure. In 1988, at the height of the Presidential election season, George Bush's Willie Horton ad got a lot of traction because of the ever-rising crime rate that nobody seemed to have an answer to besides more prisons and tougher jail sentences. But in 2012, crime was barely an issue in the Presidential election.
In 2007, the Washington Post reported on the work of Rick Nevin, an economist out of Virginia. He reported that lead poisoning accounted for much of the variation in violent crime in the US. It showed an identical decades-long association between lead poisoning and crime rates in nine different countries. In fact, he told the Post that 65% to 90% of the variation in violent crime was explained by lead.
There have been many other theories to explain this drop in crime, but Nevin has accounted for all of them. One argument advanced by the pro-choice community is that the elimination of unwanted babies through the legalization of abortion was responsible. Another argument is that Giuliani's get tough on crime approach was the cause. Others have argued that demographics or economic conditions were responsible. But in fact, Nevin accounted for all of these factors and lead was still the only explanation that can account for the trends in crime. In every single instance, the violent crime rate tracks lead poisoning levels two decades earlier. In fact, abortion was also legalized in the UK in the early 1970's and crime soared there in the 1990's. The UK did not enact strong regulations on lead until the late 1980's and early 1990's. On the other hand, New York was ahead of the curve on this issue; they began to crack down on lead in 1960, starting with a policy to replace old windows. Old windows are a major source of lead poisoning.
The Post article cites two other studies that found the same correlation. The first study (Stretesky & Lynch, 2001), showed that counties with high lead levels had four times the murder rate of counties with low lead levels, even when controlling for multiple environmental and socioeconomic factors. The study noted that populations who were most at risk of lead poisoning were the least likely to get resources required to prevent, screen, and treat the illness. The second study, a University of Pittsburgh study done in 2002, showed that arrested youths had lead levels that were four times higher than youths who were not arrested. Herb Needleman, who did the study, was quoted by the Post as saying that lead is a toxin that affects judgment, resulting in youths ignoring consequences of their actions such as jail time.
A third study (Wright & Dietrich et al, 2008) measured lead exposure rates for children in Cincinatti born between 1979 and 1984 and subsequently compared it with arrest records. The study found that prenatal and postnatal blood lead concentrations are associated with higher rates of violent arrests as well as arrests in general. This study demonstrated an association between developmental exposure to lead and adult criminal behavior. The 2008 study is important because the others indirectly measured exposure while this one directly measured childhood exposure to lead.
In 2012 another study, reported on by the Australian Broadcasting Company, found that there was a 90% correlation between the rise and fall of air lead and the aggravated assault rate.
The New York Times, in 2007, reported on the work of Jessica Wolpaw Reyes, an economist at Amherst College. Her research showed that the main source of lead in both air and water was leaded gasoline, phased out by the Clean Air Act.
This research shows that getting rid of lead is a need and not a want. By the time people like the Sandy Hook killer grow up, it may be too late. Therefore, the best way to fight crime is prevention. The easiest way that each of us can prevent lead exposure in children is common sense -- feed them a healthy breakfast every day. A Chinese study in 2011 reported on by Time showed that children who eat a healthy breakfast have 15% less lead exposure than ones who don't.
The EPA has other ideas that each of us can do to reduce lead exposure. If you suspect your home has high levels of lead:
--Get your young children tested for lead even if they seem healthy;
--Wash childrens' hands, bottles, pacifiers, and toys often;
--Make sure your children eat healthy, low-fat foods;
--Regularly clean floors, window sills, and other surfaces;
--Wipe soil off shoes before entering the house;
--Talk to your landlord about fixing surfaces with peeling or chipping paint;
--Take precautions to avoid exposure to lead dust when remodeling or renovating;
--Don't use a belt-sander, propane torch, high temperature heat gun, scraper, or sandpaper or painted surfaces that may contain lead;
--Don't try to remove lead-based paint yourself.
Homes built before 1978 may have high levels of lead paint. The Federal Government did not ban lead paint from housing until 1978.
This does not mean that there are no other factors affecting crime. We have to do all we can to raise our children not to be violent or aggressive and we must do all we can to have adequate law enforcement. But the relationship between lead exposure and crime is one that has been widely overlooked up to this point. In light of the tragic Sandy Hook shooting, we cannot afford to overlook such factors anymore.
No comments:
Post a Comment