SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
One popular theory has linked declines in crime rates to the elimination of leaded gasoline. A study of New Zealanders suggests that this is not the case:
Lead exposure during childhood has been tied to a variety of developmental problems, but a new study suggests it may not be associated with higher odds of criminal behavior later in life.
The study set out to address a flaw in much of the previous research linking lead and crime: mainly that it's hard to determine how much of this connection might be explained by poverty and other socioeconomic circumstances that can influence both criminal activity and lead exposure. Researchers followed 553 people born in Dunedin, New Zealand, in 1972 and 1973, when lead exposure was common among children of all economic backgrounds because of widespread use of leaded gasoline. All of the kids were tested for lead exposure when they were 11 years old, and the study team followed them until age 38 to see how many of them were convicted of crimes.
By the end of the study, 154 participants, or 28 percent, had at least one criminal conviction, the researchers report in JAMA Pediatrics. But the odds of this happening were barely influenced by the amount of lead exposure people had during childhood. Just being male had a stronger effect than lead levels, the researchers note. "Many studies have shown that higher exposure to lead could predict more criminal behavior, but our study actually found that there isn't a clear connection between the two," said lead author Amber Beckley, a researcher at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. The reason for the different results this time is that the current study found children from all walks of life had high lead levels, Beckley said by email.
The Need to Include Biological Variables in Prospective Longitudinal Studies of the Development of Criminal Behavior (open, DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.4237) (DX)
Association of Childhood Blood Lead Levels With Criminal Offending (open, DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.4005) (DX)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Friday December 29 2017, @03:52PM (7 children)
In this context, crime is that activity that generates a record of arrest and charges filed.
"Just being male..." is quite enough to get one arrested more frequently - leaded, unleaded, ethyl or premium.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 29 2017, @04:42PM (3 children)
There has been a statistical increase in female criminality across the Anglo-sphere. I can't find any recent articles but IIRC, the largest increase amongst adult women has been domestic violence. Probably because it was a historically under-reported crime but men especially avoided filing criminal complaints. They'd need to control for societal changes since the early '70s for a "toxic masculinity" conclusion to be statistically meaningful.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 29 2017, @05:23PM (2 children)
Lesbian couples experience the most domestic violence, and gay men experience the least.
Don't hold your breath waiting for science to knock down the female superiority narrative.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 29 2017, @05:34PM
Exactly. Science Vs. Science. [wikipedia.org]
Female convicts are victims, [csosa.gov] always victims. [prisonstudies.org]
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday December 29 2017, @08:31PM
Are you sure about that? What's reported may not be precisely the same as what actually happens. I would bet good money a hell of a lot of gay men are abused and don't report it because, well, they're gay. It's easier for lesbians to pass one another off as just friends or roommates...ask me how I know :/
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 29 2017, @07:01PM
I'll take ethyl.. and myrtle.. and, what the hell, clyde too!
(Score: 5, Interesting) by frojack on Friday December 29 2017, @07:03PM (1 child)
Even the prior studies suggested that the effects on lead were exhibited predominantly in males. with almost no significant effect on females. This was never adequately explained, but it was always there. (That was one of the first stories I submitted to SN way back).
So if this study included females, then OF COURSE the significance of lead was swamped by gender. What the hell were they thinking?
I also find it interesting second link in the story spends a lot of time poo-pooing the study, pointing out that the perceived weakness is not all that weak when one considers world wide falling crime rates and the social cost saving of even marginal reductions.
And a resting heart??? Guess what it predicts across the board: Gender!!! [topendsports.com] One wonders if these guys are measuring their own rulers and confusing that for data.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday December 30 2017, @01:44AM
I think that statisticians love digging into well known studies and pointing out their flaws... even if the conclusions are not really in dispute, I think they think that they are encouraging "better statistical practices" in the future.
Personally, I find so much of statistics to be just arbitrarily set methods and thresholds of significance - no matter what you do, there's surely another camp of statisticians somewhere who can find fault with how it doesn't meet their pre-conceived ideals of rigor.
🌻🌻 [google.com]