I have been thinking a lot since the election about what could explain the incredibly high numbers of Americans who seem incapable of critical thinking, or really any kind of high level rational thought or analysis.
Then I stumbled on this post https://old.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/16ires5/lead_exposure_from_shooting_is_a_much_more/
Which essentially explains that “Shooting lead bullets at firing ranges results in elevated BLLs at concentrations that are associated with a variety of adverse health outcome"
I looked at the pubmed abstract in that Reddit post and also this one https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5289032/
Which states, among other things, “Workers exposed to lead often show impaired performance on neurobehavioral test involving attention, processing, speed, visuospatial abilities, working memory and motor function. It has also been suggested that lead can adversely affect general intellectual performance.”
Now, given that there are well in excess of 300 million guns in the United States, is it possible lead exposure at least partially explains how brain dead many Americans seem to be?
This is a genuine question not a troll and id love to read some evidence to the contrary if any is available
No.
No that’s kind of stupid.
The amount of lead exposure from shooting is not particularly high and would be concentrated in a very small number of people who are doing things like firing uncoated bullets A LOT ie. reloaders. Most Americans don’t own guns and even the ones that do don’t fire them indoors extremely regularly and most indoor ranges have soap intended for lead. The lead exposure we’re talking about is pretty tiny especially considering lead effects cognition the most during brain DEVELOPMENT and the amount of leaded gas and lead paint are going to be much, much more significant. People who occupationally encounter lead in things like bullets, such as range workers, armorers, etc, monitor their lead exposure and if they are within safe levels the average guy who goes to an indoor range a handful of times a year certainly is. Also, shooting is expensive, most people aren’t shooting thousands of rounds a year, so countries with mandatory service where every 18 year old learns to shoot a rifle, likely using thousands of rounds of rifle ammo for every boy as an early adult would still be a much more statistically significant thing, as anyone who has ever received military training has, simply due to cost, shot more rounds than a very large chunk of any population
Yes, but not because of guns. While the adverse effects of leaded gasoline were known in the 60s and leaded gasoline got banned in most countries, the US only phased it out in 1996. Which means that millions of people alive today are exposed as a child. This has a huge impact on IQ:
The average lead-linked loss in cognitive ability was 2.6 IQ points per person as of 2015. This amounted to a total loss of 824,097,690 IQ points, disproportionately endured by those born between 1951 and 1980.
This amounted to a total loss of 824,097,690 IQ points
What a useless figure compared to the 2.6 per capita given earlier
IQ is a useless data point anyway as even IQ point values have shifted over the past 100-ish years. An average IQ now used to be genius level IQ in the past and it mostly comes down to basic education and not starving.
Adding all the points together feels useless as a metric. But 2.6 per individual doesn’t sound as drastic as I was expecting leaded gas to impact. Still bad, just not what I’d call a huge impact.
The lowering of emotional self-regulation and impulse control on the other hand swings wildly with just a few percents over a population with a much more dangerous extreme on the bell curve
What a fucking retarded post
Most Americans don’t shoot very often, even if they own a bunch of guns.
Part of it is that ammo is just expensive. A trip to the range can burn hundreds of dollars in ammo in just a few minutes.
My aunt spent a long time working in education in the USA, much of it in leadership roles. When she incorporated lessons on critical thinking into the curriculum, it resulted in a lot of pushback from parents who did not appreciate their kids applying the lessons at home.
People who actively resist the use of critical thinking will seem cognitively impaired because they are, in fact intentionally impairing their cognition. My intuition here is to blame religious fundamentalism, but that’s not a well-researched position.
This is from the Texas GOP 2012 education platform.
“We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.”
They backtracked on critical thinking after the outrage it caused with this
- Munisteri told KVUE, "The platform plank is against a specific type of teaching called ‘outcome-based education.’
"The reason why critical thinking is mentioned is some places try to disguise the program of outcome-based education and just re-label it as ‘critical thinking.’ "
“Good Christian kids need fear-based learning, like we had!”
I got a wooden spatula that’s great for creating fear!
100%
“We are already providing all the answers you will ever need.” -religion
Organized religion is, fundamentally — at its very core — based on rejecting critical thought; to “just have faith” in the unknown/unknowable.
It is in no way surprising that it’s incompatible with advanced science/evidence-based civilization.
Fundamentalism is certainly a contributing factor, but there are others. Conservatives have been working to cut back on education since the early 80’s. Removing critical thinking training was one of the objectives… Conservative policies are unpopular and are often supported with misrepresentations and outright lies. To succeed, they need a public without the knowledge or skills to realize their arguments are invalid. Unfortunately, they have gone a long way toward accomplishing that.
Yeah man. When that kid starts asking questions and challenging the family norms, that’s the teacher’s fault for making their life harder. It isn’t a sign that the parent needs to adapt.
Adapting IS a pain in the ass. Some parents don’t have the faculties to do it. Some do, but don’t after getting done with work. It is truely a generational trauma that the parent has to head off in themselves for it to carry to early aged kids.
A lot of parental pushback comes from frustration over the Dunning-Kruger effect, where somebody who learns a little about a subject feels like an expert. This is often where kids are at. If you keep studying the same material you realize how much you don’t know, which tends to make you feel ignorant, but as you continue you get better at gauging what level you’re at. A lot of it is a matter of maturity. Some parents don’t mind that the kids are learning new things, they just aren’t very good at parenting it. Highly religious people are more likely to see outside information and analyticals skills as a threat, because yeah they are - for good reason lol.
Religion is a major component I’m sure but overall parents probably don’t want their ideals and norms challenged in their own house. This is probably why people (on the right) say that college liberalized their kids. No, college teaches you how to think and pursue answers to your own questions. Not our fault your ideals are based on tradition and ignorance.
I doubt that there are enough people shooting enough guns often enough for it to be more than just trace exposures, it likely must be something else.
It’s regular old religion, shit culture, and propaganda just like it always is.
Don’t forget the deliberate effort by Republicans to nerf the public education system
Nerf is too nice a way to say it. They want to abolish the Department of Education. Their goal is that only the children of the rich will get anything close to a good education.
It’s by design. Keep people stupid, and use religion for its intended use, a tool for control.
We the masses are the foundation for their wealth and power.
Plus, Gen-X and Boomers were exposed to a lot of lead.
Gasoline types used to be “Regular or Unleaded” and Regular, I think, and required a"special" engine.
Also fungicides/pesticides can cause dementia. One of the first signs of early onset dementia is loss of empathy. So not very surprising many old rural folks have become jaded people
Small aircraft still use 100LL fuel…(LL is low lead)
Leaded (“regular”) gas will destroy a catalytic converter. A car without a cat could usually run leaded or unleaded. Some may knock running unleaded if they’re super old or broken in some way. I believe leaded was usually cheaper.
I wouldn’t try running leaded in a modern engine even if you removed the cats. God knows what else it would screw up.
Nailed it! Religion, shit culture and propaganda are all major sources of stupidity!
Yes it’s actually a pretty ignorant idea. Lead exposure is more likely from car exhaust from leaded gas, which has been severely limited since the 80s.
Lead paint in every house probably didn’t help
Most old lead paint just gets painted over, further sealing it in. It doesn’t do anything to you unless you chew on peeling paint or release it into the air by sanding it.
At first glance I thought this post was a bit facetious, but after thinking about it and reviewing some research around people manufacturing the bullets and how it affects them and understanding that detonating them in confined spaces probably is just as if not more problematic. And if you have a job that requires you to do it often, say a cop, does that create even more of an effect? Lead exposure causes a loss of impulse control as well as intelligence effects. Could that be one reason why cops are so much more violent than the average person? I’d love to see a study on lead content of blood in cops, especially ones who murder people they capture, but unfortunately, the NRA is probably too powerful to allow that to happen. And conservatives hate masks, so I doubt it would be easy to convince cops to wear them while practicing.
Most Americans don’t even own guns. A minority of Americans own lots of guns.
And like 9 out of 10 people who own guns go to the range less than a few times a year.
More than half of gun owners have never gone to a range beyond what might have been part of a state’s pistol permitting process.
9 out of 10 go to the range
More than half have never gone to the range
Math isn’t checking out here buddy.
Less than a few times a year also includes zero… so all of the 50% are part of the 90%
Fair enough.
…never gone to a range beyond what might have been part of a state’s pistol permitting process.
If you can, read the whole sentence. If you can’t, please get checked for lead poisoning.
If I can’t what? Sorry I’m actually functionally illiterate.
Seems accurate.
If you can, read
Bruh I can read.
Yeah, but I read something on reddit that says Americans all have guns and love shooting them. So they must all have brain damage
I can’t remember where I read it, but I’ve heard that Americans all have guns and love shooting them, so they must have brain damage
I appreciate you all for the anecdotes and source materials, some well researched things to ponder!
Here’s my take on it:
I can’t remember where I read it, but I’ve heard that Americans all have guns and love shooting them, so they must have brain damage.
American here: I may all have guns and love brain, therefore I must have shooting damage to my lead.
According to Gallup, 44% of American households have guns. This is survey based. If fact, the actual number is unknown. A good guess is somewhere between 1/2 and 2/3.
Gun ranges where I live (California) require employees to wear an exposure monitor for a week or so each year. I talked to a range officer about it, and he said that they had never had the monitors indicate anything that is remotely a problem. Nevertheless, careful gun owners are aware of the problem and ranges that I’ve been to post notices and have hand cleaning stuff ready at hand.
Before trump, I’d have agreed with this. After trump, it’s now increasing at an incredible rate. It was like 32% owned a firearm. Latest pew from this year is 40%. Now with trump back in power, I’m betting you will see us hit 50% or nearly 50%.
Leftists woke up and realized we need to be armed.
Truth
Mama mia!
I mean increasing numbers of Americans are being threatened by the government
%100 fact.
latest pew
Heh. Pew go pew pew.
And using those guns make them a little dumber every time.
Only takes a minority to go off the rails and spread conspiracy theories. Squeaky wheel and all that.
Post reads like some violently uninformed person making a lot of… I don’t want to say racist cuz that’s not really right, but similar sentiments about Americans
Y’all are stupid cuz of your guns
Is about as stupid a thought as possible as you’re you’re claiming we are because of shooting guns and the fact that anyone in the comments is taking it seriously shows y’all have the exact same level of critical thinking skills as those you’re insulting
Y’all are stupid cuz of your guns
Yeah, in this case he’s got it completely backwards.
Y’all are guns cuz of your stupid
Personally, I’m a firework.
Katy Perry told me so.
I see where you are going, but you probably should focus less on the guns. Most Americans don’t regularly shoot guns, even those that have them. A whole lot also don’t own any. But lead is all over in shit like water pipes. Other heavy metals and chemicals are present in higher levels than allowed elsewhere. Also full metal jacket is much more common than it used to be which reduces the lead particles when shooting.
As far as lead water pipes go, they’re not nearly as dangerous as they’re made out to be. The lead quickly bonds to things in the water creating a layer of corrosion which means the lead doesn’t really get in the water.
Don’t get me wrong, they should still all be replaced.
Was the majority of the German voting public lead-poisoned in the 30s? I don’t think lead was even put in gas then. Those Germans almost certainly were not lead poisoned, and they put a monster into power.
I get wanting a good explanation, but in reality, it’s a simple but unsatisfying explanation. It applies to every country and every population in every era. People are fuckin’ stupid. Carlin said it best:
“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”
The German population went through serious economic troubles. Wheelbarrows of cash to buy stuff. Economically troubled people get angry and revolt, and in democratic systems that means firstly voting for the extreme candidates, the ones with a good story. Anger shuts down critical thinking and they don’t think about other consequences of their vote.
That’s how many elections went in a lot of counties in the last few years too.
Yeah, I get that saying people are fuckin stupid is dismissive and over simplified in a lot of cases… But it’s also still true and a factor, which adds to all the other factors you’re talking about. Ultimately I think if people were more educated and intelligent, they could overcome a lot of irrationality.
It’s deliberate. The right wing has been gradually whittling down the quality of our education system for more than a generation.
Right, but that’s where the analogy breaks down “wheelbarrows of cash”. You can try to reference that situation, you can try to talk about desperate people just wanting to lash out but no one is pushing around “wheelbarrows of cash”. Whatever desperate situation people think they are in pales before the reality. The huge difference in severity means they are hardly comparable at all. By pretty much any stat, we should be doing ok: there have been many times we’ve had it worse, so why is this the moment?
This is where the last couple decades of hatred and divisiveness come in. Politicians bringing forth blame, scapegoats, stoking outrage at our problems. The hatred is always there. The violence is always there. Were conditions to a constant state of anger so that’s where too many turn for even a minor downturn
I dislike this saying because it’s always been assumed, never proven, that intelligence follows a normal distribution. That is if it can even be mapped to a single, consistent, comparable number.
But your point is valid. Though I’d add that it’s not universally true. Fascists thrive on fear and ignorance. Give people access to a good education, which includes political education, and they are far more resilient to these tactics.
Which is why it’s especially nefarious that conservatives love to undermine, vilify, and defund education.
I dislike this saying because it’s always been assumed, never proven, that intelligence follows a normal distribution.
Okay, think of the median instead lol
Uneducated people are easier to control. Uneducated people are more likely to join the military or police. It’s that simple. And if you haven’t heard, Trump’s handlers are going to try to abolish the Department of Education.
I got curious; looks like leaded fuel was first introduced in the 1920s.
Interesting. Though I can’t say when Germany added it. I believe the 20s was when America started doing it, but according to a podcast I listened to recently, America was the first to start doing it. And also the effects of lead poisoning take decades to manifest.
Yeah but you oughta see the other guy
The vast majority of Americans don’t own/shoot guns. There’s 300 million guns because some people own multiple.
Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/
Also, the British literally voted to have a worse economy. We don’t have a monopoly on headassery.
Also, the British literally voted to have a worse economy. We don’t have a monopoly on headassery.
Our Brexit vote narrowly won for the same reason that Trump won again - the weaponisation of our stupid people via social media by right-wing shitbags.
It’s not like these people are getting 75% of the vote and the opposition is fractured. Is’s mostly pluralities or, at best, 52%ish percent of the vote. And 20% of people in any country are just change voters no matter what the change is.
There’s not really mandates in the U.S. Trump won’t even be able to control the House. We got a Belgium situation where there’s no government.
For those that don’t know, Belgium is the world’s most successful failed state. There’s enough chocolate and beer around so no one cares but they suck at forming governments. I think they beat Iraq’s record at just not forming a government.
Don’t joke too flippantly about it to their face, though.
I did once and the dude sat me down and very patiently explained to me all of the ways people still suffered because of that period, like how his friend had to suddenly pay his cancer treatment out of pocket for months and months and would have ended up homeless if not for being able to crash on this guy’s couch.
haven’t shot a gun in at least 20 years and I’m retarded as shit. so…
I’m sure this will get rained with downvotes at some point but just know you gave me a good chuckle man, and I greatly needed it. Have a great night!
I only downvoted you for saying you’ll be downvoted. Didn’t want to disappoint you.
I think they meant the other guy for dropping the “retard” line without censoring
The euphemism treadmill is ridiculous. People are always going to just use the new euphemism as an insult, causing the creation of a new euphemism. I’m drawing the line at retarded. I rarely use it but I will not stop.
The damage has been done, probably 😂
Being self aware enough to think that probably means you’re not all that bad.
I think far more people are exposed to lead in water than from guns. Even gun-owning Americans don’t go to the range that often.
That’s a good point, especially the fact the most people who own guns don’t shoot them that often, but re: lead in the water, hasn’t the issue of lead in water become less significant over time?
This post by New York City government states that actually construction work is the most common source of lead exposure for people in the city, followed by sketchy consumer products. https://a816-dohbesp.nyc.gov/IndicatorPublic/data-stories/adult-lead/#%3A~%3Atext=This+continued+drop+in+blood%2Cair%2C+paint+and+consumer+products.
Maybe just generally we’re not taking the adverse cognitive effects of lead exposure, whatever the source, seriously enough?
Edit: someone else in the comments made the connection between the high numbers of lead water pipes in Florida and the “Florida man” phenomenon. Maybe lead in the water is still way more significant of an issue than I thought
Lead pipes internally corrode through chemical reaction very quickly. Then the corrosion shields the water from the lead. They aren’t very dangerous.
You’re maybe not wrong, but I expect that even then the amount of lead and lead salts that gets in the water will be significantly higher than from non-lead pipes
Oh yeah, every lead water pipe everywhere should be replaced. I was just trying to say that the level of concern is way too high.
Also bear in mind that leaded gas was the norm til the mid 90s, so a lot of boomers and Gen X were exposed
Holy shit. I gues lemmy is a pretty young place for you to say something so completely wrong and get so many upvotes for it. Most cars have been “unleaded gasoline only” since the mid to late 70"s.
Think about it. Do you think those cars from the 1990’s still on the road today have all had engine and fuel pump swaps on them to run unleaded? Heck no. Most all the cars you’re going to find from the 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s all still say “unleaded fuel only” by the gas gauge. Most gas stations in the 1980’s didn’t even offer leaded gasoline.
was the norm
In the US, it was only banned from being sold in 1996, but it wasn’t the norm for long before that. The last model year that leaded gas was allowed for cars was 1974. Yes, all Boomers and most of Gen X would have had high exposure, but it would have been fading out by the time younger Gen Xers were born.
And yes there are some non-car applications of it that are still legal to this day, but the overall frequency of it would have dropped a ton well before the mid-90s. (Source, and actual graphs of the decline over time)
I think they are trying to phase out 100LL right now
They’re trying again. AvGas has always been more of a challenge, more resistant to change, but also a niche market segment. They were also trying twenty years ago when I did some flying, but progress has been glacial. Personally I always hoped we’d get new engines that could run on jet fuel, so avgas could just go away ( one of the things holding back general aviation is cost, and jet fuel is much cheaper). We should probably treat land near airports as contaminated, but there really aren’t many airports and the number continues to shrink
