Although in principle I don't see why it couldn't be the case, as leas poisoning also has symptoms such as depression and fatigue, which could marginally sway people towards inaction.
Although in principle I don't see why it couldn't be the case, as leas poisoning also has symptoms such as depression and fatigue, which could marginally sway people towards inaction.
That could be counteracted by stimulant use, for example.
If it's true that lead exposure motivates crime, but at the same time causes people to feel too depressed and fatigued to act on their motivation, then my point is that if lead-exposed people then take stimulants (like meth, coke, or crack, for example) then those stimulants could counteract the depression and fatigue effects of the lead enough to allow people to act on their motivation to commit crime.
In case some of the downvoters are skeptical that stimulants could counteract depression or fatigue -- they certainly can. Not saying this is a smart thing to do, due to the addictive potential of these substances or their other deleterious effects. But they certainly can stimulate people in to action if they're otherwise too depressed or tired to do anything.
This is just a hypothesis. But it would be interesting to see if there's a correspondence between lead exposure, stimulant use, and crime.
The nexus of lead exposure, alcohol, and crime would also be interesting to investigate, as alcohol is already well known to be associated with violence, impulsive behavior, and poor decision making -- adding lead exposure in to the mix might potentiate this in to criminal activity.
I was responding to someone who said "lead poisoning also has symptoms such as depression and fatigue, which could marginally sway people towards inaction."
What I just quoted is an argument against lead being implicated in an increase in crime. I was just pointing out why lead might be implicated in crime after all, despite the above quoted argument against it.
So what exactly am I doing wrong here?
They already know it's likely wrong. You pointing out it could be wrong isn't needed. They already know there are lots of anti-lead arguments, so you making another one isn't needed.
I was just throwing an idea out there. I'm not convinced of anything.
But people seem more sedentary and depressed than ever before. Animal studies show the same - the controls are less active than the exposed group.
Maybe you only made people too weak to be capable of any violent crime.
Well, you need to post this reply to the person I was replying to instead of to me, as it was their contention that "lead poisoning also has symptoms such as depression and fatigue, which could marginally sway people towards inaction."