Could also happen that all the advances in hygiene and infrastructure and logistics during the Roman empire had a more positive impact on IQ than the negative effect of lead. Not starving while growing up does wonders for the brain.
For (presumed) IQ benefits, I'd focus more on the hygiene, and the relatively disease-free drinking water which all those lead pipes & lead-lined aqueducts provided. (Plus the sewers.) There were lots of nasty diseases you could catch by drinking the water in ancient cities. And at scale, "lead lowered IQ" isn't much different to "unable to think well while ill", to "higher mortality makes education a poorer investment".
you mean after the slaughters?
And conquest is of course always bad. But that wasn't the point you were making.
You were talking as if there was constant large scale starvation in Rome, and there for the most part wasn't. You point that only rich Roman elites didn't regularly starve isn't really true. And its certainty not true in comparison to other places in the ancient world.
You just looking for an argument? Its important people know writing and roads weren’t invented by the romans. They are given way too much credit by Americans with imperial ambitions.