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

  • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’ve been thinking long covid might also be a factor for it getting worse over the last few years.

    • hangman@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      This is a fascinating angle, I just looked at a couple of pubmed articles as a result of your comment and this one stuck out right away

      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38829253/

      “Long-COVID is characterized by persistent symptoms following COVID-19 infection, with cognitive impairment being a prominent feature. Symptoms include brain fog, difficulties with concentration, memory issues, and executive function deficits.”

      At the end of the day hardly anything has just one cause, and you may be correct that long COVID has had a big impact on the critical thinking problem in America.

      Great comment, receiving contributions like this is why I posted the question in the first place, thank you

  • nomad@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    The brain follows the same patterns as muscles: use it or lose it. The general population in America is very much not educated at all. So their brains lose the ability to think rapidly.

    • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      The cognitive decline among older populations (50+) is absolutely appalling. It’s safe to say that the average 5th grader has better critical thinking skills than the average septuagenarian.

      So… why the latter can vote but not the former is a mystery to me.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        The first paragraph I agree with. The last sentence… That is some naivity. People do shit because it’s been done before and that is all they need, they don’t even question it. Have you really not noticed how strong and consistent a factor it is that people don’t like change? It might take 100 years for public perception to align with what you’re saying even if every single study for that 100 years agreed that older adults are severely cognitively compared.

    • Gray@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Smartphones (and the Internet more generally) have led to a major decline in reading books among the American public. I think this plays such a huge role in the absolutely batshit crazy cultural shift we’ve seen.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        There’s a whole lot of stupid books to read too but one difference is that at least they’re supposed to be grammatically correct.

        People also watched a ton of bad TV instead of reading.

  • qantravon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Or, you know, the lead that we put into the air for decades burning leaded gasoline…

    Even though we’ve (mostly) stopped doing that, the effects are cumulative, and there are still plenty of people alive who were around when that was still a thing.

    • hangman@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Somebody else in the comments said something very similar, I’lll paraphrase what I responded which is that I hadn’t really thought of that, and I’m starting now to come around to the notion that maybe even if there is some percentage of the population suffering the cognitive impairments associated with the adverse effects of lead, it’s probably more likely that they were exposed many years or decades ago vs recently

  • sploosh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I figured copper jackets would greatly reduce lead exposure, which is all I used when I used to shoot.

  • Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    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.

    • hangman@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      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?

      • Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Also bear in mind that leaded gas was the norm til the mid 90s, so a lot of boomers and Gen X were exposed

        • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          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.

        • Reyali@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          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)

            • AA5B@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              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

      • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Lead pipes internally corrode through chemical reaction very quickly. Then the corrosion shields the water from the lead. They aren’t very dangerous.

        • lad@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          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

          • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            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.

  • someguy3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Leaded gas wasn’t fully stopped until 1996. Still in some aviation used (piston plane engines).

    But yes I wonder about shooting ranges too. I think a couple times a year at an indoor range isn’t insignificant.

    • hangman@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah some of the replies have good points about lead damage being cumulative and showing up later, so maybe the workers in those studies I mentioned showed impairment because they were chronically exposed over some lengthy period and the impairments they measured were because of the cumulative exposure?

      That also makes me think again though that, like you said, going to the indoor range a few times per year and not taking proper measures to clean oneself could cause some cumulative effect over time?

      I mean check out this post where this person’s lead level was over 15 and decreased to 8 after a month of no shooting. Idk but reaching a blood lead level of 15 can’t be good right? Especially if you’re exposed repeatedly over a long period of time?

      https://www.reddit.com/r/liberalgunowners/comments/1h6qtis/update_on_lead_levels_from_shooting_30_days_of_no/

    • osaerisxero@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Iirc indoor ranges need ventilation systems because, you know, all the combustion. I don’t know if the residue on, say, counters, etc, is enough of a buildup to be significant but I would be surprised if airborne particulate was particularly high.

  • Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    You’re half right, they’re are brain damaged.

    But bullets?

    I don’t know man. Seems unlikely. Leaded fuel and lead paint tho…?

    #Lead Exposure in Last Century Shrank IQ Scores of Half of Americans

    Leaded gasoline calculation to have stolen over 800 million cumulative IQ points since 1940s

    A new study calculates that exposure to car exhaust from leaded gas during childhood stole a collective 824 million IQ points from more than 170 million Americans alive today, about half the population of the United States.

    https://today.duke.edu/2022/03/lead-exposure-last-century-shrunk-iq-scores-half-americans

    • hangman@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah idk. The more I read the comments and check out sources I think the question has at least some merit.

      I’m taking in that cognitive impairments seem to really require cumulative exposure and the effects are delayed, but also anecdotes like this reddit post below make me think there is a nonzero number of Americans who are chronically exposed to elevated lead levels over a long period of time by frequent shooting (especially indoors) and not taking proper remedial measures.

      https://www.reddit.com/r/liberalgunowners/comments/1h6qtis/update_on_lead_levels_from_shooting_30_days_of_no/

      • Jolteon@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Note that those results come from indoor range with incredibly bad air circulation (it specified that the ventilation system pushed the smoke back into your face). Outdoor shooting, and shooting a normal firing range with good (or even not actively bad) air circulation would probably yield significantly lower results.

        • hangman@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          It seems like outdoors would be somewhat better, but I’m not sure the specific premise of your comment is correct in that it seems to be much more important to use proper remediation in terms of cleanup rather than whether you shoot at a good indoor range or a bad one or even outdoors.

          See, for example, this comment thread in that same post where the person states that a three day carbine course, which presumably occurred outdoors, left him testing at 13 a week later. Subsequently the person made sure to engage in proper cleaning rituals which have prevented a recurrence of the high blood lead levels

          https://old.reddit.com/r/liberalgunowners/comments/1h6qtis/update_on_lead_levels_from_shooting_30_days_of_no/m0fpnlp/

  • irotsoma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    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.

  • pyrflie@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    EXCUSE ME, but compared to the drinking water it’s basically a rounding error for lead exposure.

    • BigPotato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I have literally fired a machine gun until liquid carbon is running down the gun and spraying on my face and I’ve likely had more lead from pipes and paint chips than anything else.

  • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    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.

  • Lemmy See Your Wrists@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    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.

    • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      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.

      • Droechai@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        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

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      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

      • Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        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.

  • Zier@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Religion is the cause. You are not allowed to think outside the cult. There are a lot of idiot Americans who don’t own guns or are exposed to them, so the lead theory is not valid in that sense.

      • Zier@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        There is a venn diagram where Idiot is the center. Not everyone who is a xian owns a gun, not all gun owners are xians, and yes, there are xians who worship the NRA. National Russia Association

    • viking@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      The dumbest and most religious ones usually own the most weapons though, so it’s a persistent state of mutual amplification.

  • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Is it possible? Yes

    Could it at least in part explain some behaviour? Yes.

    But the missing question really is how much, and the answer is probably infitessimally small even if Real.

    For lead exposure there are far easier and more common ways to get exposed such as lead pipes (which the US has a lot of).

    But also you’d have to establish that the underlying problem is brain damage, and that is probably not true and instead reflects cultural bias.

    There are many other reasons to explain American culture and behaviour which does not default to brain damage (or at least provable brain damage).

    I would look at social and cultural issues first: an extremely weak political system, a poor quality general education system, high levels of religion, poor quality general health care, high levels of inequality including shocking levels of poverty.

    The problem with the US is the extremes - if you have money you have the best the world can offer; if you don’t then the state provision is shockingly poor. But alot of the crazies are also rich, and that comes down to the culture and society.

    Lead poisoning is the least likely explanation, and is almost wishful thinking to try and explain things as a disease rather than normal human nature.

    • YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      COVID causes brain damage too. We largely don’t mask anymore like even in doctor’s offices, or worse hospitals. I think COVID has done a large amount of damage in a short time.