Efforts to reduce exposure to lead poisoning, not Giuliani, lowered N.Y.'s crime rate, study says

Research Links Lead Exposure, Criminal Activity
Data May Undermine Giuliani's Claims
By Shankar Vedantam
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, July 8, 2007; A02

Rudy Giuliani never misses an opportunity to remind people about his track record in fighting crime as mayor of New York City from 1994 to 2001. "I began with the city that was the crime capital of America," Giuliani, now a candidate for president, recently told Fox's Chris Wallace. "When I left, it was the safest large city in America. I reduced homicides by 67 percent. I reduced overall crime by 57 percent."

Although crime did fall dramatically in New York during Giuliani's tenure, a broad range of scientific research has emerged in recent years to show that the mayor deserves only a fraction of the credit that he claims. The most compelling information has come from an economist in Fairfax who has argued in a series of little-noticed papers that the "New York miracle" was caused by local and federal efforts decades earlier to reduce lead poisoning.

The theory offered by the economist, Rick Nevin, is that lead poisoning accounts for much of the variation in violent crime in the United States. It offers a unifying new neurochemical theory for fluctuations in the crime rate, and it is based on studies linking children's exposure to lead with violent behavior later in their lives.

What makes Nevin's work persuasive is that he has shown an identical, decades-long association between lead poisoning and crime rates in nine countries. "It is stunning how strong the association is," Nevin said in an interview. "Sixty-five to ninety percent or more of the substantial variation in violent crime in all these countries was explained by lead." Through much of the 20th century, lead in U.S. paint and gasoline fumes poisoned toddlers as they put contaminated hands in their mouths. The consequences on crime, Nevin found, occurred when poisoning victims became adolescents...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/07/AR2007070701073.html

It reminds me of a paper years ago by a Berkeley historian (I think he was a historian, sorry, it was at least 10 years ago, probably more) who was making foods based on recipes in ancient Rome. He had to figure out measurements etc., and he found that all of the recipes that had salt in them had very large amounts of it. Then he discovered that one of the symptoms of lead poisoning is an inability to taste salt, and he posited that perhaps the fall of the Roman Empire (not to mention the various depravities) may have been due to lead poisoning from the lead-lined aqueducts.

I always found that an intriguing proposition, and it's right in line with this current study.

As much as I think he's an asshole and would make a shit president, I'm not one to encourage distorting reality for sake of campaigns either (not saying you are). Rudy definitely did a lot of things that helped the crime rate, even if some of them were unpopular. That doesn't mean there weren't other contributing factors, but I'm not going to take away legitimate accomplishments of people either for sake of campaign politics. And lord knows, nowadays he has more than enough legitimate things to criticize.

Violent crime throughout the country dropped over a period of about ten years, to everyone's puzzlement. It has been laid to a lot of things, more police, fewer police, more this, less that-and there has yet to be a definitive answer.

I confess that I have a view that Guiliani was nothing more than a space occupier, with no positive impact on change, but I'm willing to look at contrary views.

the streets and sidewalks during his tenure...that was one good thing. But what else? I don't know.

:eyes:

:eyes:

...lead paint chips, as well as the PSA's warning kids about blasting caps - both were on WPIX & WNEW (NYC independent stations).

neighborhood

the ages of 20 and 36 running around causing trouble.