Esperanza has a Healthy Homes team that does outreach to the community on lead issues. The LA times and Discovery News posted two articles connecting lead exposure to violent crime. It has been found that lead exposure can permanently affect part of a children’s brain; consequently resulting in crime. Even the lowest levels of lead found in children can reduce IQ by damaging brain cells affecting the volume regions associated with judgment and problem solving during their early years. Furthermore, its effects can increased children’s distractibility, impulsiveness, restlessness, and shortens their attention span, all these factors are considered to be precursor of aggressive or violent behavior. Lead comes in many forms, for example, paint, leaded gasoline, some types of batteries, water pipes, and pottery glazes. About 38 million U.S., 40% of the nation’s housing, still contain lead-based paint, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The problem exists particular in urban areas with uderserved communities, where older housing has not been renovated. For more information visit the following websites:
“Lead exposure in children linked to violent crime” in the LA Times
“Lead exposure linked to violent crime, Brain changes” in Discovery News
June 10, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Lead exposure = violent crime.
It’s a little too simplistic of a theory kinda like the argument that single parenthood equals a supposed less likelihood of children getting higher education.
A violent culture, with a violent history, and violent economic infrastructure in our communities combined by individual generations of trauma and inability of coping with structural obstacles to me is more holistic approach when looking at what purports violence.
by no means am I underminding the negative effects of lead exposure in children’s health, only pointing to the fact that violent crime is an effect derived from causes much larger than slum housing.
June 10, 2008 at 7:06 pm
for clarification purposes this is a critique to the article/spin/argument, not the blog author.
Ain’t got nothing but love for you arizbe!
June 10, 2008 at 7:28 pm
I have to agree with Fabiola on this point. I think the key distinction that needs to be made is that what has been proven is a CORRELATION, not a CAUSATION. Notice that the article uses words like “associated” and “linked” but I don’t think it ever explicitly says “lead exposure LEADS to violent crime” or “lead exposure CAUSES violent crime.”
The fact that lead exposure is correlated to violent crime definitely leaves room for Fabiola’s interpretation that areas with lead exposure are more likely to be communities that are low-income — and that means that we’re talking about systematic institutional neglect and exploitation that low-income communities face that is multi-dimensional. Therefore any analysis of violent crime should not be limited to exposure to one toxin, but should include an analysis of racism, employment opportunities, educational opportunities, worker’s rights, and the whole slate of social issues that we grapple with.
I think this kind of finding is one that everyone can feel good grabbing onto because it makes large systemic problems very simple: All we need to do is get rid of lead! The reality is more complicated and requires changing power structures — something that is not terribly savory for privileged people who hold power (getting rid of lead is probably a lot easier than looking critically at incarceration rates of minorities, for example).
Even though I think the formulation of “lead exposure CAUSES violent crime” is simplistic, there are facts from these articles that should definitely give both me and Fabiola pause. For instance:
“The researchers found, for example, that every 5-microgram-per-deciliter increase in blood lead levels at age 6 was accompanied by a 50% increase in the incidence of violent crime later in life.” Increased lead exposure is correlated to INCREASED violent crime? That is a powerful finding that is difficult to explain within our “this is ONLY a correlation related to poor social conditions” argument.
Also, the finding that the highest exposure to lead was associated to the smallest brain volume is a physical reality that is hard to dispute.
As Fabiola mentioned, no one is undermining the negative effects of lead. Esperanza has been committed for years to protecting our community from lead hazards — lead hazards cause brain damage and developmental problems. Our Healthy Homes team does FANTASTIC work in our community to protect our families from lead hazards and keep our children safe.
We may disagree with dramatic over-simplifications of the root causes of a social phenomenon like violent crime, but we ALL agree that lead is toxic, leads to major health problems, and families MUST be protected.
That’s why Esperanza’s 12 year commitment to the health of our families includes the Healthy Homes team, an elite group of Promotoras that protects our families from lead poisoning.