71–80 of 241 posts
It just doesn’t make sense intuitively to me. This feels more like an example to show correlation does not equal causation. So what if the violent crime is higher in highly polluted areas? How is that information useful for anything?
It just doesn’t make sense intuitively to me. This feels more like an example to show correlation does not equal causation. So what if the violent crime is higher in highly polluted areas? How is that information useful for anything?
For all those commenting on 'aren't more polluted areas just more criminal due to other factors", as far as I can tell the researchers examined crime rates for the same place and find correlation with whether there was more Ozone and PM 2,5 on a particular day or not. So they are not comparing clean air neighborhoods to highly polluted neighborhoods, but the same neighborhood on different days. https://www.sciencedai…
An interesting result, to be sure, but correlation does not imply causation.
For all those commenting on 'aren't more polluted areas just more criminal due to other factors", as far as I can tell the researchers examined crime rates for the same place and find correlation with whether there was more Ozone and PM 2,5 on a particular day or not. So they are not comparing clean air neighborhoods to highly polluted neighborhoods, but the same neighborhood on different days. https://www.sciencedai…
Do you know if they controlled for daytime population? As in weekdays vs weekends?
For all those commenting on 'aren't more polluted areas just more criminal due to other factors", as far as I can tell the researchers examined crime rates for the same place and find correlation with whether there was more Ozone and PM 2,5 on a particular day or not. So they are not comparing clean air neighborhoods to highly polluted neighborhoods, but the same neighborhood on different days. https://www.sciencedai…
> correlation An interesting result, to be sure, but correlation does not imply causation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't do it with humans, for ethical reasons, but why not take some other social animal, say mice, put one population in a box with zero pollution, and one hooked up to an old car exhaust with leaded gasoline? I'd wager the ones with the pollution are going to eat each other's faces at a much higher rate than those without. For giggles and to test some fall of Rome hypotheses, run a 3rd cage where the water comes…
Can one still buy leaded petrol in the states? In any case, I agree you can't do this properly with humans. And lead is definitely a factor in many deceases including mental ones so it could well be one of the causes of increased violence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The researchers made no claims on the physiological, mechanistic relationship of how exposure to pollution leads someone to become more aggressive; their results only show a strong correlative relationship between such crimes and levels of air pollution. The researchers were careful to correct for other possible explanations, including weather, heat waves, precipitation, or more general, county-specific confounding…
> their results only show a strong correlative relationship The paper's abstract says "The results suggest that a 10% reduction in daily PM2.5 and ozone could save $1.4 billion in crime costs per year, a previously overlooked cost associated with pollution." In my opinion this is a statement of a causal relationship, not merely a correlation. I wonder why they didn't reverse that relationship, too, and propose that v…
But really if the rationalists just took a few seconds to think about it maybe they'd find a some plausibility in the notion that exposure to harmful pollution could trigger a stress response; stress is intimately wrapped up with aggression.
https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2004/10/feedback-cyc...