I'm confused - is IQ a reliable way to measure intelligence between individuals, or is it a culturally biased measure that is scientifically bankrupt? I guess it depends on the context.
[deleted]
The cognitive costs of air pollution
31–40 of 300 posts
Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution
#32If the effect were present, and as large as implied, you’d expect low IQ test results in ultra-polluted Chinese cities such as Shanghai and Beijing. And yet... http://www.city-data.com/forum/world/2348902-china-iq-map-pr...
Pardon my ignorance, but how is this IQ data obtained? It is reported by the government? Are IQ tests standardized?
It's official data released by Chinese. Which helps explain why Han Chinese are on top of the list.
Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution
#33If the effect were present, and as large as implied, you’d expect low IQ test results in ultra-polluted Chinese cities such as Shanghai and Beijing. And yet... http://www.city-data.com/forum/world/2348902-china-iq-map-pr...
Pardon my ignorance, but how is this IQ data obtained? It is reported by the government? Are IQ tests standardized?
The whole point of IQ is that it tests common factor (as in factor analysis) underlying different tests. There is known correlation between different testing methods.
Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution
#34I wish the argument against pollution would be the simplest one.
Go to a massively unpopulated area and just breath. Feel the difference? Isn't it intoxicating?
Who gives a crap if umpires make worse calls? Just fight pollution because it's obvious pollution is bad for humans and the planet.
Normally I'm all for extra evidence, but in a situation like this come on. It's basically like immaterial evidence against genocide by saying, I don't know, saying the increased production of bullets to commit genocide reduces national science and health budgets by 12% (fake stat just for context). Who cares! It's just plain bad.
/rant
(ps - rant isn't against the article, but a broader frustration about the topic)
Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution
#35This really bothers me. I live in a VERY polluted place, and unfortunately moving away won't be an option for me for at least half a decade. What can I do to minimise the health effects of such an atmosphere? I'm planning on getting an indoor air filter for my home.
Starts with monitoring. Awair or laseregg are good quality monitors. Then you can assess how well filters work.
I think there are masks you can use outside too. You can also check which times of day/days are worst. And which streets. You can carry the laseregg around for local measures.
Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution
#36How do you all monitor air quality? I personally have a couple of devices (an Awair and a Flow). They seem to under-report PM2.5 compared to purpleair, airnow, and waqi.
Measurements from PurpleAir's network of public sensors are available for free.
It's a useful tool if the locals in the area that you're interested in are using PurpleAir's sensors.
Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution
#37This really bothers me. I live in a VERY polluted place, and unfortunately moving away won't be an option for me for at least half a decade. What can I do to minimise the health effects of such an atmosphere? I'm planning on getting an indoor air filter for my home.
I'm assuming Delhi?
Not much you can do except get out. I've already started moving out for the first 2-3 weeks of November and working from a city like Panjim
Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution
#38Poverty also reduces IQ by 13 points https://archive.is/bmj11
Has this study been replicated? It seems a lot like one of those terrible “priming” studies that won’t.
Statistics aside, the experimental methodology is terrible. You ask a bunch of people to think about being poor, or not, and that’s supposed to be a simulation of being poor or not?
Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution
#39How do you all monitor air quality? I personally have a couple of devices (an Awair and a Flow). They seem to under-report PM2.5 compared to purpleair, airnow, and waqi.
The South Coast (California) Air Quality Management District does some really thorough tests on the quality of the various low-cost sensors: https://www.aqmd.gov/aq-spec/evaluations/summary-pm
Anyone want to review this table and suggest a currently commercially available option in the $300 and lower price range? I may have time this afternoon but if anyone does go thorough it I'm interested to know.
Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution
#40I thought IQ was not a reliable measure of anything?
I wouldn't call IQ a completely useless yardstick. Likely through examining all of the evidence regarding IQ and military performance, the United States government has come to the conclusion that an IQ below a certain level disqualifies the person for military service.
Unsurprisingly, US law is a bit complicated on this, but to summarize, it implies that an IQ below 81 (“tenth percentile”) is disqualifying, and dictates that persons with IQ's between 81 and 93 (“thirty-first percentile”) cannot comprise more than 20% of all enlistees.