“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” —the U.S. Constitution Preamble (bolded words by me).
“You will observe with Concern how long
a useful Truth may be known and exist before it is generally
receiv’d and practic’d on.” —Benjamin Franklin
Why is nobody talking about the lead poisoning theory?
The United States has a dark and prominent past with lead poisoning. Although lead has been carefully regulated and monitored since the late 1980s, it most definitely wasn’t always that way. In fact, the lead poisoning of millions of Americans (including children) from that era can still be felt, in one way or another, presently.
I’ve recently stumbled upon this revelation, and I find it to be both illuminating and disquieting with regards to our current political climate. This revelation is both a blessing to know and understand, and a curse too frightening to accept. It is nevertheless necessary to discuss, and seriously consider, the pivotal role lead poisoning has played in the current economic and environmental crises which all leading nations face today.
I’m referring to the disturbing history of leaded gasoline, the United States (and the rest of the world), and the permanent effects of lead poisoning on the minds of over 170 million Americans from the 1920s through the 1980s.* Although this historical matter has been archived and essentially forgotten since those dark days, I’m keen on resurfacing the data to explore and develop a pressing theory: Are the Boomers and GenXers truly fit to (lead) this world?
*Although leaded gasoline wasn’t officially banned in the U.S. until 1996, the 1986 lead content standards wiped out 98% of leaded gasoline use in the nation, essentially enacting tighter regulations in the later 1980s .
Americans (and other nations) huffed Leaded Gasoline for Decades before it was finally banned
This is the unfortunate truth for anyone who lived contemporaneously with the ill-fated invention of leaded gasoline circa 1921. The “mastermind” behind it all was the notorious Thomas Midgley Jr., who will go down in history as the man who killed (and destroyed the livelihoods of) the most people in history:
Thomas Midgley knew, of course, that there were better, safer alternatives to leaded gasoline even during those times. Mixing ethyl alcohol with gasoline, for example, was already on the verge of becoming commercialized and used worldwide as a suitable anti-knocking agent. (Knocking refers to a vehicle’s internal combustion process that would detonate and “knock” the car loudly. Anti-knocking agents were added to gasoline to quiet the car and stabilize the combustion process.)
As William Kovirik (2005) wrote in the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, “Another alternative, ethyl alcohol, produced an anti-knock effect identical to that of ethyl [the intentionally confusing name they used in place of the far less appealing moniker ‘leaded gasoline’] when blended in 10–20% volume with gasoline.”
According to Kovirik, Midgley knew ethyl alcohol was the future for gasoline years before he set his eyes on the much more profitable leaded gasoline, tetraethyl lead (TEL). He even wrote about the marvels of ethyl alcohol in his personal journal entries, noting that ethyl alcohol was “of course, the fuel of the future.” He even sent a lab assistant to Yale University, a year prior to his TEL discovery, to study the conversion of cellulose to ethyl alcohol fuel. Of course, when those Yale studies and experiments were taking too long for Midgley’s preference (time is money after all), he withdrew from the mission altogether, and instead set his sights on inventing that which he yearned for all along: a get-rich-quick scheme. And so the real money-making agent, TEL, would retire every (less profitable) alternative for publicly safe, anti-knocking agents.
Every promising anti-knocking agent thereafter was sidelined, as TEL stole the limelight. After the ill-fated invention in December 1921, TEL was popularized and marketed between 1922 and 1923, and finally distributed throughout the nation’s markets (and worldwide) in February 1923, for over fifty years. America was very suddenly huffed out on TEL. Unlike our reasonably safer and far more enjoyable poison, ethyl alcohol (aka the fun, adult variety), the effects of lead poisoning would most assuredly be permanent on the minds and bodies of its victims. And at an alarmingly rapid rate. Oh, and children were most negatively impacted by the lead poisoning, as the scientific literature today almost unanimously agrees on.
The Harrowing Effects of Lead Poisoning on the Mind
The fallout of TEL was recognized almost immediately. Ethyl Corporation—the aggregate of Standard Oil Co. (now Exxon Mobil), DuPont, and GM—witnessed worksite-related deaths as early as September 1923, not even a year after the mass production and distribution of TEL to the markets. Within just a year, workers were either dying or driven insane. The mad ones were shipped off to psychiatric facilities until their inevitable passing.
Although these related incidents of lead poisoning prompted a slew of public health conferences and debates, the general consensus remained that TEL was the “only” viable option for anti-knocking agents at the time. This of course was false, according to the personal records of Midgley himself, mentioned earlier. But once a sociopath, always a sociopath. Midgley and his diabolical lab partners continued to lie and deceive the public about the safety of TEL until over half the population was suffering from moderate to severe lead poisoning. Extreme public safety measures weren’t seriously considered until the mid-1970s. By then, it was too late. The minds of most Americans had already been infected with the noxious TEL fumes.
Interesting anomalies started taking place concurrently with the rise of TEL use in gasoline. A lead-crime hypothesis was formulated by scientists to explain the unusual rise in homicides and other violent crimes in direct correlation with the rise of TEL use. Take this graph, for instance, which shows the alarming spike in homicides from the mid-1960s through the 1990s.
Although correlation does not assume causation, it’s quite extraordinary to compare the rise in TEL use in gasoline (which peaked in the 1960s through the 1980s) with this graph denoting a concurrent rise in violent crimes such as homicide. It should be stated that other factors such as socioeconomic status, upbringing, the legalized abortion and crime effect, genetics, and other cultural shifts also play a role in determining the sudden rise and fall of violent crime from the 1960s-1990s. Even considering all of these confounding variables, however, a meta-analysis pooling 24 individual studies together on the lead-crime hypothesis found that “the abatement of lead pollution may be responsible for 7–28% of the fall in homicide in the US.” This at least corroborates that as close as 10% to as much as a quarter of all crimes during that period were caused from the lead poisoning of Americans. If that isn’t concerning enough about the average state of the American mind at that time, then perhaps this is:
A colossal study on 1.5 million individuals across the U.S. and 37 European nations found that individuals exposed to lead levels greater than the modern standard of 5 μg/dL (microgram /deciliter) “were less agreeable, less conscientious (in the US sample), and more neurotic (among younger participants)…” Furthermore, “people born in each US county after atmospheric lead reduction began had healthier, more mature personality profiles. They were more agreeable, more conscientious, more open to experience, and less neurotic.”
Does this feel like déjà vu to you? You’ve probably experienced plenty of the elderly’s irrational, rash, delinquent, explosive, and/or borderline antisocial personalities in your life already. You now have plenty of science to support your theory that there was something quite wrong with those individuals. In fact, the average adult in the 1970s had a blood lead level of 13 μg/dL, which is now considered by modern standards to be nearly three times the cutoff for clinical attention. The average American from the 1970s has over twice the amount of lead poisoning in their systems than is normal and healthy. Don’t you think this would pose a problem not only to the afflicted individual, but to society as well?
The researchers from the aforementioned study seem to think so, too. As they prophesied on page two of their research:
[M]illions of people born from the 1930s (when leaded gasoline became popular worldwide) to the mid-1970s (when it was phased out) may have had their personalities adversely affected. If these associations persist at low levels of exposure, current generations may still be experiencing lifelong consequences from lead exposure…Even a small association between lead exposure and personality, when aggregated across millions of people and their countless decisions and behaviors influenced by personality, could have large effects on societal well-being, productivity, and longevity. (bold words by me)
It should come as no surprise to anyone that those individuals most affected by lead poisoning from the 1930s through the 1970s posed serious threats not only to themselves, but to everyone else in their society. Being less agreeable, less conscientious and less considerate of others’ well-being, and displaying such blatantly antisocial and neurotic personalities—what could go wrong when a supermajority of citizens are suddenly like this? Everything, according to author Bruce Gibney.
In his book A Generation of Sociopaths: How the Baby Boomers Betrayed America, Gibney explores every channel of sociopathy the Baby Boomers encompassed on their rise to snatching political and financial power for themselves. Considering the Baby Boomers were one of the most susceptible cohorts to lead poisoning—they were children or young adults and therefore the most vulnerable to adverse effects during the peak years of TEL use—I think Gibney is onto something here.
Gibney provides a plethora of data, from reliable sources like the U.S. Treasury, U.S. Census Bureau, FRED (Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis), economical journals, and other sources repellant to fake news like FoxNews, CNN, and MSNBC. Through his reliable data sources, Gibney makes a compelling argument against the Baby Boomer’s mental faculties.
He shows that Baby Boomers expressed sociopathic tendencies as early as their teens and young adults, when they harbored more pro-Vietnam War sentiments of any generation preceding them. As soon as those Boomers reached draft age—specifically, when the government overturned the draft deferment via college enrollment—that tune changed almost overnight. Baby Boomers started protesting the Vietnam War in the late 1960s to early 1970s, when many of them were draft age and could no longer dodge the draft through college attendance. Hypocritical? Most definitely. Sociopathic? Let’s be fair and require more examples before jumping to that conclusion. No worries, Gibney has that covered, too.
For reference, here is the official DSM-V criteria for diagnosing antisocial personality disorder ( aka sociopathy). Keep this close to refer to as I continue presenting Gibney’s conclusions on the Baby Boomer generation. I will use the respective numbers below in parentheses for every sociopathic trait indicated in Gibney’s claims. I will be brief here and I highly recommend you purchase or refer to Gibney’s book in one way or another yourself for reference:
Diagnostic Criteria of Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD)
According to the DSM-5, antisocial personality disorder is defined as a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since the age of 15 years, as indicated by three (or more) of the following symptoms:
(1) Failure to conform to social norms concerning lawful behaviors, as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest
(2) Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure
(3) Impulsivity or failure to plan
(4) Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults
(5) Having no regard for the safety of self or others
(6) Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations
(7) Lack of remorse, or inability to feel guilt, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another
One of Gibney’s additional claims indicating Baby Boomer sociopathy is the dramatic increase in risk-taking behavior (and bank bailouts) from the 1980s onward once the Baby Boomers took over Wall Street, emblematic to criteria (1), (2), (3), (6) and (7) of the antisocial personality disorder guidelines. Gibney goes on to explore the profligacy and materialism of Baby Boomers compared to other generations, revealing from the FRED data that Baby Boomers have saved the least of any generation before (or after) them (5, 6, and 7). So much for accusing Millennials of spending too much money on avocado toast and coffee! Takes one to know one, I guess. This is typical sociopathic behavior, of course: Rules for thee, but not for me. And blame everyone else for the world crises.
Gibney also touches on the influence Baby Boomers had on tax cuts from the 1980s onward. Baby Boomers, as the supermajority constituents that they were, successfully voted in politicians who pandered to their self-interests. Any politician (perfect example in Reagan) who proposed substantial tax cuts to the middle class specifically, for instance, would appeal to the Baby Boomers as they entered their peak working years from the 1980s through 2000s. This, of course, harvested more profits for the Boomers at everyone else’s expense (read the rich and poor classes were screwed with proportionally higher tax rates). This self-serving behavior for “tax cuts for me, except for thee” indicates criteria (3, 5, 6, and 7), as the Boomers had no regard (or remorse for) the social classes they threw under the bus.
To rub kosher salt on a gaping wound (kosher salt being rougher than regular table salt), the only tax cuts Baby Boomers opposed at the time were for Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security. Don’t fall for the surface charitable behavior here—they voted against those tax cuts because their impending retirements in the coming decade or so required such benefits for themselves, which is indicative of sociopathy via criteria (5, 6, and 7). As politicians, they peddled tax cuts (excluding Boomer-benefitting ones of course) through mendacious propaganda such as “trickle-down economics” and the fallacy that “tax cuts add more to the economy,” (1 and 2).
There are too many examples provided by Gibney to continue here, but I hope you get the picture. Boomers have presented sociopathic tendencies since at least their teenage and young adult years when leaded gasoline was ubiquitous. Lead poisoning in moderate to severe amounts has been clinically proven to decrease agreeableness, conscientiousness, and increase neuroticism and personality disorders such as antisocial personality disorder. I think you can put two and two together here.
With this in mind…Is it truly safe to put our faith and trust in generations exposed to significant levels of lead poisoning?
This is the golden question I think all of us should seriously consider before contributing that pivotal answer.
Lead poisoning nationally traumatized Americans (and the rest of the world if I’m being honest) from the 1930s through the mid-1970s. The average blood lead levels for adults in the 1970s was 13 μg/dL, more than twice the threshold for necessary clinical intervention. Baby Boomers primarily, and older GenXers secondarily, were most affected by lead poisoning as children and young adults. Clinical studies continue to replicate the findings that lead found at those levels attributes to a variety of cognitive, behavioral, and personality disorders, including significantly reduced IQ, violent/aggressive behavior, neuroticism, paranoia, memory loss, and even antisocial personality disorder. Authors such as Gibney have been outspoken about the sociopathic behavior of the Boomer population compared to every other generation.
So then why are Boomers (and GenXers) still the supermajority in congressional, judicial, and executive powers in America circa 2023? As of 2021, Boomers still control the U.S. Senate by an overwhelming supermajority of 68%; with GenXers following behind at 20%; the Silent Generation comprises 11%; and Millennial(s) a meager and pathetic 1% of the Senate. The House fares no better, with 230 seats bearing the pruny derrières of Baby Boomers (53% majority); 144 seats to host the secondarily lead poisoned GenXers (exactly one-third of the representation); the Silent Generation carries 27 seats (6.25%); and the Millennials only 31 seats (7%):
First of all, does this seem like fair and equal representation of all Americans to you? Furthermore, isn’t it a tad bit alarming to consider that 402 of the 432 House seats, which include the Silents, Boomers, and GenXers (that’s almost 93% total) are, considering the scientific literature on it, on average over twice the threshold for concerning health risks posed by lead poisoning? Does anyone truly feel comforted by the fact that 68% of lead poisoned, narcissistic and sociopathic-presenting Boomers dominate the Senate, while one-fifth of the Senate is represented by additionally lead poisoned Gen Xers, and 11% the fossilized (and further along in lead poisoning) minds of the Silent Generation?
Am I being unfair here, oversimplifying and generalizing these older generations? Not all Boomers and GenXers fit under one category. I’ve met plenty of pleasant, non-hostile Boomers and GenXers in my life as well. I like to think of them whenever I learn a new fact about one cranky old politician or another, to remind myself that they’re not all the same. However, the fact remains that the most sociopathic-presenting ones in these specific generations are the ones in power, be it the dumb CEO sociopaths of today (who hold quite a bit of their own political leverage through lobbying) or Boomer bankers of Wall Street, or the corrupted politicians serving these deviant types.
Nevertheless, these corrupted Boomer types were buoyed up by the masses, and the majority of those masses were fellow Boomer constituents. Obviously the less power-hungry but equally lead poisoned Boomers still managed to stall the burgeoning scientific and technological advancements in this country through their reckless, self-serving voting decisions over the past forty-plus years from the 1980s onward.
Finally, after fifty years of worldwide tyranny by the lead-poisoned minds of Baby Boomers (and Silents and some older GenXers!), we can observe what that has done for our well-being and the condition of the planet. Financial struggles abound amongst all average American families, while the Boomers soak up the most profits and Medicare / Social Security returns of any generation. House and rental rates have soared in a short span of time, with Boomer Wall Street bankers and Boomer-run private equity firms manipulating these markets to their self-interests. Judging by this currently trending issue of worldwide Boomer deceit over global climate change concerns, we’re not getting anywhere good when it comes to the health of the mother sustaining us all, planet Earth herself, either.
Boomers (and some Silents and older GenXers) reject science and reasoning over personal religious beliefs and confirmation biases. Perhaps this is due in part to their significantly reduced IQs from lead poisoning? They lie and deceive when it suits their best interests, at the literal expense of everyone else. Perhaps these sociopathic tendencies stem from lead poisoning affecting the mental faculties involving personal relationships, openness to new experiences, and psychosis? They’re the most hypocritical generation as supported by just some of the facts mentioned earlier, and they show no remorse for their hypocrisy and blatant manipulation of the public. All of this just shows how narcissistic, sociopathic and corrupted they are from, greed, yes, but most importantly, and more likely as a result of, severe lead poisoning.
Am I being too harsh, considering these older fools (as proven by their lowered IQs) were involuntarily exposed to neurotoxic lead fumes against their better judgments? Should we hone sympathy for our oppressors? You tell me. When the damage has been as catastrophic as it has been and the overwhelming burden for resolving these crises falls disproportionately on their Posterity, the younger generations, will pity be the appropriate answer against such lead poisoned rulers who personally opened the canisters, poured out the oil, and sparked the flames that would burn up the world?
Think of everything sociopathic and hypocritical the Boomer generations anywhere in the world have done in comparison to other generations. In America, they were the most pro-war during the Vietnam War when no other generation wanted to go to war. Yet when the time to go to war presented itself to them, the Boomers changed their tune and protested. Think of the free or exceptionally cheap college they enjoyed, as they now prey on younger students hoping to achieve the same as they once had. Think of their flagrant responses to the world crisis of climate change, which scientists believe is one of two main contributing factors (the other being nuclear warfare) on the doomsday clock’s tightening projection of the world’s end.
Can we really put any of our faith and trust in these lead-poisoned, tyrannical rulers who present with such anti-science, antisocial, and psychotic tendencies? The current state of the world is answer enough.