this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
406 points (100.0% liked)

News

27787 readers
4032 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I wonder if you could analyze internet discussions for an effect.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 103 points 1 week ago (11 children)

Causes :
long covid ?
micro plastics ?
screen time ?
sedentarism ?
fast food ?
lack of sleep ?
other ?

[–] [email protected] 90 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Heavy metal exposure

Sugar

The proliferation of food additives being used that are known to dramatically lower IQ

The gelding of our education system by morons who favor religious dogma over scientific fact

Criminally underfunded schools thanks to political leaders who see investing in future generations as budget waste

Failure to teach children critical thinking skills before exposing them to technology that makes it simpler for them

Being constantly bombarded and overstimulated every waking moment by media

Being chronically overworked and underrested

Climate change

Take your pick. The answer is "probably, yes."

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 week ago

Heavy metal exposure

🤘😠🤘

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Everything you said makes sense...except heavy metal exposure. Unless you mean lead or something...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

I know the phrase is ambiguous but from context they clearly meant actual metal.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 week ago (1 children)

idiocracy intro?

(IE the theory it pushed was in short, smart people do family planning, try to wait for everything to be perfect... and forget to get around to having kids).

Meanwhile on the less intelligent spectrum. Shit I'm pregnant again!!!... Oh and I got the girl in the trailer next door pregnant.

Or for a real world example... look at Lauren Boebert, the 35 year old grandmother in congress.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Yes absolutely (and i was afraid to say it out loud).
But now, we have also to explain why it did not so much apply in the past millennias ... or tens of past millenias. (again, i am afraid to say it ... don't want a shitstorm)

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The massive lowering of the bar of "good enough to stay alive". Life expectancy was consistantly in the 30s up until the 1870s. Simply having kids was life threatening... doing so while malnourished even more so.

Natural selection favors traits that increase the odds of having offspring, as well as those that avoid death before having offspring. Avoiding death is a lot easier than it used to be.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

For what it's worth the average life expectancy was 30-something. That didn't mean that everyone, or even the mostly everyone, just dropped dead at 30.

It did, however, involve an awful lot of people dying in childhood. Often due to diseases that these days we've almost stamped out, but now antivax morons are working hard on bringing back!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Yeah, I at least assumed that was understood with just "expectancy", obviously people live longer than expectations, and some die unexpectedly young. Key point is if you were given a mission where you must become a baby, and carry on life until you have 6 kids reach the age of 18. But you could chose what time to be born in (but not pick location, class or race), the lowest difficulty mode of that game would almost certainly be after 1950s... and prior to the 1800s would be viewed as very hard mode.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Yes. Thanks for stating these hard facts.

[–] obviouspornalt 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Part of the answer is that mortality rates were far higher 150 years ago. A couple might have 5 children but only 2 survive to adulthood.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Because i agree with this, i encourage you to push this idea further to its conclusion.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If you have an idea that you regularly get called out on, you should probably say it and be willing to truly listen to what people are saying about it...lol

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

i did it often enough. Now someone else did it for me and I'm very happy they did.

P.S. : Often it's not my ideas but the harsh direct way i express them 😆

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

if you got married before 2000 and had a decent job. especially if both did. having kids seemed like a thing to do. past 2000 anyone smart had to contend that the world of their kids adulthood did not seem like it would be great.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

Yes, i agree, and many other lemmy users said similar things about : "why it does apply recently" ...
Yet, it's more interesting to look at why in the past centuries or millennias there was quite a strong selection pressure favoring intelligence.
During those past times, life for humans was much more competitive, so that any major deficiencies, including in intelligence, physical strength, mental strength or whatever important survival characteristics, meant death.
Similarly, in any living species, would it be plants, animal or other, if you remove survival pressures, you rapidly, in just a few generations, diverge into completely different life forms.
Since selection pressures have drastically decreased in many rich countries, for maybe 50 to 100 years now, their populations are on this unsustainable path (in my educated opinion).
Comments from other users were close to what i am saying here, but never so bluntly.

P.S. : @[email protected] this comment is of the type for which i would expect to be, as you said : "regularly get called out on".

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Some selection pressure seems to be returning. anti mask (during a pandemic), anti vax, homeopathy. some folks seem to want to or have their kids die early.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Such a nightmare... i suppose we can describe this as :
(hypothesis #1) : Stupidity increasing up to a breaking point where it's no longer sustainable and kids start to die again.
(h #2) : this increase in stupidity is not necessarily genetic ... it can be from other (social ...) causes.
(h #3) : selection pressure can also act on social behaviors.

Disclaimer : i'm not working in this field : this has no scientific value.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Measles outbreaks are coming back, lol

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

"lol" ... ok, laughing to avoid crying.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Well, I'm not seeing anyone calling you out yet. But maybe you made it sound more racist before, or something? Lol

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Up to this point, i have read most comments inside this post and race or racism was nowhere mention. Yet there have been studies to measure its influence on intelligence ... humm ... is that a topic that you wish to develop here ? Why ? Do you believe it is useful ? Or do you agree with me that it is a waste of our time ?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Lol ok, yeah, that's probably what it was.

You might want to look into some studies done on those studies -- there are IQ tests that historically (and sometimes presently) had culturally-ingrained aspects to their questions that made it hard for minorities and newcomers to answer properly. E.g., IQ tests with questions about baseball that assume the test-taker knows how many innings are in a game, how many outs/balls/strikes to get a player out, etc.

Wikipedia seems to have a lot to say on it, including some of the criticisms.

But generally speaking you're probably looking at what's mostly a correlation, not a direct causation.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Bad questions, so, useless IQ tests ... all this quite a bit sad, yes.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Lead was a much bigger problem in the 1970 when it was in road vehicles fuels. But now its only use in some small plane fuels. There is also much less use of lead paint and lead in water pipe systems.
N.B. : Study in that article is about decline from 2010 until today in 15-year-olds.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago (7 children)

I remember still having to ask for unleaded gas, and that was in the '90s. Plenty of houses still have lead paint and lead pipes. Sure it was more of a problem in the 70s, but it didn't go away after that.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Meanwhile, it's presently in many other sources like chocolate and spices. It's part of the soup, it's not doing us any favors, but it's far from the sole causative factor.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So for quick context the reason why it's present in foods specifically plants is because the plants naturally leach it up.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

So the quality of soil is most important...

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

Right after this message from our sponsors.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

In my personal observations less intelligent people tend to have more children.
Therefore population IQ drifts towards bottom.

I suspect that's because they do not fully understand all their future struggles and fates of their children in the world, fucked up by climate crisis and resource scarcity.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (4 children)

This is the plot to a fictional movie. Intelligence is a factor of many things, and most of those factors are not genetic.

Your observation seems close to the opinions of old school eugenicists. "The wrong people are having children".

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

The intro to Idiocracy doesn't actually mention genetics.

Smart people value intelligence and people who value intelligence will raise their children as such.

Parents who don't value intelligence don't raise their kids with intelligence in mind.

Public schools aren't actually about education. They're about job training and obedience, so they wont fill the gaps the parents are leaving.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

it is not genetic, it is environmental. Children of parents with less intelligence will not be raised to be intelligent. They might be lucky/resilience and try to get the most support outside the house, but it is much harder to accomplish, and often is even met with harassment at home, due to the rest of the family being insecure about their own lack of intelligence. And that is only if they rebel, which is not necessarily true as they will not only lack easy access to basic knowledge about the world/science, but will also not be introduced to the importance of learning about it from their closest figures of authority. Escaping that cycle it is even harder if the family is facing economic hardship, which is true for most modern families in general. It really isn’t that hard to figure that out, the kneejerk reaction that the statement always gets is annoying.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

the kneejerk reaction that the statement always gets is annoying.

I agree with everything you said, but I'm going to point out something. If there is a common kneejerk reaction to some particular topic, there's probably a reason for that. You yourself said its annoying? I suppose its predictable then. If you can predict that people are going to react in some way, you can write with more explanation to clarify that you aren't actually supporting something like eugenics. The poster I'm responding to did not do this.

I took this lack of explanation as support (which, on reflection, might be leaping to conclusions). The overall tone of the comment is rather judgemental.

The commenter is also wrong; IQ hasn't been "drifting towards the bottom", the average IQ increases every year. Its why they have to constantly adjust the tests, because 100 is meant to be an average score by design. This is primarily why I chose to respond to him. He's not saying " which is why we should invest in family planning" or "we should invest in children's education", he's making an untrue statement, and then pretending that this will cause some sort of feedback loop. Dumb people making more dumb people.

IQ is not some absolute quantitative metric of intelligence. The people who treat it like it is... I find that a lot of them are pushing some sort of angle or simply don't understand it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Intelligence is a factor of many things, and most of those factors are not genetic.

You are very vague...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Im not going to write some big long podt, just two things:

  1. people, on average, are not getting dumber. Anything you noticed observationally about dumb people having more children does not seem to have any effect on the world. Human nutrition has improved vastly over the past 100 years, as has education, etc.

  2. IQ increases every year. I don't think this is evidence people are getting smarter because I think IQ is a poor measure of intelligence. I'm pointing this out to you because your statement about "IQ drifting toward the bottom'" is factually untrue.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

IQ drifting toward the bottom'" is factually untrue

So, this post is wrong?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

It's social media and political manipulation.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why not the aggregate of all of these?

Why are you putting a space after your punctuation?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (5 children)

i agree that some aggregate of all of these, and to various degrees, and differently for different people, would apply. Also, i did not say more so to let the discussion open.

Now, about text formatting in here :
.
i wanted one line for each items
yet I didn't want it in 2 lines/items

see examples here :


line # 1(no spaces + one line feed) line # 2


line # 1(no spaces + 2 line feed)

line # 2


So, the only way to get the formatting i wanted is to have two spaces at the end of each lines followed by one line feed.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Short form content like those found on reddit and here on Lemmy have retrained my brain, I'm sure of it. I'm actively trying to fight it, by forcing myself to read full articles, scroll more slowly and try to engage more fully rather than just endlessly scrolling for the next dopamine hit.

It's easy to justify this behavior because "I'm just getting my news and staying informed" and while partially true it comes at the cost of the medium it's provided by. Screen "reading" has definitely changed our brains for the worse and most people have no clue its even happened.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

dependency on AI can be another

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

The decline of American intelligence has been ongoing since before AI

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

All of these and more. Did you know our carbon emissions are changing the ratio of oxygen in the atmosphere as a whole? Guess which species is known to get dumber when oxygen deprived. Don't worry about the warming ocean's increasing acidity, it just makes the ocean a more difficult habitat for the phytoplankton that make 65%of the oxygen in the atmosphere.

I'm sure our normalcy bias will protect us or maybe the invisible space monkey will save his favorite primates if we can commit a few more hate crimes in his name.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)