Poor children have smaller brains than wealthy children

[cybercoma]

I look at it from the perspective that the government has a finite ability to borrow and tax and there are plenty of existing programs that need additional funding. This means that additional borrowing and/or taxes that are directed to this program comes at the expense of other programs that could have received it instead.

So you look at it from a perspective that completely misunderstands the way the government operates. That's cool.

[TimG]

So you look at it from a perspective that completely misunderstands the way the government operates.

Only if you assume that governments are run by financially incompetent buffoons that do not understand the concept of "opportunity cost".

[jacee]

Investing in children's health saves money

Maybe. At some point in the future.

Yes that's the way investments work.

.

Edited May 25, 2015 by jacee

[-1=e^ipi]

Are you not getting it?... racism.

I'm very used to your willingness to label others racist for the most nonsense reasons. Suggesting that there is empirical evidence that suggests that nutrition affects cognitive ability is somehow racist. Just like criticizing Islamism is somehow racist I guess. Or criticizing affirmative action and wanting people to be equal under the law is racist.

So, Jacee, do you take the position that nutrition has no affect on cognitive ability? If so, what do you think causes differences in cognitive ability (if you believe they exist)? Do you think that some creator goes around, waves a magic wand, and 'poof' you have differences in cognitive ability?

widespread criticism of the book's scores, methodology, and conclusions.

The theory of evolution has received widespread criticism. The idea that the Earth isn't flat received widespread criticism. Given that there is a segment of the population that will dogmatically refuse to admit that cognitive differences between groups of humans exist regardless of evidence, there will always be 'widespread criticism'.

[jacee]

I'm very used to your willingness to label others racist for the most nonsense reasons. Suggesting that there is empirical evidence that suggests that nutrition affects cognitive ability is somehow racist. Just like criticizing Islamism is somehow racist I guess. Or criticizing affirmative action and wanting people to be equal under the law is racist.

Actual quote:

"Are you not getting it?

It's garbage 'science' ... racism."

Garbage science.

So, Jacee, do you take the position that nutrition has no affect on cognitive ability? If so, what do you think causes differences in cognitive ability (if you believe they exist).

Nutrition certainly has an effect on cognitive ability and healthy functioning in general.

That's why I support a national food program in schools.

The theory of evolution has received widespread criticism.

Unh ... maybe in your small circle, not in general.

The idea that the Earth isn't flat received widespread criticism. Given that there is a segment of the population that will dogmatically refuse to admit that cognitive differences between groups of humans exist regardless of evidence, there will always be 'widespread criticism'.

There is no valid evidence.

Differences in types and extent of abilities exist within groups of humans too.

And differences exist across cultures in willingness to 'perform' on ridiculous abstract IQ tasks.

And anybody who purports to assess a variety of intelligences validly across cultures ... is making a bogus claim.

Garbage science.

Here's a/summary of the state of real research:

Intelligence across cultures:

Research in Africa, Asia and Latin America is showing how culture and intelligence interact.

And in the context of the thread topic ... nutrition plays a huge role in limiting children's growth and development.

That's a worldwide priority.

.

Edited May 27, 2015 by jacee

[TimG]

And anybody who purports to assess a variety of intelligences validly across cultures ... is making a bogus claim.

I suppose you believe the earth was created 6000 years ago too and that the theory of evolution is a "bogus claim".

Intelligence is a function of nurture and nature. i.e. environment and genetics matter. Culture is strongly correlated with nurture and can have a strong association with specific genetic strains. For these reasons it is irrational to claim that there can never be statistically significant differences in intelligence across different cultures. That said, these differences are most likely tiny compared to the variations within the group and are not that relavent. Nor would it be reasonable to infer an causal relationship between culture and intelligence.

[jacee]

I suppose you believe the earth was created 6000 years ago too and that the theory of evolution is a "bogus claim".

Intelligence is a function of nurture and nature. i.e. environment and genetics matter. Culture is strongly correlated with nurture and can have a strong association with specific genetic strains. For these reasons it is irrational to claim that there can never be statistically significant differences in intelligence across different cultures.

On whose test?

I said it can't be validly assessed.

See link added above.

That said, these differences are most likely tiny compared to the variations within the group and are not that relavent. Nor would it be reasonable to infer an causal relationship between culture and intelligence.

Agreed.

And nutritional deficits have to be eliminated.

.

Edited May 27, 2015 by jacee

[-1=e^ipi]

And anybody who purports to assess a variety of intelligences validly across cultures ... is making a bogus claim.

There are ways of controlling for culture or genetics. For example, North Korea and South Korea are very similar culturally and genetically, so differences in cognitive performance are most likely due to nurture, particularly nutrition.

[jacee]

There are ways of controlling for culture or genetics. For example, North Korea and South Korea are very similar culturally and genetically, so differences in cognitive performance are most likely due to nurture, particularly nutrition.

Then you'll be interested in reading the research summary posted above.

.

[Michael Hardner]

There are ways of controlling for ...

Really, you should at this point be framing any advice that appears to come from an expert with your actual credentials. Factual arguments require people with an honest sense of their own abilities, and an ability to concede points. This helps the discussion, you see, to be progressive.

[Freddy]

What's the big deal? We still need a ton of stupid people to do all the crappie work. So be it. We can't all be Prime Minister. Someone needs to drive the cab.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Freddy

[jacee]

What's the big deal? We still need a ton of stupid people to do all the crappie work. So be it. We can't all be Prime Minister. Someone needs to drive the cab.

Sure!

And it might as well be a doctor or an engineer from another country, eh?

But of course there will always be a range of abilities and aptitudes within any society.

.

[Freddy]

Sure!

And it might as well be a doctor or an engineer from another country, eh?

But of course there will always be a range of abilities and aptitudes within any society.

.

Our society already is suffering from over qualification. So this would help this situation how?

We already have a ton of University graduates who are flipping burgers at McDonald. How is making that situation worse a good idea in your mind?

Most companies are looking for the people just intelligent enough to show up every day and dumb enough to work in the crappy, stressful, work yourself to the bone environment that will shave 10-15 years off their total life expectancy.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Freddy

[JeremiahAnon]

This could also be children having the belief they are subject to living the same life as their parents and thus not attempting to achieve better for themselves...there are many variables in the statement provided. Trying to pinpoint a cause is very hard and I'm sure it isn't simply the level of income. Maybe it is the expectations of the parents? Maybe it is the education of the parents and whether they have the ability to help their child with their school work. The theories are endless...

[RB]

On ‎5‎/‎23‎/‎2015 at 6:39 PM, WestCoastRunner said:

 They discovered that the brains of children in families that earned less than $25,000 a year had surface areas six per cent smaller than those whose families earned $150,000 or more.

well neither family nor I got money or this sort of coins - but individuals can grow a immensely BIG head when they receive compliments,  with friends socializing, experience and over-come obstacles, and when they rise each day and experience life -  store all of this information in the big head, albeit small use according to the Einstein guy

Edited April 20, 2019 by RB

[Peter Taylor]

Em... of course!!!!

[Gaboras]

That old article is a little bit terrible.

[cannuck]

On 5/27/2015 at 7:57 PM, Freddy said:

What's the big deal? We still need a ton of stupid people to do all the crappie work. So be it. We can't all be Prime Minister. Someone needs to drive the cab.

Uh....it seems we have sought the ultimate in stupid people to BE Prime Minister, not just once by accident, bit TWICE in a row!

I have had the incredible good fortune for a half of a century to be married to an educator who specializes in exceptional children, and to have seen first hand what it takes to raise and educate exceptional children.  All that applies to gifted or challenged children applies to "average" children (I will tell you that in my experience, there is simply no such thing as an "average" child,  just billions of similar individuals).

What educators and neuro-scientists will tell you, and what we don't seem to understand as a body politic, is that childrens' learning abilities start at birth, and slowly decline with time.  IMHO, intellectual capacity is hereditary, but the functionality of the mind is very much a factor of environment/learning.   Problem is: there is simply no way that some government institution can in any practical terms come anywhere near meeting the phenomenal learning capacity of a baby, a toddler, a "pre-schooler" or a student.  It can contribute, it COULD support, but the mega-hours, one-on-one time that an infant or toddler requires to meet their very special learning needs is something that only a parent (or grandparent, close relative, etc.) is likely able to provide.  Problem is, we as a society don't teach them how to do this, we instead sell the idea that you have to have "location, location, location" real estate, and that will take full time employment from Mom and Dad to pull that off in most of this country.   So, who is raising the kids during their first, and highest learning capacity times?   It is a function you can NOT "job out" to contractors in "day care" storage facilities.

In spite of having one of our kids with degrees in food science and education (and a couple of other things), I can not say that I have ever discussed nutrition as a separate component of education/intellect with her.   As you can imagine, nutrition is at the core and fully integrated with a great deal of things to her, it is just something (school lunch) that I have asked.  I am willing to accept that a hungry child may not be paying attention or be able to concentrate as well as a nutritionally satisfied child, but a school lunch IMHO is not going to solve the much larger problem of who CAN actually meet a child's educational needs.

What I can say from experience, is to raise two children with a pretty decent education relative to their needs was a full time, 24/7, 100% effort of more than 20 years for my wife, and that for our grandkids (7 in two families) it requires her help to pull it off with 2 stable, 2 parent families.   Stick those same kids in some kind of government institution, and they will get only a tiny fraction (albeit, in SOME cases, a very well done tiny fraction) of their needs and abilities met.

So, what I am saying is simple:  if you want your children to be well educated, it is YOUR responsibility, not mine.

Edited November 1, 2019 by cannuck

[intratec]

OK, so maybe the kids aren't starving, but they aren't eating nutritious food. How do we make parents give them what they need for proper brain development?

[eyeball]

On 11/22/2019 at 11:24 PM, intratec said:

How do we make parents give them what they need for proper brain development?

Try telling them why it's important to do so.

Force won't work so...