A Little Bit of Chart History for Wednesday â Mother Jones
Barry Nussbaum
Then  last week  reader David P. pointed me to a column by  Barry Nussbaum   chief statistician at the EPA for over a decade and currently president of the American Statistical Association. As soon as I read it I called  Nussbaum   who was a young EPA analyst in the late 70s when heâwell  weâll get to that. First  though  the answer to my question.
According to  Nussbaum   EPA wanted places like California to reduce smog  and that meant cars would have to be fitted with catalytic converters. However  since gasoline lead ruins catalytic converters  refineries needed to produced unleaded gasoline. This was the initial impetus behind unleaded gasoline. The fact that it also reduced atmospheric lead was basically a happy accident.
The first itemâunfortunately for HUDâsuggested that lead poisoning was not correlated with lead paint in housing. After all  thereâs no reason to think that kids are exposed to more lead paint in the summer. The second item suggests that lead poisoning is correlated with gasoline lead.Â² And the third item immediately convinced Carter to continue the lead phasedown. âHe stated he did not want any policy that might have a particularly deleterious effect on these two groups â  Nussbaum  says.
On a statistical note   Nussbaum  adds this: âWith the benefit of hindsight  Carter was concerned about the harmful effects on minority populations. Would he have even have known this if the graph just had one composite line for blood lead?â Maybe not. Sometimes flukes of data presentation are all it takes to influence public policy.
Â¹If youâre wondering why the chart doesnât show white children  the answer is lost to history.  Nussbaum  thinks it might have something to do with the limits of plotting technology at the time. In any case  everyone knew what the line looked like: just like the other two  but lower.
Then  last week  reader David P. pointed me to a column by   [TGT] chief statistician at the EPA for over a decade and currently president of the American Statistical Association. As soon as I read it I called  Nussbaum   who was a young EPA analyst in the late 70s when heâwell  weâll get to that. First  though  the answer to my question.
According to   [TGT]  wanted places like California to reduce smog  and that meant cars would have to be fitted with catalytic converters. However  since gasoline lead ruins catalytic converters  refineries needed to produced unleaded gasoline. This was the initial impetus behind unleaded gasoline. The fact that it also reduced atmospheric lead was basically a happy accident.
The first itemâunfortunately for HUDâsuggested that lead poisoning was not correlated with lead paint in housing. After all  thereâs no reason to think that kids are exposed to more lead paint in the summer. The second item suggests that lead poisoning is correlated with gasoline lead.Â² And the third item immediately convinced Carter to continue the lead phasedown. âHe stated he did not want any policy that might have a particularly deleterious effect on these two groups â   [TGT] says.
On a statistical note    [TGT] adds this: âWith the benefit of hindsight  Carter was concerned about the harmful effects on minority populations. Would he have even have known this if the graph just had one composite line for blood lead?â Maybe not. Sometimes flukes of data presentation are all it takes to influence public policy.
Â¹If youâre wondering why the chart doesnât show white children  the answer is lost to history.   [TGT] thinks it might have something to do with the limits of plotting technology at the time. In any case  everyone knew what the line looked like: just like the other two  but lower.