You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

juliawise comments on Experiences in applying "The Biodeterminist's Guide to Parenting" - Less Wrong Discussion

64 Post author: juliawise 17 July 2015 07:19PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (33)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: juliawise 20 July 2015 03:22:06PM *  2 points [-]

By "save" I meant "avoid losing" not "gain an extra." Assuming a child would not normally get mercury poisoning, for example, by preventing mercury exposure I am preventing my child from losing some amount of cognitive ability.

My guess is that interventions like preschool are more likely to fade with time, and brain damage is less likely to fade.

I'm not taking Salkever's numbers literally. But you probably agree that brain damage causes lost value, possibly a lot of lost value. I estimate that I may spend a few thousand dollars on various steps to prevent brain damage to my children. That seems like a good investment to me.

Comment author: pianoforte611 20 July 2015 04:34:31PM 2 points [-]

I apologize, I see you clearly brought up IQ in the context of preventing poisoning. That should have a more predictable effect than positive interventions.