[__MatrixMan__]

Maybe, but given that "plastics" are a broad category I'd expect that IQ would me a poor proxy for some of their effects.

BPA for instance, is a xenoestrogen. I'm not sure what metric to watch for it, but it's probably not IQ.

[sebmellen]

Anogenital distance is likely the preferred measure.

> Males with a short AGD (lower than the median around 52 mm (2 in)) have seven times the chance of being sub-fertile as those with a longer AGD.

> Swan et al. report that the levels of phthalates associated with significant AGD reductions are found in approximately one-quarter of Americans tested by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for phthalate body burdens.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anogenital_distance (warning on the header photos).

[__MatrixMan__]

I was imagining something a bit more impactful (and easy to find in the data), because as far as that one goes, it's not clear why anyone should know or care.

Maybe high school graduation rate (an inverse proxy to indicate bullying)?

[sebmellen]

Obviously not as easy to screen for, but this is a very clear indicator of how strong the known adverse effects of plasticizers are.