The concept of intelligence, particularly when measured by IQ (Intelligence Quotient), has long been a subject of fascination and debate. Lists ranking countries by average IQ scores often circulate online, sometimes pointing to nations like Gambia, Ghana, and Nepal as having lower averages. But what do these rankings really tell us? Are they a fair reflection of human potential, or do they oversimplify a far more complex reality? In this post, we’ll explore the factors behind these rankings, why they’re controversial, and what they might mean for countries like Gambia, Ghana, and Nepal. The IQ Controversy: What Are We Measuring?IQ tests aim to measure cognitive abilities like problem-solving, reasoning, and memory. However, their application across diverse cultures and environments is fraught with challenges. Studies like those by Richard Lynn and others, which often inform global IQ rankings, rely on standardized tests that may not account for cultural differences, education access, or environmental factors. For example, a test designed in a Western context might not resonate with someone from a rural village in Nepal, where daily life demands different forms of intelligence, like spatial navigation or agricultural knowledge.Gambia, Ghana, and Nepal frequently appear in discussions about lower average IQ scores, often based on data from studies like Lynn’s. These countries, with average IQs reportedly ranging from 60 to 70 (compared to a global mean of 100), are cited as examples of cognitive disparity. But these numbers don’t tell the whole story. Let’s unpack why.Contextual Factors: Why Scores Vary Gambia, Ghana, and Nepal: Beyond the NumbersFocusing solely on IQ scores risks overlooking the strengths and resilience of these nations: The Bigger Picture: Rethinking IntelligenceRankings like “low IQ countries” can perpetuate harmful stereotypes if taken at face value. Intelligence is multifaceted, shaped by environment, culture, and opportunity. Gambia, Ghana, and Nepal, like all nations, have unique strengths that simplistic metrics fail to capture. Instead of focusing on deficits, we should celebrate the diverse ways humans solve problems and thrive.Global IQ studies can spark curiosity, but they demand context. Investing in education, healthcare, and economic opportunities in countries like Gambia, Ghana, and Nepal would likely shift these metrics dramatically. More importantly, it would empower individuals to reach their full potential—whatever form that takes.ConclusionLists ranking countries by IQ may grab headlines, but they obscure more than they reveal. Gambia, Ghana, and Nepal are not defined by test scores but by their people’s resilience, creativity, and potential. Intelligence is not a single number—it’s a tapestry woven from culture, environment, and opportunity. Let’s move beyond rankings and focus on building a world where everyone can shine.

By Prince Iroka The Depot and Petroleum Products Marketers Association of Nigeria(DAPPMAN) has accused the Dangote Petroleum Refinery of distributing substandard Petroleum products into the Nigerian market. The claim was contained in a statement by the Executive Secretary of DAPPMAN, Mr. Olufemi Adewole, titled “Clarifying the Role of Market Players in Nigeria’s Downstream Petroleum Sector” released on Saturday. The association said it rejects any insinuation that DAPPMAN members deal in “substandard” petroleum products, saying all imports are subject to independent, regulator-accredited laboratory testing in accordance with NMDPRA protocols and global quality standards. Ironically, it said the same refinery alleging superiority had on multiple occasions sought waivers to distribute products with sulphur levels above approved thresholds, a fact that calls into question its consistency and credibility on product quality. “Nigeria’s downstream petroleum market is highly regulated, transparent, and aligned with international best practices. Attempts to cast doubt on the integrity of other compliant players are unfair and inaccurate,”. The further pointed out that, claims that repeated fuel price reductions by the Dangote Refinery are patriotic gestures ignore their timing and market impact. “These reductions were often strategically timed when other importers had active cargoes at sea or in tank, creating price shocks that undermined competition and imposed financial strain on fellow market participants, including the refinery’s own domestic customers. Even more concerning is the refinery’s pattern of offering lower prices to international buyers while quoting higher rates to local off takers. This contradicts public-facing claims of prioritizing Nigerians and places unnecessary burden on domestic businesses already operating under tight margins,’’. DAPPMAN maintained that, the assertion that Nigeria’s downstream stability rests solely on one refinery is misleading and dismissive of the broader ecosystem. “While we welcome the Dangote Refinery as a major infrastructure project, its contribution has peaked at only 30 to 35 percent of national demand. The balance continues to be supplied by responsible petroleum product marketers, including DAPPMAN members, who import and distribute under strict regulatory oversight by the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA),’’. DAPPMAN insisted that, the claim that the refinery offers “free delivery” is also misleading, stating that, in reality, marketers are required to lift at least 25 per cent of their allocations directly from the refinery gantry and must do so using only Dangote-owned trucks, paying commercial rates based on their destination. The arrangement, it said, imposes additional logistical and financial burdens on marketers, limits operational flexibility, and undermines the narrative of cost relief being provided to the local market.