1. Weaver et al propose that among rats, maternal behavior towards newborn pups influences their cortisol response to stress via epigenetic mechanisms that change the expression of glucocorticoid receptor gene for the rest of the pup’s life. They argue that because epigenetic patterns are established at specific developmental periods, there is extreme time sensitivity to when the pup is exposed to particular maternal behaviors (licking and grooming, in this case), and maternal behavior before or after that sensitive period window is not as important. Do you think this mechanism is relevant in humans? If so, what behaviors are most analogous to “maternal licking and grooming”?
I do believe this mechanism is relevant to humans in some ways. For decades we have used animals to test for human response. However, there are elements of the human that differs from animals. Although these differences may be minimal, they are enough to be considered such as in the case of stress response. For example, I believe that animals have instinctive responses that are not influenced by place, past experiences and present condition. I believe animals follow their instincts without regard of the “social determinants” if you will. However, I believe similar to the “maternal licking and grooming” found in animals, humans require, touch, holding, kissing, and even the sense of smelling the mother’s milk.
2. Gruenewald, in contrast, emphasize the cumulative effects of SES adversity on a multi-system allostatic load measure. Do you think that the Gruenewald findings are consistent, inconsistent, or unrelated to the Weaver findings? Explain.
Gruenewald and Weaver have similarities in their perspectives and framework for discovering the impact of outside elements on health. Weaver’s incremental look at periods of internal stress exposures could lend insight to developmental milestones impacted overtime. Similarly, Gruenewald’s findings looks at the impact of external stress and its impact over time. The reason I see them as similar is because regardless of the type of stress experienced, our body responds in a similar manner and therefore, epigenetic changes that impact health could be the same and also, the interventions could be the same as well.
3. Hertzmann and Boyce argue that “it is not genes or environment, nor is it genes and environment, but rather it is gene-by-environment interactions that influence developmental trajectories.” To what extent do you think that GxE interactions can contribute to major disparities along racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, or geographic dimensions?
I believe that genes and environment are two separate influences for developmental trajectory. I think that this topic is a slippery slope because I think that racial/ethnic assumptions made in the past are some of the things that made some ethnic groups targeted as not intelligent or not capable of learning. I think as researchers it’s important to consider the genetic aspects of a person for chronic diseases such as diabetes, HTN and also consider the environmental factors that impact our health. I think GxE is a very interesting concept but I think it could be almost harmful to look at their interactions together but rather look at the singularity of the impact of each on health.