Social Determinants of Health and Health Disparities
Reading Reflection for Biological Mechanisms Lecture
Due: 2/2/16
Questions Related to Week 5 Readings:
- 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 think this mechanism may be relevant in humans. We can be influenced by our environment and the people we are surrounded by. So it would not surprise me if this mechanism is also found in humans. Behaviors that are analogous to “maternal licking and grooming” would be like talking/singing smoothly, massaging babies head, hands, feet, kisses, cuddling, feeding and giving the baby lots of love and care.
- 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.
I think that the cumulative effects of SES adversity findings are consistent with Weaver’s results. I think if babies do not get the love, caring and attention they need, their bodies could experience heavy stress load. Hertzmann and Boyce argued, “At the level of the family, the qualities of stimulation, support, and nurturance in intimate circumstances contribute the most.” Babies are vulnerable during the first year, and they greatly depend on their mothers for everything. If babies are experiencing adversity at such an early age it would make sense that these experiences are manifesting in their bodies as toxic stress which in turn causing biological problems. Furthermore, Hertzmann and Boyce stated “Day-to-day child rearing in environments characterized by impoverished parent-child interactions, for example, may be implicated in the cognitive and neurological deficits now being identified in children from disadvantage families”. If a baby keeps getting deprived from his/her daily proper care, the baby would have repeated exposure of stress and may accumulate this stress over time causing genes to be methylated and risk him/her for later health problems or diseases. Mothers and fathers from low SES tend to suffer due to economic hardship and that makes it hard for them to provide the proper care their children deserve.
- 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 think Gene-by-Environment interaction can contribute to major disparities in all aspects of racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic dimensions. I think that we are designed to be connected to our environment just like every other living organism is. Our genes can be influenced by our society, environment, the people we interact with, the food we eat and many more things. As long as we live in a system where inequalities, hierarchy, inequities exist our gene-by-environment interactions will keep contributing to major disparities.