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 would agree that exposure to particular behaviors during specific developmental periods is relevant in humans. However, I would have to disagree that maternal behavior before and after the sensitive period is not important. For example, let’s look at children who are exposed to early childhood trauma. While there is a critical or sensitive period in which the child will need a significant amount of support, learning coping and resiliency are important factors in mitigating the effects of childhood trauma and maternal behaviors can play a significant role in that process.
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.
- I feel that the Gruenewald article complements Weaver et al’s claim that material behavior during specific developmental periods is extremely important. However, Gruenewald expands their claim over the course of one’s life. People are exposed to a variety of stressors as a result of the SES over the course of their lives. Maternal behavior can play a role in how one responds to these stressors as a child and through adulthood.
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 feel that gene and environment interaction can contribute to major health disparities along with racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, or geographic dimensions. For example, let examine the BRCA 2 gene (breast cancer gene). A mutation in this gene can increase the risk of developing breast cancer. BRCA 2 mutations are found more commonly in African American women. While there is a high incidence of breast cancer in White women, African American women die at a higher rate. This could be attributed to a decrease in early detection, lack of insurance, or limited access to new treatment methods (r/t cost or location). This example combines genes, environment, racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic location.