Stressful upbringings can leave imprints on genes of African American children

NewsGuard 100/100 Score

Stressful upbringings can leave imprints on the genes of children as young as age 9, according to a study led by Princeton University and Pennsylvania State University researchers. Such chronic stress during youth leads to physiological weathering similar to aging.

A study of 40 9-year-old black boys, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shows that those who grow up in disadvantaged environments have shorter telomeres - DNA sequences that generally shrink with age - than their advantaged peers. The researchers also report that boys with genetic sensitivities to their environment have shorter telomeres after experiencing stressful social environments than the telomeres of boys without the genetic sensitivities. These sensitivities are based on gene variants related to the serotonin and dopamine pathways - neurotransmitters essential for relaying information between the brain and body.

"African American children have really not yet been studied through this context," said co-author Sara McLanahan, Princeton's William S. Tod Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs. "Previous work has mostly focused on middle-class whites. Our study takes a different approach and really highlights the importance of early intervention to moderate disparities in social and educational opportunities."

The research team was led by Daniel Notterman, lead author and a visiting professor of molecular biology at Princeton and vice dean for research and graduate studies at the Pennsylvania State University's College of Medicine, and comprised of collaborators from Columbia University, the University of Michigan and the University of York in the United Kingdom. The team analyzed data collected by the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study, a Princeton and Columbia study pioneered by McLanahan that includes 5,000 children born in 20 large American cities with populations over 200,000 people between 1998 and 2000. These children and their parents, who come from a wide range of social backgrounds, were interviewed at regular intervals between the child's birth and age 9. Saliva DNA samples were collected when the children were 9 years old.

The researchers wanted to focus on African American boys because past studies have shown that boys may be more sensitive to their environment. They restricted their sample to 40 boys who participated in the Fragile Families study and met the following criteria: they had provided saliva samples at age 9; their mothers self-identified as black or African American; and complete information was provided about their social environments. Of the sample, half of the boys were raised in disadvantaged environments, which the researchers characterized by such factors as a low household income, low maternal education, an unstable family structure and harsh parenting.

To measure telomere length, the researchers analyzed the saliva DNA provided by the boys. These telomeres, which live at the end of each chromosome, protect the ends from damage and vary in length by person, shrinking with age. Through their analysis, the researchers found that living in a disadvantaged environment was associated with 19 percent shorter telomeres by age 9. For boys predisposed to being sensitive to their environment, this negative association was even stronger.

"Our report is the first to examine the interactions between genes and social environments using telomeres as a biomarker," Notterman said. "We also demonstrate the utility of using saliva DNA to measure children's telomere length. This is important because most telomere research uses blood, which is much more difficult to collect than saliva. Using saliva is easier and less expensive, allowing researchers to collect telomere samples at various points in time to see how social environment may be affecting DNA."

Arline Geronimus, a professor at the University of Michigan who studies population health but was not involved in the study, said this work adds to the growing body of research related to the role of chronic stress in health inequalities, especially among the poor. Geronimus, a pioneer in research on physiological weathering, said she was particularly struck by how quickly the effects of chronic stress can be seen.

"I think it's very striking that these findings are in children at age 9, because you are talking about accelerated aging or stress-mediated wear and tear on your body, which make you more vulnerable to all kinds of illnesses and diseases. To say that you can see this by 9 years old is a very strong statement," Geronimus said.

Source: Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs

Comments

  1. P Rice P Rice United States says:

    I found several questionable areas in this study. The largest is the way the researchers arrived at the concluding sentence, “We suggest that an individual’s genetic architecture moderates the magnitude and direction of the physiological response to exogenous stressors.” They deliberately skewed the experimental 40-person sample, then made “findings” by pretending that contrasting two 20-person skewed samples of 9-year old boys represented something about stress and genetics in a larger population of children without proving their case.

    Researchers cannot validly do this in children’s brain studies, for a comparable example. It is well known that long-term stress causes a child’s brain to develop differently than an unstressed child’s brain.

    Further, instead of establishing a control group, the researchers split their sample according to maternal depression, which is a experimentally proven contributor to epigenetic changes detrimental to a developing fetus and on to infancy and early childhood. There are dozens of studies on that subject from which to choose on PNAS.org.

    So, of course, in general “..an individual’s genetic architecture moderates the magnitude and direction of the physiological response to exogenous stressors.” But the researchers didn’t do the work to find out whether it was the genetic architecture that the 9-year-olds were epigenetically changed into, or the genetic architecture they were conceived with, that stored the damage. I presume that this additional work wasn’t pursued because those type of findings wouldn’t make the race-baiting headlines of the press coverage this study was designed for.

    Which leads me to ask – Was this study published to further an agenda other than make a contribution to science?

    If so, does this study also represent a failure of the peer review process? Were the reviewers even interested in advancing science?

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
Post

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

You might also like...
Experts urge to promote healthy movement behaviors in children under five in Europe