Sociocultural, behavioural and political factors shaping the COVID-19 pandemic: the need for a biocultural approach to understanding pandemics and (re)emerging pathogens

Although there has been increasing focus in recent years on interdisciplinary approaches to health and disease, and in particular the dimension of social inequalities in epidemics, infectious diseases have been much less focused on. This is especially true in the area of cultural dynamics and their effects on pathogen behaviours, although there is evidence to suggest that this relationship is central to shaping our interactions with infectious disease agents on a variety of levels. This paper makes a case for a biocultural approach to pandemics such as COVID-19. It then uses this biocultural framework to examine the anthropogenic dynamics that influenced and continue to shape the COVID-19 pandemic, both during its initial phase and during critical intersections of the pandemic. Through this understanding of biocultural interactions between people, animals and pathogens, a broader societal and political dimension is drawn as a function of population level and international cultures, to reflect on the culturally mediated differential burden of the pandemic. Ultimately, it is argued that a biocultural perspective on infectious disease pandemics will allow for critical reflection on how culture shapes our behaviours at all levels, and how the effects of these behaviours are ultimately foundational to pathogen ecology and evolution.

Building on the biocultural syntheses: 20 years and still expanding

Building a New Biocultural Synthesis: Political Economic Perspectives in Human Biology called for an integration of political economy with ecological and adaptability perspectives in biocultural anthropology. A major goal of this volume was to explore the utility of including political-economic and sociocultural processes in analyses of human biological variation, nutrition, and health. A second goal was to enhance collaboration among subfields and work against the "chasm" that separated complementary perspectives in cultural and biological anthropology. Twenty years hence, new ways to link social inequalities and human biology have emerged in part through contributions of developmental origins of health and disease, epigenetics, microbiomes, and other new methods for tracing pathways of embodiment. Equally important, notions of "local/situated biologies" and "reactive genomes," provide frameworks for understanding biology and health at the nexus of ecologies, societies, and histories. We review and highlight these contributions toward expanding critical approaches to human biology. Developments over the past two decades have reinforced the central role of social environments and structural inequalities in shaping human biology and health. Yet, within biocultural approaches, a significant engagement with historical, political-economic, and sociocultural conditions remains relatively rare. We review potential barriers to such analyses, focusing on theoretical and methodological challenges as well as the subfield structure of anthropology. Achieving politically and socially contextualized and relevant critical biocultural approaches remains a challenge, but there is reason for optimism amid new theoretical and methodological developments and innovations brought by new generations of scholars.

The eukaryotic genome is structurally and functionally more like a social insect colony than a book

Traditionally, the genome has been described as the 'book of life'. However, the metaphor of a book may not reflect the dynamic nature of the structure and function of the genome. In the eukaryotic genome, the number of centrally located protein-coding sequences is relatively constant across species, but the amount of noncoding DNA increases considerably with the increase of organismal evolutional complexity. Therefore, it has been hypothesized that the abundant peripheral noncoding DNA protects the genome and the central protein-coding sequences in the eukaryotic genome. Upon comparison with the habitation, sociality and defense mechanisms of a social insect colony, it is found that the genome is similar to a social insect colony in various aspects. A social insect colony may thus be a better metaphor than a book to describe the spatial organization and physical functions of the genome. The potential implications of the metaphor are also discussed.