Mapping the new molecular landscape: social dimensions of epigenetics

Epigenetics of Trauma Transmission and Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder: What Does the Evidence Support?

Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) results from teratogenic impacts of alcohol consumption during pregnancy. Trauma and prenatal alcohol exposure (PAE) can both cause neurodevelopmental impairment, and it has been proposed that FASD can amplify effects of trauma. Certain PAE and trauma effects are mediated via epigenetic mechanisms. The objective of this review is to present the current evidence for epigenetics in trauma transmission as it relates to FASD, to help bridge a potential knowledge gap for social workers and related health professionals. We include a primer on epigenetic mechanisms and inheritance, followed by a summary of the current biomedical evidence supporting intergenerational and transgenerational epigenetic transmission of trauma, its relevance to FASD, the intersection with social transmission, and finally the application to social work. We propose potential models of transmission, considering where social and epigenetic pathways may intersect and/or compound across generations. Overall, we aim to provide a better understanding of epigenetic-trauma transmission for its application to health professions, in particular which beliefs are (and are not) evidence-based. We discuss the lack of research and challenges of studying epigenetic transmission in humans and identify the need for public health interventions and best practices that are based on the current evidence.

You Are What Your Mother Endured: Intergenerational Epigenetics, Early Caregiving, and the Temporal Embedding of Adversity

Environmental epigenetics has become a site of growing attention related to the intergenerational effects of stress, trauma, and adversity. This article draws on a multi-sited ethnography of epigenetic knowledge production in the United States and Canada to document how scientists conceptualize, model, and measure these experiences and their effects on children's neurodevelopmental and behavioral health. We find that scientists' efforts to identify the molecular effects of stress, trauma, and adversity results in a temporal focus on the mother-child dyad during early life. This has the effect of biologizing early childhood adversity, positioning it as a consequence of caregiving, and producing epigenetic findings that often align with individually oriented interventions rather than social and structural change. Our analysis suggests that epigenetic models of stress, trauma, and adversity therefore situate histories of oppression, inequality, and subjugation in discrete and gendered family relations, resulting in the temporal embedding of adversity during early life.

Milk's Flows: Making and Transmitting Kinship, Health, and Personhood

Milk provides a way of thinking about how the body is enacted in science, policy and popular culture. This paper follows the currents of moral and biomedical epistemologies circulating around milk, including via notions of inheritance, the practices of wet nursing, and emerging scientific knowledge about the health-related benefits of breastfeeding. By situating milk's flows historically and culturally it shows how constructions of milk production, lactation, and infant feeding have long served as a 'cultural signal' of prevailing conceptions of bodies and social identities. In so doing, it explores the simultaneous power of milk as both a source of dispositional and somatic health, and an index of customary forms of unity and division. A focus on breast milk further contributes to augmenting and expanding recent debates about the biology-society nexus in science and technology studies (STS), anthropology, and sociology. Seen within biomedicine today as a carrier of somatic signals about the environment, the article reflects on how milk is bound up in the responsibilisation of women's bodies and the internalising of potential risks to the health of their offspring. This implies an unlimited agency for women in averting health risks and in future-proofing their children to be better than well, elides the socioeconomic, and environmental forces pragmatically limiting this assumed agency, and the distinct lack of material and inter-personal support for the perinatal period in many nations.

Messengers of stress: Towards a cortisol sociology

In 2008, Timmermans and Haas called for a 'sociology of disease' to develop and challenge the sociology of health and illness. A sociology of disease, they argued, would take seriously the biological and physiological processes of disease in theorising health and illness. Building on two decades of Science and Technology Studies and feminist work on biological actors such as hormones and genes, we propose a 'cortisol sociology' to push further at this argument. As a 'messenger of stress', cortisol is key to understanding human and non-human health as a biosocial phenomenon. We argue that sociologists should engage with cortisol through critical yet open-minded reading of the relevant science and critical triangulation studies, and by tracking cortisol's movements from science into public worlds of biosensing and self-monitoring.

The social life of self-harm in general practice

Research engaging qualitatively with clinical practitioners' understanding of, and response to, self-harm has been limited. Self-harm offers a particularly compelling case through which to examine the enduring challenges faced by practitioners in treating patients whose presenting symptoms are not clearly biomedical in nature. In this paper, we present an analysis of 30 General Practitioners' (GPs') accounts of treating patients who had self-harmed. Our analysis demonstrates the complex ways in which GPs seek to make sense of self-harm. Illustrated through three common 'types' of patients (the 'good girl', the 'problem patient' and the 'out of the blue'), we show how GPs grapple with ideas of 'social' and 'psychological' causes of self-harm. We argue that these tensions emerge in different ways according to the social identities of patients, with accounts shaped by local contexts, including access to specialist services, as well as by cultural understandings regarding the legitimacy of self-harming behaviour. We suggest that studying the social life of self-harm in general practice extends a sociological analysis of self-harm more widely, as well as contributing to sociological theorisation on the doctor-patient relationship.

Communicating science: epigenetics in the spotlight

Given the public interest in epigenetic science, this study aimed to better understand media representations of epigenetics in national newspaper coverage in various regions in North America, Europe, and Asia. Content analysis was used to study media messages about epigenetics, their policy focus, and the balance of the reporting. We identified several recurring themes in the news reports, including policy messages relating to individual and societal responsibilities. We also found shortcomings in the media's portrayal of epigenetic science, and sought to identify potential causes by considering the underlying scientific evidence that the media reported on. A case study analysis showed that the results of epigenetic studies were often overstated in academic research publications due to common experimental limitations. We suggest that defining standardized criteria with which to evaluate epigenetic studies could help to overcome some of the challenges inherent in translating complex epigenetic research findings for non-technical audiences, and present a Press Kit template that researchers can adapt and use to aid in the development of accurate and balanced press releases.

Epigenetics, ethics, law and society: A multidisciplinary review of descriptive, instrumental, dialectical and reflexive analyses

Epigenetics, defined as 'the study of mitotically and/or meiotically heritable changes in gene function that cannot be explained by changes in DNA sequence', has emerged as a promissory yet controversial field of scientific inquiry over the past decade. Scholars from many disciplines have formulated both optimistic and cautionary claims regarding its potential normative implications. This article provides a comprehensive review of the nascent literature at the crossroads of epigenetics, ethics, law and society. It describes nine emerging areas of discussion, relating to (1) the impact of epigenetics on the nature versus nurture dualism, (2) the potential resulting biologization of the social, (3) the meaning of epigenetics for public health, its potential influence on (4) reproduction and parenting, (5) political theory and (6) legal proceedings, and concerns regarding (7) stigmatization and discrimination, (8) privacy protection and (9) knowledge translation. While there is some degree of similarity between the nature and content of these areas and the abundant literature on ethical, legal and social issues in genetics, the potential implications of epigenetics ought not be conflated with the latter. Critical studies on epigenetics are emerging within a separate space of bioethical and biopolitical investigations and claims, with scholars from various epistemological standpoints utilizing distinct yet complementary analytical approaches.

Epigenetics in the public sphere: interdisciplinary perspectives

Despite the high public interest in epigenetics, few scholars have empirically investigated the forms, reasons and consequences of the public circulation of epigenetics. Using an original database focusing on 'lifestyle' or 'everyday' epigenetics, this article aims to promote an open-minded and interdisciplinary dialogue between the public appropriation of epigenetics and the current scientific state of the art. It raises three main questions: Are there any specific modes of circulation of epigenetics in the general public? Why does epigenetics seem so appealing to the public? Within the public repertoire of epigenetics, is it possible to identify some specific knowledge claims and, if so, given the current state of the art, what is their degree of accuracy? The article argues that the social diffusion of epigenetics frequently carries on beliefs and misconceptions about genetics and epigenetics. The social life of epigenetics fuels a collective 'illusion' of control and empowerment on the basis of which new markets expand. More unexpectedly, this article underlines the emergence of a new scientific culture, i.e. the 'scientifization' of the cultural appropriation of epigenetics. Our analysis can inform the scientific community about the current and evolving state of the public representation of epigenetics and help it frame outreach activities.

A task that remains before us: Reconsidering inheritance as a biosocial phenomenon

What doesit mean to inherit? Debates about the meaning of inheritance are numerous in the history and the present of the biological and the social sciences. While the majority of contributions in this special issue discuss hitherto unthought of molecular mechanisms of biological inheritance, this review explores the contested territory of inheritance from a social science perspective. Specifically, it examines contemporary biological research on epigenetic forms of inheritance in its historical and social contexts. To that end, the review explores what biology itself has been inheriting when it comes to how it considers inheritance conceptually and experimentally. I delineate three particularly important strands of inheritance: inheriting a history of eugenics; inheriting determinist reasoning; and inheriting experimental reductionism. I approach the social and scientific meaning of these inheritances by following scholars such as Donna Haraway and Jacques Derrida, who frame inheritance not as a passive occurrence but as an active process, as a task that must be undertaken by those who inherit. Such a framing raises the question of what it might mean to inherit something responsibly - particularly when what needs to be inherited is not an object but a difficult history. I argue that in order to become 'response-able' to this question, researchers who investigate biological inheritance today must engage these histories critically and review their legacies in present-day research. This is a task biologists might not want to undertake alone, but in interdisciplinary collaboration with social scientists and humanities scholars, in order to mobilize multiple forms of expertise for understanding the complex biosocial processes of human inheritance.

Biomarkers and brains: situating dementia in the laboratory and in the memory clinic

This paper provides a comparison of how genetic biomarkers are used (or not) in three contexts: clinic-based diagnostic work with people; lab-based research on mice and their marbles; and lab-based research on thrashing nematodes. For all the worldwide drive to find biomarkers that can be used in the detection of early, presymptomatic dementia, there is little research on how or when the association between biomarkers and a definitive disease are being made to "hold." First, we show the disjuncture between the animal modeling that underpins laboratory attempts to stabilize genetic biomarkers and the paradigms that inform clinical diagnosis. Secondly, we develop this theme to show how in our third site, an epigenetics "worm" laboratory, neurodegenerative changes are explored as located in specific gene-environment interactions over time. We speculate whether such an enactment brings us closer to a notion of "situated biology," to undercut possibilities of making genetic biomarkers of preclinical dementia hold.

Markers as mediators: A review and synthesis of epigenetics literature

Epigenetics, the study of the processes that control gene expression without a change in DNA sequence, highlights the importance of environmental factors in gene regulation. This paper maps the terrain of epigenetics and identifies four main research subfields: gene expression; molecular epigenetics; clinical epigenetics and epigenetic epidemiology. Within and across these fields, we analyse of what is conceptualised as environment and demonstrate the variable ways authors understand epigenetics environments. Then, following an analysis of the discursive strategies employed by epigenetics researchers, we demonstrate how authors portray the interactions between genes, epigenetics, and environment as relationships linking the outside (where the environment is located) with the inside (where the genes are located). We argue that authors assign specific roles to each actor: the environment as the active player initiating the relationship, the genes as recipients, and epigenetics as mediators between environment and genes. Framed as mediators, epigenetic markers can be understood as enablers of communication between environment and genome, capable of processing and organising signals so as to regulate the interactions between the actors of epigenetic relationships. This finding complicates the observation by social science scholars that the interactions between environment and genes can be understood through the concept of signal.

Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance and social responsibility: perspectives from the social sciences

Research in environmental epigenetics explores how environmental exposures and life experiences such as food, toxins, stress or trauma can shape trajectories of human health and well-being in complex ways. This perspective resonates with social science expertise on the significant health impacts of unequal living conditions and the profound influence of social life on bodies in general. Environmental epigenetics could thus provide an important opportunity for moving beyond long-standing debates about nature versus nurture between the disciplines and think instead in 'biosocial' terms across the disciplines. Yet, beyond enthusiasm for such novel interdisciplinary opportunities, it is crucial to also reflect on the scientific, social and political challenges that a biosocial model of body, health and illness might entail. In this paper, we contribute historical and social science perspectives on the political opportunities and challenges afforded by a biosocial conception of the body. We will specifically focus on what it means if biosocial plasticity is not only perceived to characterize the life of individuals but also as possibly giving rise to semi-stable traits that can be passed on to future generations. That is, we will consider the historical, social and political valences of the scientific proposition of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance. The key question that animates this article is if and how the notion of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance creates new forms of responsibilities both in science and in society. We propose that, ultimately, interdisciplinary conversation and collaboration is essential for responsible approaches to transgenerational epigenetic inheritance in science and society.

An Epigenetic Prism to Norms and Values

In this article, we ask to what extent the specific characteristics of epigenetics may affect the type of questions one can ask about human society. We pay particular attention to the way epigenetic research stirs debate about normative and moral issues. Are these issues implied by scientific evidence as an outcome of research? Or do moral and normative issues also shape how research is done and which problems it addresses? We briefly explore these questions through examples and discussions in (social-) scientific literature. In the final section, we propose an additional dimension and a refocusing of attention from issues of scientific evidence alone (asking what kind of evidence epigenetics produces and how it does so) to a broader picture on epigenetics as a mode of attention that encourages relational and process-oriented thinking with entities, values and scales that may not yet fit within conventional problem-frames that inform research funding and policy-making. We argue that the task of (post-)ELSI approaches is to take inspiration from the ecological complexity of epigenetics in order to bring more relations, relief and gradient in our ethical and political questions.

Regenerative medicine and responsible research and innovation: proposals for a responsible acceleration to the clinic

This paper asks how regenerative medicine can be examined through the ‘responsible research and innovation’ (RRI) approach which has been developed over the past decade. It describes the drivers to the development of RRI, and then argues for the need to understand innovation itself through drawing on social science analysis rooted in science and technology studies. The paper then identifies a number of highly specific challenges faced by the regenerative medicine field and the implications these have for value creation. It offers a number of examples of how a combined RRI/science and technology studies perspective can identify priority areas for policy and concludes by arguing for a ‘responsible acceleration’, more likely to foster readiness at a time when much of the policy domain is pushing for ever-rapid access to cell therapies.

Epigenetics Changes Nothing: What a New Scientific Field Does and Does Not Mean for Ethics and Social Justice

Recently, ethicists have posited that consideration of epigenetic mechanisms presents novel challenges to concepts of justice and equality of opportunity, such as elevating the importance of environments in bioethics and providing a counterpoint to gross genetic determinism. We argue that new findings in epigenetic sciences, including those regarding intergenerational health effects, do not necessitate reconceptualization of theories of justice or the environment. To the contrary, such claims reflect a flawed understanding of epigenetics and its relation to genetics that may unintentionally undermine appeals to social justice. We provide a brief summary of epigenetic sciences, focusing on phenomena central to the current ethical discourse. We identify three fallacious modes of reasoning arising from the emergent literature on the ethical and policy implications of epigenetics, including mischaracterization, undue extrapolation, and exceptionalism. We end by discussing how these issues may work against mobilizing health equity policies and present a more modest claim regarding the value of new epigenetic knowledge to health justice by setting this discourse within the context of known themes in biomedical ethics and health policy.

Epistemic modesty, ostentatiousness and the uncertainties of epigenetics: on the knowledge machinery of (social) science

Epigenetic processes are garnering attention in the social sciences, where some scholars assert their importance for theorizing social life. I engage with such ideas here by drawing on interviews with leading bioscientists. To begin with, I underscore the (productive) uncertainties of those working in and around epigenetics; I describe these as a manifestation of ‘epistemic modesty’, and suggest that dissensus helps to propel biomedical innovation. Then, drawing on the concept of ‘alien science’, I detail some researchers’ ambivalences regarding the notion of ‘transgenerational inheritance’; their dissatisfaction with the (public) communication practices of other scientists (situated in what I term a regime of ‘epistemic ostentatiousness’); and the challenges faced when moderating societal discussion of epigenetics in ways that expand excitement whilst deflating (what researchers regard as) unrealistic expectations. The paper concludes with reflections on the knowledge machinery of the (social) sciences, and employs the study data to interrogate sociological engagements with epigenetics.

Revitalizing sociology: urban life and mental illness between history and the present

This paper proposes a re-thinking of the relationship between sociology and the biological sciences. Tracing lines of connection between the history of sociology and the contemporary landscape of biology, the paper argues for a reconfiguration of this relationship beyond popular rhetorics of 'biologization' or 'medicalization'. At the heart of the paper is a claim that, today, there are some potent new frames for re-imagining the traffic between sociological and biological research - even for 'revitalizing' the sociological enterprise as such. The paper threads this argument through one empirical case: the relationship between urban life and mental illness. In its first section, it shows how this relationship enlivened both early psychiatric epidemiology, and some forms of the new discipline of sociology; it then traces the historical division of these sciences, as the sociological investment in psychiatric questions waned, and 'the social' become marginalized within an increasingly 'biological' psychiatry. In its third section, however, the paper shows how this relationship has lately been revivified, but now by a nuanced epigenetic and neurobiological attention to the links between mental health and urban life. What role can sociology play here? In its final section, the paper shows how this older sociology, with its lively interest in the psychiatric and neurobiological vicissitudes of urban social life, can be our guide in helping to identify intersections between sociological and biological attention. With a new century now underway, the paper concludes by suggesting that the relationship between urban life and mental illness may prove a core testing-ground for a 'revitalized' sociology.

Epigenetics in the Neoliberal "Regime of Truth": A Biopolitical Perspective on Knowledge Translation

Recent findings in epigenetics have been attracting much attention from social scientists and bioethicists because they reveal the molecular mechanisms by which exposure to socioenvironmental factors, such as pollutants and social adversity, can influence the expression of genes throughout life. Most surprisingly, some epigenetic modifications may also be heritable via germ cells across generations. Epigenetics may be the missing molecular evidence of the importance of using preventive strategies at the policy level to reduce the incidence and prevalence of common diseases. But while this "policy translation" of epigenetics introduces new arguments in favor of public health strategies and policy-making, a more "clinical translation" of epigenetics is also emerging. It focuses on the biochemical mechanisms and epigenetic variants at the origin of disease, leading to novel biomedical means of assessing epigenetic susceptibility and reversing detrimental epigenetic variants. In this paper, we argue that the impetus to create new biomedical interventions to manipulate and reverse epigenetic variants is likely to garner more attention than effective social and public health interventions and therefore also to garner a greater share of limited public resources. This is likely to happen because of the current biopolitical context in which scientific findings are translated. This contemporary neoliberal "regime of truth," to use a term from Michel Foucault, greatly influences the ways in which knowledge is being interpreted and implemented. Building on sociologist Thomas Lemke's Foucauldian "analytics of biopolitics" and on literature from the field of science and technology studies, we present two sociological trends that may impede the policy translation of epigenetics: molecularization and biomedicalization. These trends, we argue, are likely to favor the clinical translation of epigenetics-in other words, the development of new clinical tools fostering what has been called "personalized" or "precision" medicine. In addition, we argue that an overemphasized clinical translation of epigenetics may further reinforce this biopolitical landscape through four processes closely related to neoliberal pathways of thinking: the internalization and isolation (aspects of liberal individualism) of socioenvironmental determinants of health and increased opportunities for commodification and technologicalization (aspects of economic liberalism) of health care interventions.

Epigenetic Determinism in Science and Society

The epigenetic "revolution" in science cuts across many disciplines, and it is now one of the fastest growing research areas in biology. Increasingly, claims are made that epigenetics research represents a move away from the genetic determinism that has been prominent both in biological research and in understandings of the impact of biology on society. We discuss to what extent an epigenetic framework actually supports these claims. We show that, in contrast to the received view, epigenetics research is often couched in language as deterministic as genetics research in both science and the popular press. We engage the rapidly emerging conversation about the impact of epigenetics on public discourse and scientific practice, and we contend that the notion of epigenetic determinism - or the belief that epigenetic mechanisms determine the expression of human traits and behaviors - matters for understandings of the influence of biology and society on population health.

Metaphors in search of a target: the curious case of epigenetics

Carrying out research in genetics and genomics and communicating about them would not be possible without metaphors such as "information," "code," "letter" or "book." Genetic and genomic metaphors have remained relatively stable for a long time but are now beginning to shift in the context of synthetic biology and epigenetics. This article charts the emergence of metaphors in the context of epigenetics, first through collecting some examples of metaphors in scientific and popular writing and second through a systematic analysis of metaphors used in two UK broadsheets. Findings show that while source domains for metaphors can be identified, such as our knowledge of electrical switches or of bookmarks, it is difficult to pinpoint target domains for such metaphors. This may be indicative both of struggles over what epigenetics means for scientists (natural and social) and of difficulties associated with talking about this, as yet, young field in the popular press.

Scrutinizing the epigenetics revolution

Epigenetics is one of the most rapidly expanding fields in the life sciences. Its rise is frequently framed as a revolutionary turn that heralds a new epoch both for gene-based epistemology and for the wider discourse on life that pervades knowledge-intensive societies of the molecular age. The fundamentals of this revolution remain however to be scrutinized, and indeed the very contours of what counts as 'epigenetic' are often blurred. This is reflected also in the mounting discourse on the societal implications of epigenetics, in which vast expectations coexist with significant uncertainty about what aspects of this science are most relevant for politics or policy alike. This is therefore a suitable time to reflect on the directions that social theory could most productively take in the scrutiny of this revolution. Here we take this opportunity in both its scholarly and normative dimension, that is, proposing a roadmap for social theorizing on epigenetics that does not shy away from, and indeed hopefully guides, the framing of its most socially relevant outputs. To this end, we start with an epistemological reappraisal of epigenetic discourse that valorizes the blurring of meanings as a critical asset for the field and privileged analytical entry point. We then propose three paths of investigation. The first looks at the structuring elements of controversies and visions around epigenetics. The second probes the mutual constitution between the epigenetic reordering of living phenomena and the normative settlements that orient individual and collective responsibilities. The third highlights the material import of epigenetics and the molecularization of culture that it mediates. We suggest that these complementary strands provide both an epistemically and socially self-reflective framework to advance the study of epigenetics as a molecular juncture between nature and nurture and thus as the new critical frontier in the social studies of the life sciences.

Neuroscience, epigenetics and the intergenerational transmission of social life: exploring expectations and engagements

Research in neuroscience and epigenetics is prominent in biomedicine and beyond. Some policy makers, health professionals and other citizens have intuited particular implications from these 'social biologies', leveraging them to support policies that many find problematic (e.g., around the early years). This enjoins scholarly attention to the uses to which science is put, but also to how and why biomedical knowledge comes to be imbued with certain kinds of salience (both by 'advocates' and by 'critics').