Race in an epigenetic time: thinking biology in the plural

Refusing epigenetics: indigeneity and the colonial politics of trauma

Environmental epigenetics is increasingly employed to understand the health outcomes of communities who have experienced historical trauma and structural violence. Epigenetics provides a way to think about traumatic events and sustained deprivation as biological "exposures" that contribute to ill-health across generations. In Australia, some Indigenous researchers and clinicians are embracing epigenetic science as a framework for theorising the slow violence of colonialism as it plays out in intergenerational legacies of trauma and illness. However, there is dispute, contention, and caution as well as enthusiasm among these research communities.In this article, we trace strategies of "refusal" (Simpson, 2014) in response to epigenetics in Indigenous contexts. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork conducted in Australia with researchers and clinicians in Indigenous health, we explore how some construct epigenetics as useless knowledge and a distraction from implementing anti-colonial change, rather than a tool with which to enact change. Secondly, we explore how epigenetics narrows definitions of colonial harm through the optic of molecular trauma, reproducing conditions in which Indigenous people are made intelligible through a lens of "damaged" bodies. Faced with these two concerns, many turn away from epigenetics altogether, refusing its novelty and supposed benefit for Indigenous health equity and resisting the pull of postgenomics.

Can Translational Social Neuroscience Research Offer Insights to Mitigate Structural Racism in the United States?

Social isolation and conflict due to structural racism may result in human suffering and loneliness across the life span. Given the rising prevalence of these problems in the United States, combined with disruptions experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, the neurobiology of affiliative behaviors may offer practical solutions to the pressing challenges associated with structural racism. Controlled experiments across species demonstrate that social connections are critical to survival, although strengthening individual resilience is insufficient to address the magnitude and impact of structural racism. In contrast, the multilevel construct of social resilience, defined by the power of groups to cultivate, engage in, and sustain positive relationships that endure and recuperate from social adversities, offers unique insights that may have greater impact, reach, and durability than individual-level interventions. Here, we review putative social resilience-enhancing interventions and, when available, their biological mediators, with the hope to stimulate discovery of novel approaches to mitigate structural racism. We first explore the social neuroscience principles underlying psychotherapy and other psychiatric interventions. Then, we explore translational efforts across species to tailor treatments that increase social resilience, with context and cultural sensitivity in mind. Finally, we conclude with some practical future directions for understudied areas that may be essential for progress in biological psychiatry, including ethical ways to increase representation in research and developing social paradigms that inform dynamics toward or away from socially resilient outcomes.

The neurobiology of social stress resulting from Racism: Implications for pain disparities among racialized minorities

Extant literature posits that humans experience two types of threat: physical threat and social threat. While describing pain as "physical" or "social" can be helpful for understanding pain origins (i.e., broken bone versus lost relationship), this dichotomy is largely artificial and not particularly helpful for understanding how the human brain experiences pain. One real world example of social exclusion and rejection that is threatening and likely to bring about significant stress is racism. Racism is a system of beliefs, practices, and policies that operates to disadvantage racialized minorities while providing advantage to those with historical power, particularly White people in the United States and most other Western nations. The objective of this Mini-Review is to present evidence in support of the argument that racism promotes physical pain in racialized minorities, which in turn promotes chronic pain disparities. First, we provide a theoretical framework describing how racism is a potent stressor that affects the health and well-being of racialized minorities. We will then address the neurobiological underpinnings linking racism to social threat, as well as that linking social threats and physical pain. Finally, we will discuss how the perception of social threat brought about by racism may undermine pain management efforts.

A biosocial return to race? A cautionary view for the postgenomic era

Recent studies demonstrating epigenetic and developmental sensitivity to early environments, as exemplified by fields like the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD) and environmental epigenetics, are bringing new data and models to bear on debates about race, genetics, and society. Here, we first survey the historical prominence of models of environmental determinism in early formulations of racial thinking to illustrate how notions of direct environmental effects on bodies have been used to naturalize racial hierarchy and inequalities in the past. Next, we conduct a scoping review of postgenomic work in environmental epigenetics and DOHaD that looks at the role of race/ethnicity in human health (2000-2021). Although there is substantial heterogeneity in how race is conceptualized and interpreted across studies, we observe practices that may unwittingly encourage typological thinking, including: using DNA methylation as a novel marker of racial classification; neglect of variation and reversibility within supposedly homogenous racial groups; and a tendency to label and reify whole groups as pathologized or impaired. Even in the very different politico-economic and epistemic context of contemporary postgenomic science, these trends echo deeply held beliefs in Western thinking which claimed that different environments shape different bodies and then used this logic to argue for essential differences between Europeans and non-Europeans. We conclude with a series of suggestions on interpreting and reporting findings in these fields that we feel will help researchers harness this work to benefit disadvantaged groups while avoiding the inadvertent dissemination of new and old forms of stigma or prejudice.

Contrasting Narratives of Race and Fatness in Covid-19

The slogan that 'the virus doesn't discriminate' has been belied by the emergence of stark and persistent disparities in rates of infection, hospitalisation, and death from Covid-19 between various social groups. I focus on two groups that have been disproportionately affected, and that have been constructed or designated as particularly 'at-risk' during the Covid-19 pandemic: racial or ethnic minorities and fat people. I trace the range of narratives that have arisen in the context of explaining these disparities, in both the scientific literature and wider expert and public discourse. I show that the scientific and public narratives around these groups have differed significantly, revealing contested and competing conceptions of the basis of these categories themselves. These different conceptions have important impacts on the kinds of interventions that become possible or desirable. I show that in the case of racial or ethnic disparities, genetic narratives have been combatted by a strong focus on structural racism as a driver of pandemic inequalities. However, in the case of fatness, individualising and stigmatising narratives have dominated discussions. I suggest that, given racial or ethnic differences in prevalence of fatness, and scholarship casting anti-fatness as historically racialised, the stigmatisation of fatness disproportionately affects racial or ethnic minorities in terms of placing individual blame or responsibility for the increased burden of Covid-19 on these groups. Despite widespread acknowledgement of the role of structural racism in driving racial inequalities in the burden of Covid-19, anti-obesity rhetoric and research provides a 'backdoor' to placing blame on individuals from racial minorities.

Childhood trauma, the stress response and metabolic syndrome: A focus on DNA methylation

Childhood trauma (CT) is well established as a potent risk factor for the development of mental disorders. However, the potential of adverse early experiences to exert chronic and profound effects on physical health, including aberrant metabolic phenotypes, has only been more recently explored. Among these consequences is metabolic syndrome (MetS), which is characterised by at least three of five related cardiometabolic traits: hypertension, insulin resistance/hyperglycaemia, raised triglycerides, low high-density lipoprotein and central obesity. The deleterious effects of CT on health outcomes may be partially attributable to dysregulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, which coordinates the response to stress, and the consequent fostering of a pro-inflammatory environment. Epigenetic tags, such as DNA methylation, which are sensitive to environmental influences provide a means whereby the effects of CT can be biologically embedded and persist into adulthood to affect health and well-being. The methylome regulates the transcription of genes involved in the stress response, metabolism and inflammation. This narrative review examines the evidence for DNA methylation in CT and MetS in order to identify shared neuroendocrine and immune correlates that may mediate the increased risk of MetS following CT exposure. Our review specifically highlights differential methylation of FKBP5, the gene that encodes FK506-binding protein 51 and has pleiotropic effects on stress responding, inflammation and energy metabolism, as a central candidate to understand the molecular aetiology underlying CT-associated MetS risk.

"Quiet is the New Loud": The Biosociology Debate's Absent Voices

In 2000, a controversial article about hormones and gender roles was published to stimulate debate about whether and how biological knowledge should be integrated in sociological research. Two decades later, this so-called biosociology debate is more relevant than ever, as biological knowledge has become widespread across societies and scientific disciplines. Hence, we as sociologists are regularly confronted with biological explanations that challenge our own explanations. Whether this happens in the scientific arena, the classroom, media, or even at social events, these situations often force us, individually, to take a stance on whether to meet such explanations with dialogue or opposition. One could therefore expect that sociologists have an interest in discussing these issues with their peers, but their lack of participation in the biosociology debate suggests otherwise. This paper explores possible reasons for this absence and how sociologists' views on biosociology are influenced by key agents - sociological associations and journals. Smith's "A Sacred project of American Sociology", and Scott's "A Sociology of Nothing" served as theoretical tools in the paper. A qualitative content analysis of presidential addresses of four sociological associations was conducted. The analyses suggest that sociologist avoid biosociology for widely different reasons, including fear that biosociology legitimizes oppression. This avoidance is probably reinforced by the leftish politization of the sociological discipline and the rightish politization of society. Overcoming obstacles to engagement in biosociology is required to safeguard the scientific integrity of sociology and enable sociologists to provide relevant contributions to research on the Covid-19 pandemic and climate change.

Medical Mistrust and Enduring Racism in South Africa

In this essay, I argue that exploring institutional racism also needs to examine interactions and communications between patients and providers. Exchange between bioethicists, social scientists, and life scientists should emphasize the biological effects-made evident through health disparities-of racism. I discuss this through examples of patient-provider communication in fertility clinics in South Africa and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic to emphasize the issue of mistrust between patients and medical institutions. Health disparities and medical mistrust are interrelated problems of racism in healthcare provision.

Epigenetic alterations associated with childhood trauma and adult mental health outcomes: A systematic review

Objectives: Multiple, chronic and repeated trauma exposure in childhood is associated with adverse mental health outcomes in adulthood. In this paper we synthesise the literature on epigenetic modifications in childhood trauma (CT) and the mediating effects of differential epigenetic mechanisms on the association between CT and the later onset of psychiatric disorders.Methods: We reviewed the literature up to March 2018 in four databases: PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCOhost and SCOPUS. Non-human studies were excluded. All studies investigating CT exposure both in healthy adults (18 years and older) and adults with psychiatric disorders were included.Results: Thirty-six publications were included. For mood disorders, methylation of the glucocorticoid receptor NR3C1 gene, specifically at the NGFI-A binding site in exon 1F, and correlation with CT was a robust finding. Several studies documented differential methylation of SLC6A4, BDNF, OXTR and FKBP5 in association with CT. Common pathways identified include neuronal functioning and maintenance, immune and inflammatory processes, chromatin and histone modification, and transcription factor binding.Conclusions: A variety of epigenetic mediators that lie on a common pathway between CT and psychiatric disorders have been identified, although longitudinal studies and consistency in methodological approach are needed to disentangle cause and effect associations.

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.

Race and nutrition in the New World: Colonial shadows in the age of epigenetics

This paper addresses historical dimensions of epigenetic studies on human populations. We show that postgenomic research on health disparities in Latin America reintroduces old colonial views about the relations between race, environment, and social status. This especially refers to the idea - common in colonial humoralism and epigenetics - that different types of bodies are in balance and closely linked with particular local environments and lifestyles. These social differences become embodied as physiological and health differences. By comparing Spanish chronicles of the New World with recent epidemiological narratives on Mexican populations in social epigenetics (especially on obesity), we identify four characteristics that both share in distinguishing races, such as indigenous or mestizos from Spaniards or non-Mexicans: (i) Race is not intrinsic to bodies but emerges as a particular homeostatic body-environment relation; (ii) the stability of one's race is warranted through the stability of one's local environment and lifestyle, especially nutrition; (iii) every race faces specific life challenges in a local environment to maintain its health; and (iv) every race shows a unique social status that is closely linked to its biological status (e.g., disease susceptibility). Based on these similarities, we argue that currently in Latin America the field of epigenetics appears on the scene with a worrisome colonial shadow. It reintroduces long forgotten exclusionary and stereotypic perspectives on indigenous and mestizos, and biologizes as well as racializes social-cultural differences among human groups.

Could epigenetics help explain racial disparities in chronic pain?

African Americans disproportionately suffer more severe and debilitating morbidity from chronic pain than do non-Hispanic Whites. These differences may arise from differential exposure to psychosocial and environmental factors such as adverse childhood experiences, racial discrimination, low socioeconomic status, and depression, all of which have been associated with chronic stress and chronic pain. Race, as a social construct, makes it such that African Americans are more likely to experience different early life conditions, which may induce epigenetic changes that sustain racial differences in chronic pain. Epigenetics is one mechanism by which environmental factors such as childhood stress, racial discrimination, economic hardship, and depression can affect gene expression without altering the underlying genetic sequence. This article provides a narrative review of the literature on epigenetics as a mechanism by which differential environmental exposure could explain racial differences in chronic pain. Most studies of epigenetic changes in chronic pain examine DNA methylation. DNA methylation is altered in the glucocorticoid (stress response) receptor gene, NR3C1, which has been associated with depression, childhood stress, low socioeconomic status, and chronic pain. Similarly, DNA methylation patterns of immune cytokine genes have been associated with chronic stress states. Thus, DNA methylation changes may play an essential role in the epigenetic modulation of chronic pain in different races with a higher incidence of epigenetic alterations contributing to more severe and disabling chronic pain in African Americans.

Gendered imaginaries: situating knowledge of epigenetic programming of health

Our paper explores the value-laden and epistemic resources that scientists working in epigenetics and developmental programming of health and disease (DOHaD) mobilise to produce scientific representations of pregnancy and parenthood, which in turn imagine norms, values, and responsibilities for the protection of future generations. In order to do so, we first describe the place of questions regarding the relative weight of paternal and maternal influences on the health of the offspring in the discursive formalisation of this research in scientific publications. This enables us to identify the mutual constitution of 'prototypes' (i.e. experimental designs, settings, techniques) and 'stereotypes' (i.e. social meanings, beliefs, norms and values) of parental roles in DOHaD and epigenetic biomedical sciences, by means of a specific gendered figuration of paternal influences: the 'father-as-sperm'. Second, and drawing from a set of interviews (N = 15), we describe a tension between this dominant, objectifying molecular discourse and the perspective of individual scientists. The situated perspective of individual researchers provides in fact evidence for a conflictual (moral and epistemic) economy of gendered engagements with parental figurations in DOHaD and epigenetic research, and consequently suggests a more fine-grained, as well as conflictual web of socio-political positioning of this 'knowledge' in its societal circulation.

A Postgenomic Body: Histories, Genealogy, Politics

This article sets the stage for a genealogy of the postgenomic body. It starts with the current transformative views of epigenetics and microbiomics to offer a more pluralistic history in which the ethical problem of how to live with a permeable body - that is plasticity as a form of life - is pervasive in traditions pre-dating and coexisting with modern biomedicine (particularly humoralism in its several ramifications). To challenge universalizing narratives, I draw on genealogical method to illuminate the unequal distribution of plasticity across gender and ethnic groups. Finally, after analysing postgenomics as a different thought-style to genomics, I outline some of its implications for notions of plasticity. I argue that postgenomic plasticity is neither a modernistic plasticity of instrumental control of the body nor a postmodernist celebration of endless potentialities. It is instead closer to an alter-modernistic view that disrupts clear boundaries between openness and determination, individual and community.

Epigenetic Discrimination: Emerging Applications of Epigenetics Pointing to the Limitations of Policies Against Genetic Discrimination

Over more than two decades, various policies have been adopted worldwide to restrict the use of individual genetic information for non-medical reasons by third parties and prevent ‘genetic discrimination’. In this paper, we bring attention to the growing interest for individual epigenetic information by insurers and forensic scientists. We question whether such interest could lead to ‘epigenetic discrimination’ – the differential adverse treatment or abusive profiling of individuals or groups based on their actual or presumed epigenetic characteristics – and argue that we might already be facing the limitations of recently adopted normative approaches against genetic discrimination. First, we highlight some similarities and differences between genetic and epigenetic modifications, and stress potential challenges to regulating epigenetic discrimination. Second, we argue that most existing normative approaches against genetic discrimination fall short in providing oversight into the field of epigenetics. We conclude with a call for discussion on the issue, and the development of comprehensive and forward-looking preventive strategies against epigenetic discrimination.

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.

The fluidity of biosocial identity and the effects of place, space, and time

Public and scientific conceptions of identity are changing alongside advances in biotechnology, with important relevance to health and medicine. In particular, biological identity, once predominantly conceived as static (e.g., related to DNA, dental records, fingerprints) is now being recognized as dynamic or fluid, mirroring contemporary understandings of psychological and social identity. The dynamism of biological identity comes from the individual body's unique relationship with the world surrounding it, and therefore may best be described as biosocial. This paper reviews advances in scientific understandings of identity and presents a model that contrasts prior static approaches to biological identity from more recent dynamically-relational ones. This emerging viewpoint is of broad significance to health and medicine, particularly as medicine recognizes the significance of biography - i.e. the multiple, dense interactions imparted on a body across spatio-temporal dimensions - to phenotypic prediction, especially disease risk.