10 ms·
Low social status 'can damage immune system'
- MichaelBurge 10y ago> The newest member nearly always ended up at the bottom of the social order and became "chronically stressed", received less grooming and more harassment from the other monkeys. > A detailed analysis of the monkeys' blood showed 1,600 differences in the activity levels of genes involved in running the immune system between those at the top and bottom. Could it be that the grooming procedure itself helps with the immune system? For example, cats will often lick their fur, which could bring in small quantities of pathogens to help build an immunity. If something similar happens with the monkeys, the result might not generalize to humans. > Dr Snyder-Mackler said: "Status is always relative, but if we could flatten the slope so the differences between the highest and lowest weren't as much, or find ways to focus attention on lower social environments so they are not as 'crappy' we could mediate some of those consequences. It's fine for the doctor to have his own political philosophy and motivations to do this study, but I would wait for a biologist to do a more careful analysis of why those genes are being activated before using this to justify any political action. Certainly, if every conceivable biological variable except for feeling like you're at the bottom is accounted for and the effect remains, that would be a very interesting result.
- bootload 10y ago"I would wait for a biologist to do a more careful analysis of why those genes are being activated before using this to justify any political action." Already done. I refer to the "Dunedin Study", (Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study). [0] Read the summaries of how this was/is being conducted. The most revealing insight into the links between poverty, disease and mortality. People born into poverty and who increase their wealth considerably in later life, do not get healthier. Disease (damage to the immune system) is directly related to poverty. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunedin_Multidisciplinary_Health_and_Development_Study https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunedin_Multidisciplinary_Heal... [1] http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz and http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/publications http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/publications
- MichaelBurge 10y agoI'm not able to speak to the statistical validity of the test, but as a software developer I find it more convincing if there's an explicit causal connection. Like, "Poor people live in darker homes, and the photosensitive ganglion cells are connected to the part of the brain that controls melanin production. And this triggers a sleep response more often, which causes the immune system to behave in X, Y, and Z". How does a statistician make a decision about what to change given only statistical data? It seems very mysterious to me. I understand how to interpret a scientific result(give people brighter homes), but not a statistical one.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y agoCausality is extremely difficult to prove in all sorts of reasonable circumstances, much less the Rube Goldberg mess of horrible chemistry that is the human corpus. (See also for example Judea Pearl's work http://causality.cs.ucla.edu/blog/ http://causality.cs.ucla.edu/blog/ )
- bootload 10y ago"I'm not able to speak to the statistical validity of the test, but as a software developer I find it more convincing if there's an explicit causal connection." @Michael, biology is messy compared to machines. To judge a measure of certainty in the methodology and results, read the peer-reviewed papers submitted to scientists working in this and other fields ~ http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/publications http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/publications
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- tpeo 10y agoI'm skimming through the study, thanks to Sci-Hub. The researchers did account for the impact of grooming and harassement on the immune system. We next investigated the behavioral mechanisms that give rise to social status effects on gene expression, focusing on NK and helper T cells where the observed effects were strongest. Mediation analysis revealed that rates of received harassment—a measure of the agonistic, competitive element of social status inequality— contributed to these effects for 17.3% (helper T) and 7.8% (NK) of rank-responsive genes, respectively. However, in rhesus macaques, dominance rank also influences affiliative social interactions (15). Grooming rates mediated rank effects on gene expression levels for 17.6% of genes in helper T cells, comparable to the results for agonistic interactions. In contrast, grooming behavior was more important than harassment for rankresponsive NK genes (n = 560 genes, 33.4% of all rank-responsivegenes; chi-squared test P = 1.33 × 10e−74)(Fig. 2, D and E). A lack of positive social interactions may therefore be equally or more important than social subordination per se in shaping social status effects on gene expression, consistent with the known effects of social integration on health and mortality in both humans and other primates (16–18).
- thirstysusrando 10y agoI've always thought about this the other way around. When I feel sick or depressed I tend to drop out of society for a bit.
- Fomite 10y agoAs with many things, this is also more complex. This article: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303694650_Primate_reinfection_with_gastrointestinal_parasites_Behavioural_and_physiological_predictors_of_parasite_acquisition https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303694650_Primate_r... suggests that higher status animal in this particular group have a higher parasite burden.
- daodedickinson 10y agoNietszche says to measure one's strength by the number of parasites one can support.
- reflexive 10y ago"It is not impossible to imagine society so conscious of its power that it could allow itself the noblest luxury available to it, – that of letting its malefactors go unpunished. ‘What do I care about my parasites’, it could say, ‘let them live and flourish: I am strong enough for all that!’ . . . Justice, which began by saying ‘Everything can be paid off, everything must be paid off ’, ends by turning a blind eye and letting off those unable to pay, – it ends, like every good thing on earth, by sublimating itself. The self-sublimation of justice: we know what a nice name it gives itself – mercy; it remains, of course, the prerogative of the most powerful man, better still, his way of being beyond the law." -- Genealogy of Morals, 2nd Essay, Chapter 10 "In the spot where the strong are weak, where the noble are over tender, there the parasite builds its horrid nest; dwelling in the sick corners of the great man . . . and it is just the highest species that harbors the greatest number of parasites." -- Thus Spake Zarathustra, Part 3, Section 56: "On Old and New Tablets", Number 19
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- 77pt77 10y agodirectly related: Stress, Portrait of a Killer - Full Documentary (2008) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYG0ZuTv5rs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYG0ZuTv5rs It studies this in humans and other primates.
- AnthonyNagid 10y agoHas anyone else here ever read Keith Johnstone's 'Impro'? Coming from the world of theater, Johnstone has a facinating perspective on the malleability of social status.
- drakenot 10y agoCan you give a brief summary of the points he makes about social status? I'm curious but my reading backlog is already out of hand.
- rukuu001 10y agoI was wondering if anyone had ideas on hacking social status for your own benefit :)
- Fluid_Mechanics 10y agoDisrupt Society 2016
- alex_anglin 10y agoWear a suit?
- solotronics 10y agoI have noticed a lot of engineers speak very quickly because you are in a hurry and flit between points (ie. Elon Musk) this is a specific kind if social status projection. Another way is to change how you dress. Another way is how you carry your body. Interesting how much people use these signaling queues to categorise each other.
- bitL 10y agoGo sigma.
- skvale 10y agobrief summary, improvisational acting is a lot funnier when the social status between the actors is toyed with. Keith finds it is surprisingly liberating and easy to fake a social status with certain body language, etc. When playing low status people clammed up or stammered and said less, high status they were energetic and took up more space. The audience likes when the dynamics change gradually.
- du_bing 10y agoThat's right, I have become more intent to have disease when not social at all. Beccause nowadays, it's more difficult to commuincate with people with others in real life, talking and interacting on internet can do much help.
- fixxer 10y agoBeing too rich can give you gout. We all got problems.
- adiabatty 10y agoSome people on a high-protein diet get this. The usual solution is to make sure you're eating enough fat and veggies.
- Animats 10y agoThis is well known. Relative social status has an influence on health. Above survival level, it's healthier to be at the top of a poor culture than at the bottom of a rich one, even if the absolute level is lower.
- sndean 10y ago> it's healthier to be at the top of a poor culture than at the bottom of a rich one, even if the absolute level is lower That Big-Fish-Little-Pond effect is seen to be relevant in a lot of places, including academic performance [1][2], depression, and suicide rates. [1] http://aer.sagepub.com/content/47/2/390.abstract http://aer.sagepub.com/content/47/2/390.abstract [2] http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-008-9075-6 http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-008-9075-6
- John23832 10y agoI commented on this in a recent thread and was crucified for being a self centered sociopath... better luck to you.
- noelwelsh 10y agoHeh. I think think the sociopathic conclusion would be to claw one's way to the top no matter what. The compassionate conclusion would be to reduce inequality, so all benefit.
- yummyfajitas 10y agoUnless you can reduce inequality to zero - Harrison Bergeron style [1] - you can't fix this by reducing inequality. It's an ironclad law of mathematics that 20% of the population will be part of the bottom fifth. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron
- noelwelsh 10y agoI believe the level of inequality, and the level of social mobility (which is probably related to the magnitude of inequality), is more important than the existence of inequality.
- known 10y agoSimple solution; Give a separate country to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominant_minority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominant_minority
- known 10y agoHigh social status = Highly unethical http://www.pnas.org/content/109/11/4086 http://www.pnas.org/content/109/11/4086
- bunchofdweebs 10y agoBut is it necessarily a bad thing? It seems like a way for nature to filter out less competitive genetic material. There are always going to be hierarchies and there will always be people at the bottom. It's an inherent part of how matter organises itself.
- drawnwren 10y agoThe human side of your comment aside, it isn't absolute. So it may 'filter out more competitive genetic material,' from the bottom of more competitive pools than the 'less competitive material' at the top of worse performing pools.
- cyrusshepard 10y agoLogical fallacy. Social status ≠ genetics. Social status is unfortunately often determined by income, race, religion, and a host of other nonlogical designations. In this experiment, social status was determined by "newness" to the group. Nothing to do with genetics.
- wybiral 10y agoBut if social status has an impact on sexual selection or individual survival then it does have something to do with genetics. It's a selective pressure meaning that genetics will likely drift in that direction.
- bunchofdweebs 10y agoSocial status is determined by social status of forebears, intelligence, physical attractiveness, good health. These are all heritable. This is not a matter of (formal) logic (so stop throwing 'fallacy' around); it's genetics.
- aaron695 10y agoYou can't just name a fallacy from the wiki 'List of Fallacies' and try and win an argument. Social status in humans and other animals is a large part genetic. This is take as fact by many people. If you believe it's not you really need proof. The original OP didn't need to provide proof as they took it as a given and was talking a different interesting premise.
- dschiptsov 10y agofucking meme-science
- sctb 10y agoWe've asked you many times to comment civilly and substantively, so we've banned this account.
- dschiptsov 10y agoThat's OK. If one likes to be posted by this kind of crap - it is his choice. Distant correlations based solely on statistics have no explanatory power, because so called non negligible statistical correlation might reflect complex multi variable phenomena observer has no clue about. This is just the confirmation bias at work. With same degree of "scientific" bravado it could be stated that number of teeth are related to the number of major brain areas, or any silly stuff like that.