7 ms·

> genetic-exacerbated substance abuse Could you expand on this a bit? Not a concept I am familiar with

dboreham 4y ago
Not parent, but this is a generally accepted thing, e.g. https://www.bumc.bu.edu/genetics/research/substance-abuse/ https://www.bumc.bu.edu/genetics/research/substance-abuse/
- ffssffss 4y ago
  That paper also seems to heavily qualify the findings, implying that environmental factors may dominate genetic ones (or may not, the point is that we don't know): However, these loci explain only a small proportion of the genetic variance. The “missing heritability” may be explained by other genetic mechanisms and gene*environment interactions
boomboomsubban 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_Native_Americans#Genetic_predisposition_to_alcoholism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_Native_Americans#G... Alcoholism rates among Native Americans is higher than most groups, which leads some to suspect a genetic reason. Currently, there isn't a ton of evidence supporting that idea.
- imoverclocked 4y ago
  There is also severe distrust of western medicine and science in many Native American communities which makes doing studies hard.
- Ntrails 4y ago
  I knew about the alcoholism rates, but had always assumed it was a socio-economic / situational driven thing. I understand that historically it was used in some sense to control and indeed damage the Native Americans by the colonists? To what extent alcohol was completely new etc I do not know
  - boomboomsubban 4y ago
    >To what extent alcohol was completely new etc I do not know Kind of a tricky question that is somewhat covered in my link. Alcohol was definitely brewed in the Americas pre-Columbus, but by the seventeenth century alcohol was largely unknown to the Natives interacting with the colonists.
    - amanaplanacanal 4y ago
      I always wonder how much was lost in the population crash caused by the introduction of old world diseases.
    - LarsDu88 4y ago
      Tejuino is a precolonial alcoholic beverage that is still enjoyed today. It's ABV is incredibly low compared to anything you'd buy in a modern 7/11 however. The tarahumara people's have more alcoholic version called tesguino that is only drunk once per year as the preparation process is labor intensive, and the drink goes bad rather quickly
      - bumby 4y ago
        I think your points add much needed nuance, but isn't there a possibility that both are true? I.e., both your examples may be true for Native Americans in present-day Mexico while the OP's point could be true for other groups like the Lakota at Pine Ridge. (I'm not claiming any knowledge on the subject, just questioning whether both points have to be mutually exclusive)
  - lisper 4y ago
    It is very hard to tease genetic factors out from socio-economic ones, but IMHO it seems plausible that a population that has been exposed to alcohol for a long time (hundreds of generations) may have been better selected for higher tolerance than a population that has been exposed only recently (a few dozen generations, and with modern technology making selection pressure lower in general).
- thinking4real 4y ago
  It’s false to say there isn’t data and pier reviewed studies on the subject. The link is clear. However, there’s a lot of propaganda that will pretend otherwise. https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh301/3-4.htm https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh301/3-4.htm
  - boomboomsubban 4y ago
    I'm confused. Why link what you seem to consider "propaganda" showing no genetic predisposition to alcoholism rather than link the clear proof you claim exists?
- Nomentatus 4y ago
  Summary - and interpretation - from memory of a lot of reading: Background: Humans are highly unusual amongst mammals; our livers are more than ten thousand times IIRC better at burning off alcohol than any other known mammal, and this is a rather recent change evolutionarily. This may have been necessary to survive off old winter fruit during the ice age that just about took us out (reduced our population down to low genetic variation.) Alcohol, in common with all other organic solvents save water, changes every single chemical reaction within our cells at least a little bit - esp the speed and frequency of given reactions. (Hence the cancer risk, etc, etc.) The change to neurotransitter reactions is just one of those changes, but one we find pleasing and distracting. Some genes protective re alcohol consumption reduce the effects/pleasure alcohol brings. Others may reduce habituation (so dose doesn't tend to increase.) Etc. My genes adapt me so quickly to alcohol that habituation/dosage escalates FAST. I and my relatives famously just shouldn't start since alcoholism is a quick result if we keep drinking. Cultures which have cultivated alcohol for thousands of years (Asia) are less vulnerable to alcoholism; no doubt those kinda genes were culled sometime back. Europeans less so, less protected. Central American native populations cultivated alcohol but (at least in some cultures) restricted its use to the elderly. North American natives, not to my knowlege. Selecting strongly for alcohol resistance has costs, off course, there are always tradeoffs. And where evolutionary selection has acted very strongly over a short period of time, the tradeoffs (downsides) can be extreme (particularly from copy-number variations, which are common under heavy/fast selection.) If you're going to be a teetotaller anyway, you'd prefer to have Native genes on average (other confounding variables aside.) But if you're going to drink - and alcohol is obviously dangerous - well, maybe you don't want the otherwise more ideal Native/original genetics; maybe some alcohol-protective genes (with other downsides) would predict a longer and better life for you, on average.
- more_corn 4y ago
  It was my understanding that native Americans have a genetically driven shortage of the second enzyme in the chain necessary for breaking down alcohol. My source was knowledgeable but not rigorous so take that as you will. https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/alcohol-metabolism https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/alcohol-metabolism
aaomidi 4y ago
Not exactly what you’re asking but there’s also a concept of genetic trauma, where some traumas can fundamentally change your offspring. For example, your grandmother from your moms side technically made the egg cells that you were born from. That means that whatever your grandmother was going through could for example pass on all the way down to you.
- phkahler 4y ago
  >> For example, your grandmother from your moms side technically made the egg cells that you were born from. That can't be right. Grandma gave mom a single cell. Mom's ovaries with grandpa's DNA too produced the egg leading to me. Or is there some element I'm not aware of that make it more like stated above?
  - soVeryTired 4y ago
    I guess the egg cell you came from was made inside your grandma when your mom was an embryo in her. So the the cell was technically made inside your grandma’s body.
    - abledon 4y ago
      isn't the mother just providing the nourishment for the fetus to grow inside her? and the fetus itself, takes the nourishment, and actually producing the eggs inside itself? So technically I don't think we can say the grandma is making the eggs directly, but has assisted in the fetus' creation, and then provided the nutrients/environment for the egg creation that the fetus itself makes (which yes, can influence things w/ the generational trauma science coming out...).
      - rolph 4y ago
        mom and dad also supply a half helix [single strand] of DNA, with conservation of state. this passes on the structural features responsible for regulatory configuration
  - 4y ago
citizenpaul 4y ago
> genetic-exacerbated substance abuse >Could you expand on this a bit? Not a concept I am familiar with Its profitable to pretend that personal choices have nothing to do with drug addiction. Then you can "treat" them forever collecting a monthly check from the government. I say this having grown up in a drug house and leaving as a 16yo teenager with nothing. I already regret this comment not because it isn't true but people detached from reality are going to get all bent out of shape.
- drno123 4y ago
  I know what you mean. Unfortunately, I can only give your comment a single upvote
- brookst 4y ago
  > Its profitable to pretend that personal choices have nothing to do with drug addiction That is true, and there are systemic issues we should fix. However it is also true that some people will latch on to anything — “personal choices”, “systemic issues” — to justify callousness and lack of compassion. It’s an ugly way to live, always looking for some justification to spit on those who are in already in trouble.
gedy 4y ago
Not the OP, but I think a larger factor here is fetal alcohol exposure, not epigenetics.
_dain_ 4y ago
populations differ in how well they can handle booze. this has been known since Roman times; various authors wrote how the Germans were more prone to alcoholism than Latins, an ethnic difference that persists to this day. native americans have it particularly bad, and have for centuries. colonist traders exploited it for profit, missionaries tried to stamp it out, Indian leaders often campaigned to keep rum out of their territories, etc.
imglorp 4y ago
There are definitely some social/environmental factors but there's enough anecdotal smoke around a genetic predisposition in some populations that the search for fire and causation is underway. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9603607/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9603607/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30852706/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30852706/

Not parent, but this is a generally accepted thing, e.g. https://www.bumc.bu.edu/genetics/research/substance-abuse/ https://www.bumc.bu.edu/genetics/research/substance-abuse/

ffssffss 4y ago
That paper also seems to heavily qualify the findings, implying that environmental factors may dominate genetic ones (or may not, the point is that we don't know): However, these loci explain only a small proportion of the genetic variance. The “missing heritability” may be explained by other genetic mechanisms and gene*environment interactions

boomboomsubban 4y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_Native_Americans#Genetic_predisposition_to_alcoholism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_Native_Americans#G... Alcoholism rates among Native Americans is higher than most groups, which leads some to suspect a genetic reason. Currently, there isn't a ton of evidence supporting that idea.

imoverclocked 4y ago
There is also severe distrust of western medicine and science in many Native American communities which makes doing studies hard.
Ntrails 4y ago
I knew about the alcoholism rates, but had always assumed it was a socio-economic / situational driven thing. I understand that historically it was used in some sense to control and indeed damage the Native Americans by the colonists? To what extent alcohol was completely new etc I do not know
- boomboomsubban 4y ago
  >To what extent alcohol was completely new etc I do not know Kind of a tricky question that is somewhat covered in my link. Alcohol was definitely brewed in the Americas pre-Columbus, but by the seventeenth century alcohol was largely unknown to the Natives interacting with the colonists.
  - amanaplanacanal 4y ago
    I always wonder how much was lost in the population crash caused by the introduction of old world diseases.
  - LarsDu88 4y ago
    Tejuino is a precolonial alcoholic beverage that is still enjoyed today. It's ABV is incredibly low compared to anything you'd buy in a modern 7/11 however. The tarahumara people's have more alcoholic version called tesguino that is only drunk once per year as the preparation process is labor intensive, and the drink goes bad rather quickly
    - bumby 4y ago
      I think your points add much needed nuance, but isn't there a possibility that both are true? I.e., both your examples may be true for Native Americans in present-day Mexico while the OP's point could be true for other groups like the Lakota at Pine Ridge. (I'm not claiming any knowledge on the subject, just questioning whether both points have to be mutually exclusive)
- lisper 4y ago
  It is very hard to tease genetic factors out from socio-economic ones, but IMHO it seems plausible that a population that has been exposed to alcohol for a long time (hundreds of generations) may have been better selected for higher tolerance than a population that has been exposed only recently (a few dozen generations, and with modern technology making selection pressure lower in general).
thinking4real 4y ago
It’s false to say there isn’t data and pier reviewed studies on the subject. The link is clear. However, there’s a lot of propaganda that will pretend otherwise. https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh301/3-4.htm https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh301/3-4.htm
- boomboomsubban 4y ago
  I'm confused. Why link what you seem to consider "propaganda" showing no genetic predisposition to alcoholism rather than link the clear proof you claim exists?
Nomentatus 4y ago
Summary - and interpretation - from memory of a lot of reading: Background: Humans are highly unusual amongst mammals; our livers are more than ten thousand times IIRC better at burning off alcohol than any other known mammal, and this is a rather recent change evolutionarily. This may have been necessary to survive off old winter fruit during the ice age that just about took us out (reduced our population down to low genetic variation.) Alcohol, in common with all other organic solvents save water, changes every single chemical reaction within our cells at least a little bit - esp the speed and frequency of given reactions. (Hence the cancer risk, etc, etc.) The change to neurotransitter reactions is just one of those changes, but one we find pleasing and distracting. Some genes protective re alcohol consumption reduce the effects/pleasure alcohol brings. Others may reduce habituation (so dose doesn't tend to increase.) Etc. My genes adapt me so quickly to alcohol that habituation/dosage escalates FAST. I and my relatives famously just shouldn't start since alcoholism is a quick result if we keep drinking. Cultures which have cultivated alcohol for thousands of years (Asia) are less vulnerable to alcoholism; no doubt those kinda genes were culled sometime back. Europeans less so, less protected. Central American native populations cultivated alcohol but (at least in some cultures) restricted its use to the elderly. North American natives, not to my knowlege. Selecting strongly for alcohol resistance has costs, off course, there are always tradeoffs. And where evolutionary selection has acted very strongly over a short period of time, the tradeoffs (downsides) can be extreme (particularly from copy-number variations, which are common under heavy/fast selection.) If you're going to be a teetotaller anyway, you'd prefer to have Native genes on average (other confounding variables aside.) But if you're going to drink - and alcohol is obviously dangerous - well, maybe you don't want the otherwise more ideal Native/original genetics; maybe some alcohol-protective genes (with other downsides) would predict a longer and better life for you, on average.
more_corn 4y ago
It was my understanding that native Americans have a genetically driven shortage of the second enzyme in the chain necessary for breaking down alcohol. My source was knowledgeable but not rigorous so take that as you will. https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/alcohol-metabolism https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/alcohol-metabolism

aaomidi 4y ago

Not exactly what you’re asking but there’s also a concept of genetic trauma, where some traumas can fundamentally change your offspring. For example, your grandmother from your moms side technically made the egg cells that you were born from. That means that whatever your grandmother was going through could for example pass on all the way down to you.

phkahler 4y ago
>> For example, your grandmother from your moms side technically made the egg cells that you were born from. That can't be right. Grandma gave mom a single cell. Mom's ovaries with grandpa's DNA too produced the egg leading to me. Or is there some element I'm not aware of that make it more like stated above?
- soVeryTired 4y ago
  I guess the egg cell you came from was made inside your grandma when your mom was an embryo in her. So the the cell was technically made inside your grandma’s body.
  - abledon 4y ago
    isn't the mother just providing the nourishment for the fetus to grow inside her? and the fetus itself, takes the nourishment, and actually producing the eggs inside itself? So technically I don't think we can say the grandma is making the eggs directly, but has assisted in the fetus' creation, and then provided the nutrients/environment for the egg creation that the fetus itself makes (which yes, can influence things w/ the generational trauma science coming out...).
    - rolph 4y ago
      mom and dad also supply a half helix [single strand] of DNA, with conservation of state. this passes on the structural features responsible for regulatory configuration
- 4y ago

citizenpaul 4y ago

> genetic-exacerbated substance abuse >Could you expand on this a bit? Not a concept I am familiar with Its profitable to pretend that personal choices have nothing to do with drug addiction. Then you can "treat" them forever collecting a monthly check from the government. I say this having grown up in a drug house and leaving as a 16yo teenager with nothing. I already regret this comment not because it isn't true but people detached from reality are going to get all bent out of shape.

drno123 4y ago
I know what you mean. Unfortunately, I can only give your comment a single upvote
brookst 4y ago
> Its profitable to pretend that personal choices have nothing to do with drug addiction That is true, and there are systemic issues we should fix. However it is also true that some people will latch on to anything — “personal choices”, “systemic issues” — to justify callousness and lack of compassion. It’s an ugly way to live, always looking for some justification to spit on those who are in already in trouble.

gedy 4y ago

Not the OP, but I think a larger factor here is fetal alcohol exposure, not epigenetics.

_dain_ 4y ago

populations differ in how well they can handle booze. this has been known since Roman times; various authors wrote how the Germans were more prone to alcoholism than Latins, an ethnic difference that persists to this day. native americans have it particularly bad, and have for centuries. colonist traders exploited it for profit, missionaries tried to stamp it out, Indian leaders often campaigned to keep rum out of their territories, etc.

imglorp 4y ago

There are definitely some social/environmental factors but there's enough anecdotal smoke around a genetic predisposition in some populations that the search for fire and causation is underway. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9603607/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9603607/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30852706/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30852706/