[Music]
There's a lot on the line when it comes
to human social lives.
So much in fact, that a person's place on the social ladder
might determine how long that person lives.
Social adversity's effect
on human health has surfaced in many studies
which show how income, social
integration, and adverse childhood experiences
are linked to lifespan,
and even the prevalence of specific diseases during life.
A recent scientific review
outlined these social risk factors known
as the social determinants of health
across years of research into humans.
Using data collected from the literature,
they plotted how men earning $35,000 or
less at age 40 are expected to live
fewer years than those earning $100,000 or more.
A social integration composite based on
marital status, frequency of social contacts, and community engagement
showed least socially integrated women
were more than twice as likely to suffer
from stroke than the most integrated.
And people who had six or more adverse
childhood experiences were expected to
die nearly twenty years earlier than
those who experienced none.
But what possibly set this review apart from
others was that the authors compared
human studies with those in several
other groups of mammals.
Rodents, horses, whales, and even hyraxes have been
shown to exhibit important health outcomes
that correlate with their
social environment and relationships.
Of course other primates display similar
patterns. One study found that male
Assamese macaques who formed stronger
social bonds with other males ascended
the hierarchy and also fathered more
young.
And the literature review identifies a pathway in baboons, in which social adversity, early life
adversity, and mediators of those events
forge the delicate interplay to affect
health, fitness, and lifespan.
But the scientists who tend to study these furry creatures
Often stand apart from the scientists who study social health factors in humans.
The two scientific fields seemingly dig for the same results
but do so in parallel
tunnels, which usually stand apart.
As a consequence, these fields of study might
be missing out on resources that could
be game changers and understanding the
social determinants of health.
Including its biological mechanisms in humans and behavioral or environmental mediators in
other animals.
The review hurled a monkey
wrench into the structure.
thrusting human social science into the fray with the study of animal behavior.
Rather than viewing them as strict parallels,
the review suggested combining them,
hoping to reap the benefits of these isolated
fields working in tandem.
Future large-scale genomic studies could
integrate research on social health
factors to give a more complete picture
of negative health effects in humans.
Research on hierarchies could address whether
climbing a social ladder benefits lifespan,
or whether a more egalitarian community improves an
individual's longevity. Ultimately, the
review stresses that humans have a long
history of dependence on the social
environment, which in evolutionary terms
may be older than our species itself.
Insight into social stressors across the animal kingdom
could help us tackle the greatest challenges
in public health for years to come.
[Music]
