Tag: Influence

  • Friend’s Genetic Traits Can Influence Your Mental Health Risk: Study

    Friend’s Genetic Traits Can Influence Your Mental Health Risk: Study

    Friendships during teen years can make or break mental health. It’s not just about the support they provide during tough times that the researchers are talking about, but how their genetic traits can affect you. The traits of your friends, particularly their genetic predisposition to mental health issues, can influence your mental health risks, a recent study revealed.

    Socio-genomics is a topic of growing interest that investigates the influence of a person’s genotype on the observable traits of another. The study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry investigated the peer’s social genetic effects and found that a person’s genetic predisposition to addiction, anxiety, and depression can have long-term consequences for their adolescent peers, affecting their risk of developing similar mental health issues later in life.

    “Peers’ genetic predispositions for psychiatric and substance use disorders are associated with an individual’s own risk of developing the same disorders in young adulthood,” said Jessica E. Salvatore, lead author of the study in a news release.

    “What our data exemplifies is the long reach of social genetic effects,” Salvatore said.

    The study was based on a database of more than 1.5 million people born in Sweden between 1980 and 1998. The researchers first mapped individuals by location and school during their teenage years. They then examined medical, pharmacy, and legal records to track substance use and mental health disorders into adulthood. Using models they tested if peers’ genetic risks predicted an individual’s risk of experiencing substance abuse, major depression, or anxiety. Peer genetic risks were assessed using family genetic risk scores for the same conditions.

    “Even when controlling for factors such as the target individuals’ own genetic predispositions and family socioeconomic factors, the researchers found a clear association between peers’ genetic predispositions and target individuals’ likelihood of developing a substance use or psychiatric disorder. The effects were stronger among school-based peers than geographically defined peers,” the news release stated.

    The researchers noted that these links were most noticeable among upper secondary school classmates, particularly those in the same vocational or college-preparatory track between ages 16 and 19. The peer’s genetic impact was greater for issues such as drug and alcohol use disorders compared to major depression and anxiety disorders.

    “The most obvious explanation for why peers’ genetic predispositions might be associated with our own well-being is the idea our peers’ genetic predispositions influence their phenotype, or the likelihood that peers are also affected by the disorder. But in our analysis, we found that peers’ genetic predispositions were associated with target individuals’ likelihood of disorder even after we statistically controlled for whether peers were affected or unaffected,” Salvatore said, adding that more research is needed to understand the mechanism.

    Source link

  • Corporate Influence and Our Epidemic of Obesity 

    Corporate Influence and Our Epidemic of Obesity 

    Like the tobacco industry adding extra nicotine to cigarettes, the food industry employs taste engineers to accomplish a similar goal of maximizing the irresistibility of its products.

    The plague of tobacco deaths wasn’t due just to the mass manufacturing and marketing of cheap cigarettes. Tobacco companies actively sought to make their products even more crave-able by spraying sheets of tobacco with nicotine and additives like ammonia to provide “a bigger nicotine ‘kick.’” Similarly, taste engineers are hired by the food industry to maximize product irresistibility.

    Taste is the leading factor in food choice. “Sugar, fat, and salt have been called the three points of the compass” to produce “superstimulating” and “hyper palatability” to tempt people into impulsive buys and compulsive consumption. Foods are intentionally designed to hook into our evolutionary triggers and breach whatever biological barriers help “keep consumption within reasonable limits.”

    Big Food is big business. The processed food industry alone brings in more than $2 trillion a year. That affords them the economic might to manipulate not only taste profiles, but public policy and scientific inquiry, too. The food, alcohol, and tobacco industries have all used similar unsavory tactics: blocking health regulations, co-opting professional organizations, creating front groups, and distorting the science. The common “corporate playbook” shouldn’t be surprising, given the common corporate threads. At one time, for example, tobacco giant Philip Morris owned both Kraft and Miller Brewing.

    As you can see below and at 1:45 in my video The Role of Corporate Influence in the Obesity Epidemic, in a single year, the food industry spent more than $50 million to hire hundreds of lobbyists to influence legislation. Most of these lobbyists were “revolvers,” former federal employees in the revolving door between industry and its regulators, who could push corporate interests from the inside, only to be rewarded with cushy lobbying jobs after their “public service.” In the following year, the industry acquired a new weapon—a stick to go along with all those carrots. On January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court’s five-to-four Citizen’s United ruling permitted corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money on campaign ads to trash anyone who dared stand against them. No wonder our elected officials have so thoroughly shrunk from the fight, leaving us largely with a government of Big Food, by Big Food, and for Big Food. 

    Globally, a similar dynamic exists. Weak tea calls from the public health community for voluntary standards are met not only with vicious fights against meaningful change but also massive transnational trade and foreign investment deals that “cement the protection of their [food industry] profits” into the laws of the lands.

    The corrupting commercial influence extends to medical associations. Reminiscent of the “just what the doctor ordered” cigarette ads of yesteryear, as you can see below and at 3:05 in my video, the American Academy of Family Physicians accepted millions from The Coca-Cola Company to “develop consumer education content on beverages and sweeteners.” 

    On the front line, fake grassroots “Astroturf” groups are used to mask the corporate message. RJ Reynolds created Get Government Off Our Back (memorably acronymed GGOOB), “a front group created by the tobacco industry to fight regulation,” for instance. Americans Against Food Taxes may as just as well be called “Food Industry Against Food Taxes.” The power of front group formation is enough to bind bitter corporate rivals; the Sugar Association and the Corn Refiners Association linked arms with the National Confectioners Association to partner with Americans for Food and Beverage Choice.

    Using another tried-and-true tobacco tactic, research front groups can be used to subvert the scientific process by shaping or suppressing the science that deviates from the corporate agenda. Take the trans fat story. Food manufacturers have not only “long denied that trans fats were associated with disease,” but actively “worked to limit research on trans fats” and “discredit potentially damaging findings.”

    At what cost? The global death toll from foods high in trans fat, saturated fat, salt, and sugar is at 14 million lost lives every year. The inability of countries around the world to turn the tide on obesity “is not a failure of individual will-power. This is a failure of political will to take on big business,” said the Director-General of the World Health Organization. “It is a failure of political will to take on the powerful food and soda industries.” She ended her keynote address before the National Academy of Medicine entitled “Obesity and Diabetes: The Slow-Motion Disaster” with these words: “The interests of the public must be prioritized over those of corporations.”

    Are you mad yet? To sum up my answer to the question underlying my What Triggered the Obesity Epidemic? webinar, it’s the food. I close next with my wrap-up video: The Role of the Toxic Food Environment in the Obesity Epidemic

    This was part of an 11-part series. See the related posts below.

    If the political angle interests you, check out: 



    Source link