ACE的演变:从应对行为到表观遗传学作为童年不良经历生物学的解释框架。

IF 1.6 3区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Ruth Müller, Martha Kenney
{"title":"ACE的演变:从应对行为到表观遗传学作为童年不良经历生物学的解释框架。","authors":"Ruth Müller, Martha Kenney","doi":"10.1007/s40656-024-00629-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have become a topic of public and scientific attention. ACEs denote a range of negative experiences in early life, from sexual abuse to emotional neglect, that are thought to impact health over the life course. The term was coined in the CDC-Kaiser ACE Study, an epidemiological study that surveyed 17,421 adults about ACEs and correlated the responses with participants' current health records. Shortly after the study was published in 1998, the US CDC deemed ACEs an important public health target; however, it is only recently that ACEs feature prominently in scientific and public discourses. We contend that this rise in popularity is linked to the adoption of epigenetic explanations for how ACEs affect health. Based on a literature analysis, we trace the evolution of explanatory frameworks for ACEs-from coping behaviors to allostatic load to epigenetics-and analyze how each of these explanations not only reconsiders the mechanisms by which ACEs affect health, but also who should be held responsible for addressing ACEs and how. Epigenetics provides distinctly different discursive possibilities than previous frameworks: firstly, it offers one distinct molecular mechanism for how ACEs work, lending \"molecular credibility\" to epidemiological findings; secondly, it raises the possibility of reversing the negative effects of ACEs on the biological level. This epigenetic articulation makes ACEs attractive for new actors in science and society. Particularly, it facilitates novel interdisciplinary collaborations and attracts actors in health advocacy who are interested in non-deterministic readings of ACEs that counteract stigma and support positive health interventions and healing.</p>","PeriodicalId":56308,"journal":{"name":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11522112/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The evolution of ACEs: From coping behaviors to epigenetics as explanatory frameworks for the biology of adverse childhood experiences.\",\"authors\":\"Ruth Müller, Martha Kenney\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40656-024-00629-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have become a topic of public and scientific attention. ACEs denote a range of negative experiences in early life, from sexual abuse to emotional neglect, that are thought to impact health over the life course. The term was coined in the CDC-Kaiser ACE Study, an epidemiological study that surveyed 17,421 adults about ACEs and correlated the responses with participants' current health records. Shortly after the study was published in 1998, the US CDC deemed ACEs an important public health target; however, it is only recently that ACEs feature prominently in scientific and public discourses. We contend that this rise in popularity is linked to the adoption of epigenetic explanations for how ACEs affect health. Based on a literature analysis, we trace the evolution of explanatory frameworks for ACEs-from coping behaviors to allostatic load to epigenetics-and analyze how each of these explanations not only reconsiders the mechanisms by which ACEs affect health, but also who should be held responsible for addressing ACEs and how. Epigenetics provides distinctly different discursive possibilities than previous frameworks: firstly, it offers one distinct molecular mechanism for how ACEs work, lending \\\"molecular credibility\\\" to epidemiological findings; secondly, it raises the possibility of reversing the negative effects of ACEs on the biological level. This epigenetic articulation makes ACEs attractive for new actors in science and society. Particularly, it facilitates novel interdisciplinary collaborations and attracts actors in health advocacy who are interested in non-deterministic readings of ACEs that counteract stigma and support positive health interventions and healing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11522112/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-024-00629-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-024-00629-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

童年不良经历(ACEs)已成为公众和科学界关注的话题。ACE指的是早年生活中的一系列负面经历,从性虐待到情感忽视,被认为会影响一生的健康。美国疾病预防控制中心-凯撒 ACE 研究是一项流行病学研究,该研究对 17,421 名成年人进行了有关 ACE 的调查,并将其回答与参与者当前的健康记录进行了关联。1998 年该研究发表后不久,美国疾病预防控制中心就将 ACE 视为重要的公共卫生目标;然而,直到最近,ACE 才在科学和公共论述中占据突出位置。我们认为,ACE 受关注程度的上升与采用表观遗传学解释 ACE 如何影响健康有关。在文献分析的基础上,我们追溯了ACE解释框架的演变过程--从应对行为到异质负荷再到表观遗传学--并分析了每一种解释不仅如何重新考虑ACE影响健康的机制,而且还分析了谁应该对解决ACE问题负责以及如何负责。与之前的框架相比,表观遗传学提供了截然不同的论述可能性:首先,它为 ACE 如何起作用提供了一种独特的分子机制,为流行病学的发现提供了 "分子可信性";其次,它提出了在生物层面上逆转 ACE 负面影响的可能性。这种表观遗传学的阐述使 ACE 对科学和社会的新参与者具有吸引力。特别是,它促进了新的跨学科合作,并吸引了对 ACE 的非决定性解读感兴趣的健康宣传参与者,这些解读抵消了耻辱感,支持积极的健康干预和治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The evolution of ACEs: From coping behaviors to epigenetics as explanatory frameworks for the biology of adverse childhood experiences.

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have become a topic of public and scientific attention. ACEs denote a range of negative experiences in early life, from sexual abuse to emotional neglect, that are thought to impact health over the life course. The term was coined in the CDC-Kaiser ACE Study, an epidemiological study that surveyed 17,421 adults about ACEs and correlated the responses with participants' current health records. Shortly after the study was published in 1998, the US CDC deemed ACEs an important public health target; however, it is only recently that ACEs feature prominently in scientific and public discourses. We contend that this rise in popularity is linked to the adoption of epigenetic explanations for how ACEs affect health. Based on a literature analysis, we trace the evolution of explanatory frameworks for ACEs-from coping behaviors to allostatic load to epigenetics-and analyze how each of these explanations not only reconsiders the mechanisms by which ACEs affect health, but also who should be held responsible for addressing ACEs and how. Epigenetics provides distinctly different discursive possibilities than previous frameworks: firstly, it offers one distinct molecular mechanism for how ACEs work, lending "molecular credibility" to epidemiological findings; secondly, it raises the possibility of reversing the negative effects of ACEs on the biological level. This epigenetic articulation makes ACEs attractive for new actors in science and society. Particularly, it facilitates novel interdisciplinary collaborations and attracts actors in health advocacy who are interested in non-deterministic readings of ACEs that counteract stigma and support positive health interventions and healing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences is an interdisciplinary journal committed to providing an integrative approach to understanding the life sciences. It welcomes submissions from historians, philosophers, biologists, physicians, ethicists and scholars in the social studies of science. Contributors are expected to offer broad and interdisciplinary perspectives on the development of biology, biomedicine and related fields, especially as these perspectives illuminate the foundations, development, and/or implications of scientific practices and related developments. Submissions which are collaborative and feature different disciplinary approaches are especially encouraged, as are submissions written by senior and junior scholars (including graduate students).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信