health

The New Scientist reports this morning that, “Like an influenza outbreak, happiness – and misery too – spread through social networks, affecting people through three degrees of separation. For instance, a happy friend of a friend of a friend increases the chances of personal happiness by about 6% (see graphic). Compare that to research showing that a $5000 income bump ups the odds by just 2%, says James Fowler, a political scientist at the University of California, San Diego, who led the new study.”

“Even people we don’t know and have never met have bigger effect on our mood than substantial increases in income,” he says. He and colleague Nicholas Christakis, of Boston’s Harvard Medical School, made the connection by mining 53,228 social connections between 5124 people who took part in a decades-long clinical study.

This study employed similar methods to those used to study smoking and obesity as part of the Framingham Heart Study, the research subjects recorded social contacts and health status as part of the long-term clinical study. Social links between participants allowed the investigators to map the spread of happiness — one item on the psychological questionnaire included in the study.

Even more than smoking and obesity, happiness spreads best at close distances, they found. A happy next-door neighbour ups the odds of person happiness by 34%, a sibling who lives within 1 mile (1.6 kilometres) by 14%, and a friend within half a mile by a whopping 42%.

The effect falls off through the network, with friends’ happiness boosting the chances of personal happiness by an average of 15% and friends of friends by 10%. As with obesity and smoking, Fowler and Christakis detected no effect beyond three degrees of separation.

And the sociological commentary…

Ruut Veenhoven, a sociologist at Erasmus University in Rotterdam, Netherlands, editor of the Journal of Happiness Studies, and curator of the World Database of Happiness agrees. “Happy people are typically more involved, are nicer to their kids and their dog, and live longer,” he says.

The study, which he describes as “terribly creative”, might even help people improve their daily lives. “If you want to make people happier, you know at least how it spreads.”

Read the full story.

A new study suggests that link between obesity in parents and children is the result of both social and genetic factors. This important study, first reported by Reuters, gives equal weight to family lifestyle and genes in determining teenagers’ weight.

“What we do as a family — our family lifestyles — matters for weight. Lifestyles aren’t just about individual behaviors,” study author Dr. Molly A. Martin, Pennsylvania State University in University Park told Reuters Health. The study is the first to demonstrate that the connection between parents and children’s weight is social as well as genetic.

“We had a gut sense that this was known or true, but in the research literature it actually had not been proven,” added Martin, a sociologist who studies families, social inequalities, and adolescent health. Instead, she said, scientists studying behavior and genetics have focused solely on the roles of genes and environment, without trying to separate out the effects of a family’s behavior.

The study was also picked up by US News & World Report, which reported:

Adolescents tended to be heavier in families that frequently missed meals or spent several hours a day in front of the TV or video games, researchers report in a special issue of the American Journal of Sociology.

“My study finds that weight runs in families, but it’s not just because of genetics. What we do together, how we spend our time together, what we eat and how we organize ourselves as family matters,” said study author Molly Martin, an assistant professor of sociology and demography at Pennsylvania State University in University Park.

The methods…

For the new study, Martin included data from more than 2,500 pairs of twins, siblings or half-siblings. She examined numerous factors that could contribute to a teen’s weight status, such as parental obesity, socioeconomic status, parental education levels, birth weight, activity levels and more.

Two factors that emerged as separate from a family’s genetic influence were whether or not families missed meals, and the amount of time they spent watching TV or playing video games.

Read more from Reuters.
Read more from US News & World Report.

Temple University sociologist Matt Wray has identified new patterns in suicides in the Las Vegas area, Medical News Today reports. The study, titled “Leaving Las Vegas: Exposure to Las Vegas and Risk of Suicide,” examined rates of suicide in the Entertainment Capital of the World over a 30-year period and compared that data to the rest of the nation. Wray and his colleagues found:

residents of Las Vegas face a suicide risk that is significantly higher than the risk faced by residents elsewhere

people who die while visiting Las Vegas are twice as likely to die by suicide than are people who die visiting someplace else

visitors to Las Vegas face an even higher suicide risk than residents of Las Vegas

Wray offers some plausible explanations for this pattern, but encourages further study…

According to Wray, there a couple of scenarios that may explain the reasons for this geographical suicide cluster, but these need further research. “One would be ‘gambler’s despair’ – someone visits Las Vegas, bets his house away and decides to end it all. Another would be that those predisposed to suicide disproportionately choose Las Vegas to reside in or visit. And, finally, there may be a ‘contagion’ effect where people are emulating the suicides of others, with Las Vegas acting as a suicide magnet, much like the Golden Gate bridge. Some people may be going there intent on self-destruction.”

On a positive note, Wray’s study found that the suicide risk has actually declined over the past 30 years in the Las Vegas area in contrast to national rates, which have risen slightly in recent decades.

Science News reports this morning on an alarming new trend which suggests that middle-aged whites are a high-risk group for committing suicide.

A dark underside of middle-age has surfaced in the past decade. Although this phase of life is one psychologists have long considered a time of general stability and emotional well-being, white men and women ages 40 to 64 accounted for the bulk of a recent increase in the U.S. suicide rate, a new study finds.

Data gleaned from U.S. death certificates show that the overall suicide rate rose 0.7 percent annually between 1999 and 2005, reversing a downward trend in the rate that had begun in 1986. This increase primarily reflected a 2.7 percent annual rise in the suicide rate among middle-aged white men and a corresponding 3.9 percent annual rise among middle-aged white women, say epidemiologist Susan Baker of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore and her colleagues.

A sociologist weighs in…

In 2005, evidence of a disproportionate number of annual deaths among middle-aged people in the United States raised suspicion that an escalating percentage of the deaths were suicides, remarks sociologist Robert Bossarte of the University of Rochester Medical Center in Rochester, N.Y. “The big unanswered question is why middle-aged adults killed themselves at an increased rate in the years covered by this new study,” Bossarte says.

Possible contributors to this trend include mounting numbers of military veterans reaching middle age and rising difficulties for middle-aged individuals in trying to secure medical insurance, he suggests.

Read more.

USA Today reports on new research which suggests a link between children with ADHD and the likelihood of their parents’ divorce. Researchers William Pelham Jr. and Brian Wymbs of the State University of New York-Buffalo find that a child’s disruptive behavior ‘probably pours fuel on other stresses that spark marital conflict.’

Marilyn Elias reports:

Because ADHD can be inherited, parents often have it too, and that may hinder marriage, says Andrea Chronis-Tuscano, a psychologist at the University of Maryland. If children have ADHD, their mothers are 24 times more likely than other mothers to have it, and fathers are five times more likely, her studies find. Adults with ADHD may be impulsive and find it hard to concentrate or solve problems.

“That can lead to conflict in marriage,” she says, “and a child with ADHD only adds to the stress.”

But the sociologist disagrees…

In other studies, parents of children with ADHD have said they’re less satisfied with marriage. But not all researchers agree that they divorce more. A large Canadian report last year found no higher divorce rate for parents of children with ADHD. Pelham’s group may have particularly bad symptoms because their parents sought treatment, says Lisa Strohschein, a sociologist at University of Alberta who did the Canadian study.

Read more.

Science Daily News reports on a new national study from two sociologists out of Brigham Young University which concluded that religious involvement makes teenagers half as likely to use marijuana. The findings from the study are available in the October volume of the Journal of Drug Issues – allegedly settling a question scholars have traditionally disagreed upon.

Science Daily News:

“Some may think this is an obvious finding, but research and expert opinion on this issue have not been consistent,” said BYU sociology professor Stephen Bahr and an author on the study. “After we accounted for family and peer characteristics, and regardless of denomination, there was an independent effect that those who were religious were less likely to do drugs, even when their friends were users.”

The study, co-authored by BYU sociologist John Hoffmann, also found individual religiosity buffered peer pressure for cigarette smoking and heavy drinking.

What is it about religiousity?

The term religiosity as used in the study has to do with people’s participation in a religion and not the particular denomination. Hoffmann said the protective effect of church and spirituality supplements the influence of parents.

“Parents shouldn’t force it, but they can encourage spirituality and religion in their families, which in itself becomes a positive influence in their children’s lives,” Hoffmann said.

Read more.

This morning MSNBC ran a story on new research from San Francisco State sociologists, which suggests that when women receive a breast cancer diagnosis, they often assume a caretaking role in their own treatment and recovery. 

MSNBC reports:

 After conducting a series of interviews with 164 breast cancer survivors over two years, researchers from San Francisco State University found that women with cancer not only shoulder the emotional burden of disclosing their diagnosis to loved ones, they often end up being supportive of others at a time when they actually need support themselves.

“There’s been a lot of research on how women are emotional managers, how they take care of others,” says medical sociologist and lead researcher Dr. Grace Yoo, who recently presented the findings at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association. “And when they’re diagnosed with breast cancer they’re still doing that. They’re worried about how others might react.”

Read the full story. 

The Times (UK) reports this morning on the potential health risks associated with energy drinks and the dangers they pose to young people. Pete Bee reports, “Energy drinks have become the elixir of a generation that considers itself in need of more of a jolt than can be obtained from a mere cup of coffee. Around 330 million litres of products such as Red Bull, the UK’s bestseller, are consumed every year in Britain and the super-caffeinated drinks market is worth £1billion annually.”

A sociologist contributes to these concerns over the consumption of highly-caffeinated energy drinks, some with more caffeine than seven cups of black coffee. 

… [Researchers] have suggested that the caffeine in energy drinks means that the regular use of such products should be considered an accurate predictor of bad behaviour in young people. Reporting in The Journal of American College Health, Kathleen Miller, a sociologist and addiction researcher at the University of Buffalo, showed a link between caffeinated drinks and risky or aggressive behaviour patterns, including substance abuse, violence and unprotected sex. She says that her findings did not mean that caffeinated drinks cause bad behaviour, but that their regular consumption might be a warning sign for parents that “kids who are heavily into drinking them are more likely to be the ones who are inclined toward taking risks”.

And be sure to lay off the Red Bull…

A growing number of researchers are looking not just at the effects of caffeine, but at the consequences of high doses contained in energy products. Scott Willoughby, of the Cardiovascular Research Centre in Adelaide, Australia, recently showed how the sugar-free version of Red Bull can cause the blood to thicken, raising the risk of heart attacks and strokes.

The full story.

US News and World Report ran a story entitled ‘A Sociologist’s Take on Abortion‘ on Adam Voiland’s ‘On Men’ blog. 

Voiland writes:

Earlier this week, I blogged about a conference on how abortions impact men emotionally. I pointed out that there’s a dearth of dispassionate research exploring whether the controversial procedure affects men’s mental health. That’s very much the case, but I’d like to follow up with perspective, as well as some data, from one of the few academic researchers who has tackled the issue: Arthur Shostak, an emeritus professor of sociology at Drexel University. We weren’t able to connect before that post.

Since the early 1980s, Shostak has been periodically surveying and interviewing what he calls “waiting-room men”—the 600,000 or so guys who sit and wait each year as their partners undergo an abortion, and who help them return home afterward. Though firmly pro-choice, Shostak says he considers every abortion “a tragedy” and cites reducing the need as one of the reasons he studies how the procedure affects men. Thirty years ago, he went through an abortion with his partner; since then, he has surveyed upward of 3,000 waiting-room men about their experiences.

After reading about Shostak’s work, Voiland conducted an interview with him and posted excerpts on his blog. Read it here.

A reader of the Crawler recently brought to my attention a report from the World Health Organization (WHO) about health inequalies around the world. This Crawler fan also pointed out that sociologists are becoming increasingly concerned with problems of health inequality, as illustrated in a 2007 Annual Review of Sociology article (Volume 33, Number 1) by Kathryn Neckerman and Florencia Torche titled, “Inequality: Causes and Consequences,” which highlights this trend in the discipline. 

The WHO report, from the Commission on Social Determinants of Health, is titled “Closing the Gap in a Generation.”  From the World Health Organization:

What is the Commission on Social Determinants of Health?
The Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH) is a global network of policy makers, researchers and civil society organizations brought together by the World Health Organization (WHO) to give support in tackling the social causes of poor health and avoidable health inequalities (health inequities).

What was it expected to do?
The CSDH had a three year directive to gather and review evidence on what needs to be done to reduce health inequalities within and between countries and to report its recommendations for action to the Director-General of WHO. Building partnerships with countries committed to comprehensive, cross-government action to tackle health inequalities was integral to this. Experts were brought together to gather evidence, and civil society organizations also participated in the process.

Read more about the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. 

As sociologists study these inequalities, the opportunities for collaboration and the development of policy proposals and program initiatives seems limitless, but there is work to be done in the U.S. as well. 

Health inequalities are not limited to the wide disparities between countries described in the WHO report, but can also be present within countries, even the United States. An article published by the Independent (UK) this summer reports:

The United States of America is becoming less united by the day. A 30-year gap now exists in the average life expectancy between Mississippi, in the Deep South, and Connecticut, in prosperous New England. Huge disparities have also opened up in income, health and education depending on where people live in the US, according to a report published yesterday.

The American Human Development Index has applied to the US an aid agency approach to measuring well-being – more familiar to observers of the Third World – with shocking results. The US finds itself ranked 42nd in global life expectancy and 34th in survival of infants to age. Suicide and murder are among the top 15 causes of death and although the US is home to just 5 per cent of the global population it accounts for 24 per cent of the world’s prisoners.

…Despite the fact that the US spends roughly $5.2bn (£2.6bn) every day on health care, more per capita than any other nation in the world, Americans live shorter lives than citizens of every western European and Nordic country, bar Denmark..

Check out these interactive maps from the American Human Development Project — the group who published the report referenced in the article above.