Connecting Biology and the Social Sciences

More and more graduate health care programs are requiring applicants to take social science classes as a prerequisite along with the typical basic science coursework. Having studied the natural sciences as long as I have, venturing into other fields felt foreign. This semester I am taking a sociology class in preparation for Physician Assistant school. The first day of class, the professor made the claim that the social sciences were just as much “science” as biology and chemistry. I was a little alarmed when he followed up that statement by saying that sociologists ignore the biology of human behavior and focus only on the social aspect. This was alarming because I believe that an entire field of research should not be discredited or ignored simply because it doesn’t match your perspective. Instead, both should be considered together to form a broader picture. Learning about certain topics in human health and the biology of disease has shown me that there are connections between the natural and social sciences that build upon each other.  A few of these topics include neurobiology, the interactions between microbes and humans, and gene therapy. Each of these affects society in different ways and it’s important to consider them in this context.

The brain is an incredible machine. A couple of semesters ago, I had the chance to dissect portions of the nervous system in an anatomy lab. We removed the brain from the cranial cavity and held it in our hands, resulting in a surreal moment where it hit me that I was holding the very thing that made this person who they were. Every thought and emotion came from this organ in my hands. Many of the things that sociologists focus on such as culture, morals/beliefs, and language were centered here. Societies are made up of individuals and individuals behave based on the functioning of this organ.  The brain is delicate and depends on balance for proper functioning. Any dysfunction can result in changes in behavior and cognition. For a very long time, mental disorders were not understood biochemically. Explanations such as evil spirits and omens seemed to dominate how the public viewed diseases of the brain. This resulted in stigmatization of many groups of people which is still present to this day and has an effect on how individuals and groups of people interact with each other. Removing the stigma around mental illness continues to be a prominent movement. These changes in behavior affect society as a whole but it also has a profound effect on the individual.  Many mental disorders are explained through theories other than biology including the behavioral (rewards/punishments), psychodynamic, and cognitive perspectives, but there is almost always a biological component. Many times it is due to an imbalance in hormones, neurotransmitters, or poor regulation of gene expression. Small imbalances lead to drastic changes in behavior and cognition and therefore affects how an individual interacts with others and their environment. Many medications used to treat these disorders work to reinstate some sort of biochemical balance. This brings balance to the body, but research has shown that a balance needs to be reinstated in the mind as well. Optimal therapy for many psychological conditions is achieved through both medical and talk therapy. Treatment is truly in line with Ayurvedic thinking in that a balance needs to be in place between the body, mind, and spirit to be truly well.

Imbalances in the body and mind do not always originate in the brain itself. Multiple factors in the body affect balance in the brain including the gut microbiome. Hearing about how the microbiome can affect the brain seemed like a large jump to me, but studies have shown that the two are connected in important ways. Imbalances in the composition in the microbiome can affect the biochemical functioning of the brain. Certain bacteria can affect the production of neurotransmitters because they can actually produce them themselves. For example, Bacillus and Serratia bacteria have the ability to produce dopamine. In a more expanded view, imbalances in the microbiome result in an increased likelihood of developing other serious conditions such as cancer and diabetes which definitely can have an effect on mental health. The microbiome cannot be ignored for its role in maintaining balance in the body and mind of humans. From a sociological perspective, the microbiome can have a large impact on societies. A couple of reasons come to mind. First, a study was performed to see if the microbiome had an effect on sociability. Germ free mice and mice with a microbiome intact were monitored to determine if there was a difference in their sociability levels. Germ free mice had a significant decrease in sociability compared to the mice with a microbiome. Translating this to humans, our microbiome may determine in part how we interact with others and with society as a whole. The exact mechanism for this connection isn’t well known, but recognizing that our bacterial hitchhikers may be changing the way we interact with each other is an interesting thought that I wish would be investigated further. The second reason involves the differences in the microbiome in different cultures. Most of the gut microbiome is established through the long-term diet. Cultures in different parts of the world potentially have much different microbiome than we have here in the United States.  With microbiome affecting behavior and cognition, it is an interesting thing to consider how much the microbiome may contribute to cultural differences. Diet is not only important to maintaining the microbiome of individuals through the lifespan, but it also plays a role in development. We read the paper as a class that showed that the microbiome of the mother can affect the colonization of the microbiome in the child. This early colonization then can affect the development of the child and therefore their whole lives. With differences in the microbiome in different cultures, it would be interesting to see if there are any differences in development. It’s becoming more clear that genetics is not the sole determinant for the development of the body and mind of a person and I’m glad these other causes are beginning to be investigated.

Speaking of genetics, another great intersection between biology and social science is gene therapy. Gene therapy is a very controversial topic right now. With technology such as CRISPR available, the possibility of changing the genome of an individual is no longer science fiction. Guiding the use of this technology involves lots of debate and social institutions such as government and religion often have an important voice in the discussion. Ethically speaking, the consensus seems to be that somatic cell therapy is the acceptable use of this technology and affecting the germ line is still considered mostly out-of-bounds. But many people are beginning to support the use this technology to treat genetic diseases through the alteration of embryos and germ cells. In my opinion, this is really the only valid argument for using gene therapy in this way. Broadening the use of this technology beyond medicine can open the door to so many other issues, many of which are social in nature. CRISPR can be used to eliminate undesirable traits and allow people to dictate what their offspring will be like. If a large number of individuals result from genetic engineering, they may have a large impact on the balance of society. A valid point is that we really don’t know how gene alteration would affect offspring or further generations. We also have no idea how a generation of “perfect” people would affect social structure and population balance. Also, I imagine that gene alteration is not a cheap process, meaning that only the wealthy would have access to this technology. This means that less wealthy people would not have the health benefits of gene alteration which could create a large divide between classes of people. These classes would not only be still divided by wealth, but now also by health and disease rates. This could completely throw off the balance of society and have dramatic effects that no one can really predict. It is a good thought to think that genetic diseases can be eradicated from the human population, but the potential long-term effects not associated with medicine seem a little risky to me. Society has reached its current balance because of the social and biological evolution of humans. Taking over that evolutionary process may disrupt that delicate balance.

Balance in societies depends on balance within individuals, and as we can see, balance within the individual is affected by various biological processes including proper functioning of the brain, interactions within other components of the body such as the microbiome, and the composition of human genes. Looking at social sciences through the eyes of biology has been enlightening and the importance of viewing the connections between both fields cannot be overstated in my opinion. I hope this paper might convince others not to be like my sociology professor and dismiss relevant information because it does not match up with their perspective. Any information collected through scientific study in any field should be given respect and incorporated into a bigger picture and understanding of our world.