Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bransonf 2380 days ago
I did research briefly in a lab studying heart rate variability. HRV is a really interesting statistic in predicting heart health outcomes, and very interesting is the racial difference in HRV.

Basically, African Americans exhibit much higher heart rate variability, meaning their nervous system is much quicker to react to stimuli (quicker time to fight or flight response, for example) and this still isn’t well understood in the field.

A naive understanding is that racial physiology is just different. And plenty of people will stand by this. However, self reported stress scores offer some insight into the difference.

High stress African Americans with High HRV lived as long as Low stress, low HRV White/Asian Americans. Most likely, the process by which the nervous system regulates itself is heavily influenced by life course events.

Medical science, in my experience, lacks in quantifying these social factors, and too often underplays their significance in determining physiological differences. Humans are incredibly dynamic systems, and the case can be made that we adapt to stimuli in order to survive. It’s certainly possible that the physiological difference we observe in different racial populations is due to survival based on this principal.

It’s only recently that I’ve seen research trying to get at these social/physiological mechanisms, but as far as funding is concerned, hard biological sciences are more interesting. Everyone just wants to edit the genome and call it a day, but I think we could get much further if we understood how life events lead to physiological ailments later in life.

2 comments

There is also the political implications. Nobody wants to fund research which will only stir up controversy, especially since many higher education institutions are located in liberal areas. Too many medical studies on gender, race, and intelligence would only create unrest. Just take a look at how badly the Stanford ML paper on predicting gender orientation was received. Emphasizing the differences in "fight or flight" response timings may save lives, but at the same time provide ammunition for people to draw lines between metrics and historical events/practices along societal fault lines, which I think everyone can agree is not a good thing.
> provide ammunition for people to draw lines between metrics and historical events/practices along societal fault lines, which I think everyone can agree is not a good thing.

Putting your head in the sand and trying to deny the existence of potentially uncomfortable facts actually fuels these fringe thinkers more imo. Part of their whole schtick is that the truth is being hidden from them.

Look at how the media handled the claim that Serena Williams couldn't beat a top 10 male player. Instead of actually putting it to the test, the whole angle was about how insulting and preposterous that was etc etc.

We are not all the same, but we deserve to be treated so. It's as simple as that. Trying to halt scientific progress because it doesn't fit your world view is quasi religious.

Thank you for mentioning this.

>quicker time to fight or flight response

If cops are more likely to stop you because of your skin color (also further increasing the chances of further abuses), that would probably have an impact on your physiology over time.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/the-stop...

Interestingly enough, I transitioned to gun violence research, which is what I do now, after wondering something along these lines.

If you live in a neighborhood where gun violence is a common occurrence, do you still get startled when you hear gunshots? If so, this would have a physiological effect, because it breaks your rhythm in an abrupt way, and does so at the frequency of hearing gun shots.

Obviously this is highly theoretical, but if true it would mean that just being in the proximity of violence puts you at an extra health risk, one that very few people would assume.

From personal experience myself and with friends, the level by which you are "startled" is in direct proportion to the proximity of the gunfire.

e.g. Hearing gunshots in the distance, you recognize they are gunshots, take note, but continue on your way. Hearing gunshots on your block or within a group you are in, you take immediate notice and react accordingly. But in either case, any time you hear them, is a reminder that the underlying fear never leaves.

I love how my comment, which was only praise of the parent comment, was downvoted - by someone I can only assume is racist.

Hacker News at its finest ;)