Medical Hypotheses I
I Medical Hypotheses Q Longman Group
03ffi-9877/W/tX133-0219/$10.00
(1990) 33, 219 - 225 UK Ltd 1990
The Nature/Nurture Revisited
Controversy:
Spouse-Likeness
E. CHERASKIN Park
Tower
904/906,
2 7 17 Highland
Avenue
South,
Birmingham,
Alabama
35205
- 1725,
USA
Abstract - Within the past twelve months two distinguished scientific journals have once again raised the issue of nature versus nurture in health and sickness. The conclusion continues to be simply that both genetics and environment play a role. The issue still to be resolved is the relative contributions of nature and nurture. The model which most contributes to the answer is the very one least employed, namely spouse-likeness. This is a review of the approximately 100 most recent articles. It is evident that, within the limits of these observations, environment may play a more dominant role than generally considered.
Introduction Four items serve as an excellent prelude to and justification for this report on the role of genetics versus the environment in the genesis of health and sickness. Firstly, it is abuntantly clear that the debate is current and very much alive. This is apparent as judged by the facts that reports, editorials, and Letters to the Editors appeared as recently as 1988 in two of our most prestigious scientific publications. Nature (1 - 4) and the New England Journal of Medicine (5 - 6). Secondly, the continuing prevailing conclusion is ‘most major chronic diseases probably result from the accumulation of environmental factors over time in genetically susceptible persons.’ Hence, we are still currently unclear regarding the relative contributions of the environment and inheritance. It would be helpful to know what the nature/nurture ratio is. ObDate received Date accepted
viously, the number would dictate the direction of subsequent research efforts and clinical pursuits. Thirdly, the present conclusions are based on conventional familial models including parents and children, twins, siblings, the orphaned and adopted. Finally, the least studied matrix, with the greatest possible contribution, is spouse-likeness. This report is intended to restudy the nature/nurture argument through an examination of the simplest and least expensive familial prototype, the married couples pattern. The interest in this particular model is further heightened by the recent observations (7) in undergraduate psychology students provided with single male and female photographs of couples, freshly married and of long-standing. It is noteworthy that these inexperienced students, almost without exception, could not match newly married couples. More importantly, almost without exception, the students
8 September 1989 4 January 1990
219
220
MEDICAL HYPOTHESES
identified married couples of long-standing. This simple experiment demonstrates the old adage that couples (and even their pets) begin to look alike with time. It also encourages a harder look at the husband/wife contributions to wellness and ill-health.
Review of the literature There has been a long-standing interest in the overall problem of spouse-likeness. Laced throughout the scientific literature for the past 50 years, with two notable exceptions, are approximately 50 reports generally confirming similarities in diverse patterns of married couples. For example, Winkelstein, Sackett (8 - 1l), as well as others (12-22) have looked into the problem of family aggregation as it relates to hypertension. There has also been considerable interest by a number of investigators in carcinomatosis (23 - 30). The first of the two exceptions, Garn and his colleagues (31- 48), have provided a series of consistent, structured, and productive contributions extending over a period of approximately 20 years. They have examined weight, and weight change, urinary and blood vitamin studies (vitamin A, vitamin C, riboflavin, thiamine), serum cholesterol and triglycerides, dental caries, bone, hemaglobin hematocrit and diet (calories, calcium, protein, alcohol). It is safe to conclude that, all of these parameters correlate significantly in spouse groups. In other words, with advancing
time (length of cohabitation), come increasingly similar.
these parameters be-
Results We, the other exception, here at the University of Alabama Medical Center have also been studying familial aggregation in a group of dental practitioners and their spouses. We have published approximately 20 papers over a period of 12 years (49 - 68). The model we have employed is shown in Table 1. Two hundred sixty one couples are studied in terms of their serum cholesterol (these data are still unpublished). These same dental practitioners’ scores were compared to age and sex matched unrelated women. Finally, the two female groups were compared. This format provided us with the opportunity of raising (and hopefully answering) three questions: 1. 2.
3.
What is the relationship of serum cholseterol in married couples? How does the husband-wife correlation compare with the pattern in the husband and an age-paired unrelated female? Is the correlation a function of time?
Line 1 shows a highly statistically significant correlation of serum cholesterol (r = + 0.361, p
I Medical Hypotheses Q Longman Group
03ffi-9877/W/tX133-0219/$10.00
(1990) 33, 219 - 225 UK Ltd 1990
The Nature/Nurture Revisited
Controversy:
Spouse-Likeness
E. CHERASKIN Park
Tower
904/906,
2 7 17 Highland
Avenue
South,
Birmingham,
Alabama
35205
- 1725,
USA
Abstract - Within the past twelve months two distinguished scientific journals have once again raised the issue of nature versus nurture in health and sickness. The conclusion continues to be simply that both genetics and environment play a role. The issue still to be resolved is the relative contributions of nature and nurture. The model which most contributes to the answer is the very one least employed, namely spouse-likeness. This is a review of the approximately 100 most recent articles. It is evident that, within the limits of these observations, environment may play a more dominant role than generally considered.
Introduction Four items serve as an excellent prelude to and justification for this report on the role of genetics versus the environment in the genesis of health and sickness. Firstly, it is abuntantly clear that the debate is current and very much alive. This is apparent as judged by the facts that reports, editorials, and Letters to the Editors appeared as recently as 1988 in two of our most prestigious scientific publications. Nature (1 - 4) and the New England Journal of Medicine (5 - 6). Secondly, the continuing prevailing conclusion is ‘most major chronic diseases probably result from the accumulation of environmental factors over time in genetically susceptible persons.’ Hence, we are still currently unclear regarding the relative contributions of the environment and inheritance. It would be helpful to know what the nature/nurture ratio is. ObDate received Date accepted
viously, the number would dictate the direction of subsequent research efforts and clinical pursuits. Thirdly, the present conclusions are based on conventional familial models including parents and children, twins, siblings, the orphaned and adopted. Finally, the least studied matrix, with the greatest possible contribution, is spouse-likeness. This report is intended to restudy the nature/nurture argument through an examination of the simplest and least expensive familial prototype, the married couples pattern. The interest in this particular model is further heightened by the recent observations (7) in undergraduate psychology students provided with single male and female photographs of couples, freshly married and of long-standing. It is noteworthy that these inexperienced students, almost without exception, could not match newly married couples. More importantly, almost without exception, the students
8 September 1989 4 January 1990
219
220
MEDICAL HYPOTHESES
identified married couples of long-standing. This simple experiment demonstrates the old adage that couples (and even their pets) begin to look alike with time. It also encourages a harder look at the husband/wife contributions to wellness and ill-health.
Review of the literature There has been a long-standing interest in the overall problem of spouse-likeness. Laced throughout the scientific literature for the past 50 years, with two notable exceptions, are approximately 50 reports generally confirming similarities in diverse patterns of married couples. For example, Winkelstein, Sackett (8 - 1l), as well as others (12-22) have looked into the problem of family aggregation as it relates to hypertension. There has also been considerable interest by a number of investigators in carcinomatosis (23 - 30). The first of the two exceptions, Garn and his colleagues (31- 48), have provided a series of consistent, structured, and productive contributions extending over a period of approximately 20 years. They have examined weight, and weight change, urinary and blood vitamin studies (vitamin A, vitamin C, riboflavin, thiamine), serum cholesterol and triglycerides, dental caries, bone, hemaglobin hematocrit and diet (calories, calcium, protein, alcohol). It is safe to conclude that, all of these parameters correlate significantly in spouse groups. In other words, with advancing
time (length of cohabitation), come increasingly similar.
these parameters be-
Results We, the other exception, here at the University of Alabama Medical Center have also been studying familial aggregation in a group of dental practitioners and their spouses. We have published approximately 20 papers over a period of 12 years (49 - 68). The model we have employed is shown in Table 1. Two hundred sixty one couples are studied in terms of their serum cholesterol (these data are still unpublished). These same dental practitioners’ scores were compared to age and sex matched unrelated women. Finally, the two female groups were compared. This format provided us with the opportunity of raising (and hopefully answering) three questions: 1. 2.
3.
What is the relationship of serum cholseterol in married couples? How does the husband-wife correlation compare with the pattern in the husband and an age-paired unrelated female? Is the correlation a function of time?
Line 1 shows a highly statistically significant correlation of serum cholesterol (r = + 0.361, p
