Babies Who Get Cuddled More Seem to Have Their Genetics Changed For Years Afterwards

[Judi Lynn]

DAVID NIELD 8 FEB 2019

The amount of close and comforting contact that young infants get doesn't just keep them warm, snug, and loved.

A 2017 study says it can actually affect babies at the molecular level, and the effects can last for years.

Based on the study, babies who get less physical contact and are more distressed at a young age, end up with changes in molecular processes that affect gene expression.

The team from the University of British Columbia in Canada emphasises that it's still very early days for this research, and it's not clear exactly what's causing the change.

More:
https://www.sciencealert.com/cuddling-babies-alters-genetics-dna-for-years

[dweller]

1. well

duh ...

so glad to see a study that shows benevolent loving human contact has a positive beneficiary expression upon well being ...

well, duh ...

✌🏼️

[mr_lebowski]

2. I'd think that this is potentially pretty dang important scientifically ...

If this can cause changes that can later be passed to baby's young when they grow up, it means an alternate form of evolution apart from simple natural selection becomes something that would have to be considered as viable.

Very interesting either way, however ...

[eppur_se_muova]

8. It's known as "epigenetics", and involves switching genes on and off in repsonse to ...

... the environment. So it is a form of natural selection, but more subtle and complicated than the simple death/propagation mode of selection. Appreciation of these effects is relatively recent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

[mr_lebowski]

9. I remember there was a person famous for suggesting it's a possibility ... I think in the 30s/40s?

And IIRC he was basically shamed out of scientific community for his heresy, more or less.

Personally I've always thought the possibility was perfectly reasonable to explore, and maybe even likely true. Why would genes HAVE to be immutable from birth? Wouldn't it be a tremendous potential advantage for any organism to have it's genes be directly impacted by the environment, with information passed along to it's young? Obviously there'd be very strict limits in any one generation scenario, but ... yeah. Why not?

[eppur_se_muova]

11. Lamarck had a theory of inheritance of acquired characteristics ... it was not quite that simple ...

Lamarckism (or Lamarckian inheritance) is the hypothesis that an organism can pass on characteristics that it has acquired through use or disuse during its lifetime to its offspring. It is also known as the inheritance of acquired characteristics or soft inheritance. It is inaccurately[1][2] named after the French biologist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744–1829), who incorporated the action of soft inheritance into his evolutionary theories as a supplement to his concept of orthogenesis, a drive towards complexity. The theory is cited in textbooks to contrast with Darwinism. This paints a false picture of the history of biology, as Lamarck did not originate the idea of soft inheritance, which was known from the classical era onwards, and it was not the primary focus of Lamarck's theory of evolution. Further, in On the Origin of Species (1859), Charles Darwin supported the idea of "use and disuse inheritance", though rejecting other aspects of Lamarck's theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarckism

WARNING: Discussion of this topic risks wandering into the mire of varied and/or conflicting definitions and interpretations. It can get quite hairsplitting.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

3. Wow.

I'm not really surprised. I cuddled and comforted my two babies, and while it's not possible to figure out what they would have been without that cuddling, I'm convinced the close contact made a difference.

We humans are predicated on love and comfort. And even though we can survive without such love and comfort, it seems obvious to the most casual observer that the love and comfort really matters.

You cannot possibly go wrong giving closeness and comfort to your babies.

I'm remembering my early days as a brand new mother, now more than 36 years ago. I knew that when my baby cried he needed me. He needed me to hold him and comfort him and to wordlessly let him know he was taken care of. Those who advocate letting a baby cry it out need to think about this: If you were somewhere alone and called out for comfort, would you think it even remotely acceptable NOT to be responded to? Would you think it perfectly ok that you call and call and call and not receive any response? Really? Okay, then. I'll put you in a hospital and between the hours of 7pm and 6 am your calls are not answered. Period. Because that's what you're advocating for infants. And do NOT try to explain that it's different for you. Because it's not. Either you respond to a call for help or you don't.

I can only speak from my personal experience, which I know is anecdotal, but I know that responding to my infant's cries and needs mattered. I could reassure him when he needed reassurance. He learned that the world was a safe place, not an insecure one, not one that denied his basic needs, which is what the "let him cry it out" version says.

It really shouldn't take research to support this.

[mr_lebowski]

10. "Mattering", and "Mattering at the GENETIC level" are really two different things ...

This is not just 'contact influences baby's psychological development', but rather their GENES, potentially.

That is a huge and revolutionary advancement in biological understanding if it turns out to be confirmed.

Not arguing with your points, to be clear

[Laffy Kat]

4. Who wouldn't cuddle a baby at every chance?

This seems like a no-brainer to me.

[LakeSuperiorView]

7. Holding babies drains away your own stress

My theory is that while young, humans are stress batteries -they can store up all of your stress.

But they lose that capacity when they become teenagers and discharge it back, sometimes with interest.

[pansypoo53219]

5. not sure i liked being cuddled much. since i potty trained myself + dressed myself around 1.

no idea how well.

[democratisphere]

6. Nothing like the power of love and kindness.