Interpersonal-level discrimination indices, sociodemographic factors, and telomere length in African-Americans and Whites

Abstract

Objective: Studies have linked self-reported discrimination to telomere attrition, a biological marker of accelerated cellular aging. However, it is unknown whether intersections between social categories—race, socioeconomic status (SES), sex, and age—influence the association of varying forms of discrimination with telomere length. We examined these associations in a socioeconomically and racially/ethnically diverse urban sample. Methods: Cross-sectional data were from 341 middle-aged (30–64 years) African American and White, community participants in the Healthy Aging in Neighborhoods of Diversity across the Life Span Study (HANDLS). Multiple regression models examined up to 3-way interactions between a discrimination measure (i.e., everyday, racial, gender, lifetime burden, and frequency of discrimination across sources) and two social categories. Results: After adjusting for depressive symptoms, waist circumference, and lifetime substance use, two themes emerged: 1) among women with higher SES, a) greater lifetime discrimination burden (b = −0.23, p = .011), gender discrimination (b = −0.29, p = .040), and racial discrimination (b = −0.24, p = 0.023) and 2) among younger adults, irrespective of race and sex, greater frequency of discrimination across sources (b = 0.002, p = .008) was associated with shorter telomeres. Conclusions: Irrespective of race, women with higher SES and younger adults reporting greater discrimination may be at particular risk for accelerated aging. Telomere attrition promotes and accelerates chronic health conditions for which there are health disparities. Future research explicating intersections among specific discrimination indices and social categories is warranted.

Racial discrimination and telomere shortening among African Americans: The Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) Study.

“…Another study of African American midlife men reported an interactive effect between racial discrimination and implicit in-group racial bias, with those reporting high levels of racial discrimination and holding an anti-Black bias having the shortest LTL, although there was no main effect of racial discrimination (Chae et al, 2014). These and other cross-sectional studies provide suggestive evidence that racial discrimination may have detrimental consequences for telomere shortening (Beatty Moody et al, 2019; Pantesco et al, 2018).…”

“…Another study of African American midlife men reported an interactive effect between racial discrimination and implicit in-group racial bias, with those reporting high levels of racial discrimination and holding an anti-Black bias having the shortest LTL, although there was no main effect of racial discrimination . These and other cross-sectional studies provide suggestive evidence that racial discrimination may have detrimental consequences for telomere shortening (Beatty Moody et al, 2019;Pantesco et al, 2018). Some studies on race and telomere length have found no racial differences in telomere length or in fact longer telomeres among African Americans compared to Whites, likely due to pressures stemming from selection bias over time (Hamad, Tuljapurkar, & Rehkopf, 2016).…”

The associations of socioeconomic status with incident dementia and Alzheimer’s disease are modified by leucocyte telomere length: a population-based cohort study

“…A study of n = 1,026 found that higher parental SES was associated with 1.8% longer TL among newborn boys 20 . Another cross sectional study of n = 341 mixed race participants found that younger adults with higher burden of discrimination (race and sex) had shorter TL, while similar associations were reported among female from higher SES strata 21 . A recent longitudinal study of n = 1,031 participants from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) reported that improvements in neighbourhood-level SES were protective on the rate of telomere attrition 22 .…”

Race and other sociodemographic categories are differentially linked to multiple dimensions of interpersonal-level discrimination: Implications for intersectional, health research

“…A current gap regarding interpersonal-level discrimination research is that this multidimensional construct is traditionally assessed through emphasis on one aspect or domain of discriminatory experiences [15]. Specifically, while some research does assess several dimensions concurrently [e.g., [16][17][18][19][20][21], most research characterizing discrimination has not considered multiple facets of interpersonal discriminatory acts in a comprehensive manner, including their types (e.g., generic versus status specific [race-or gender-related]), context (e.g., workplace, court setting), frequency (e.g., daily, lifetime), form of threat (e.g., socio-emotional, physical), explicitness (e.g., covert versus overt), and consequences (e.g., posed obstacles, blocked opportunities). This is a particular limitation in descriptive discrimination research.…”