The wellness industry is strongly focused on biological “clocks.” These tools estimate how old you are biologically—not in calendar years, but in terms of your body’s actual health—by analyzing samples such as blood, saliva, or cheek cells.
Lifestyle Changes Linked to a Younger Biological Age
Research into biological clocks suggests that a broad range of lifestyle changes may help keep people biologically “younger,” including supplements, better sleep habits, diet adjustments, certain medications, cultural activities, and regular exercise.
All these sources of youthfulness become significantly harder to access when people are under financial pressure or affected by other forms of social marginalization.
And, as emerging research indicates, this lack of access affects whole populations and may start as early as childhood.
Socioeconomic Status and Biological Aging in Epigenetic Clocks
A new study finds that lower socioeconomic status, and potentially racial or ethnic marginalization, is consistently associated with accelerated biological aging, a pattern that is especially pronounced in the latest generation of epigenetic clocks.
To be clear, these are not literal clocks. They are tools for interpreting patterns of molecular changes in DNA to estimate a person’s biological age and how closely it aligns with a standard “typical” aging pattern.
Someone whose biological aging appears slower on an epigenetic clock may look younger than their chronological age, while someone with faster biological aging may develop age-related health conditions earlier than expected.
It is already well established that socioeconomic status and experiences of racism are major determinants of health. Numerous studies have shown that people living in poverty tend to have shorter lifespans and experience earlier onset of disease.
Structural inequalities linked to racial or ethnic identity can produce similar effects and frequently intersect with experiences of poverty.
Epigenetic Clock Study on Socioeconomic and Racial Health Disparities
The new study, carried out by researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Human Development in Germany and Columbia University in the United States, aimed to evaluate how effectively epigenetic clocks can detect these relationships.
By combining data from 140 previously published studies and including nearly 66,000 participants in total, the researchers tested three different generations of epigenetic clocks.
The impact of poverty on biological aging was most clearly detected by the newest generation of clocks, rather than earlier models that were mainly built to estimate chronological age.
Second-generation clocks place greater emphasis on health outcomes and mortality risk, while third-generation clocks—the most recent—aim to measure the rate of aging at the epigenetic level.
The large dataset spanned 23 countries and included individuals ranging in age from 0 to 86 years.
Early Emergence of Socioeconomic Effects on Biological Aging in Children
By examining children separately, the researchers also observed that the effects of low socioeconomic status emerge early, with children from poorer backgrounds tending to show faster biological aging than those from more affluent families.
However, the authors note that pediatric estimates may be less accurate and may reflect both aging and development because researchers trained these clocks on adults with different blood composition and no active developmental programs. They therefore advise interpreting pediatric estimates cautiously.
Even so, adults who grew up in lower socioeconomic conditions also showed a faster rate of aging than those raised in wealthier households, reinforcing the strong influence of economic status on health outcomes.
Biological Aging Differences Across Racial and Ethnic Groups
To examine whether these patterns also applied to racially or ethnically marginalized groups, the researchers conducted two analyses using US cohorts: one comparing biological aging between White and Black individuals, and another between White and Latinx individuals.
In both comparisons, White individuals showed slower biological aging, with the largest gap observed between Black and White participants. Third-generation epigenetic clock data most clearly detected these racial disparities.
“We identified signs of publication bias for some clocks in the race and ethnicity findings; however, interpretation should be cautious due to substantial heterogeneity,” the authors note.
They add that racism interacts with socioeconomic disadvantage and other health risks, producing complex patterns. The effect sizes were larger for racial and ethnic disparities than for socioeconomic status differences. However, studies that rely on self-reported race and ethnicity cannot fully capture structural or individual-level racism, such as segregation or discrimination.
Understanding that epigenetic clocks can capture these effects—and which versions do so most accurately—allows researchers to apply them in future studies.
They may even help identify which interventions are most successful in promoting more equitable health outcomes.
Read the original article on: Sciencealert
Read more: Midjourney has introduced an AI-powered body scanning feature