While predicting one’s lifespan is impossible, prioritizing lifestyle and environment over genetics can increase the likelihood of a long and healthy life. This is the key finding of a study published in Nature Medicine, which leans heavily towards the influence of environment in the nature versus nurture debate.
The study utilized data from over 490,000 participants in the , a comprehensive database containing detailed medical information such as gene sequencing, MRIs, blood, urine, and saliva samples, and family health histories. Researchers analyzed this extensive data to determine the impact of genetics and over 100 environmental variables on the risk of 22 major diseases contributing to the leading causes of death.
The study especially scrutinized a group of 45,000 individuals whose blood samples underwent proteomic profiling, an analysis of thousands of proteins that help assess physical age in relation to chronological age.
According to lead author Austin Argentieri, a research fellow at Massachusetts General Hospital, proteomic profiling allows researchers to estimate an individual’s biological aging rate relative to their actual age. The difference between protein-predicted age and chronological age, known as the “proteomic age gap,” is a strong indicator of mortality and is closely linked to significant aging traits like frailty and cognitive function.
Identifying the age gap is just the first step; understanding its cause is crucial. Researchers examined various environmental and behavioral exposures, including income, neighborhood, employment status, marital status, education, diet, smoking habits, and exercise frequency, to determine their contribution to disease and biological age.
On the genetic front, researchers analyzed participants’ genomes for genetic markers associated with the 22 key diseases and noted any pre-existing conditions.
The results revealed that environment and lifestyle accounted for 17% of the risk of dying from disease, whereas genetics only accounted for 2%. Smoking was identified as the riskiest behavior, linked to 21 diseases, while socioeconomic factors like income, neighborhood, and employment status were associated with 19 diseases, and a lack of physical activity with 17. Environmental factors significantly impacted lung, heart, and liver disease, while genetics primarily influenced the risk of breast, ovarian, and prostate cancers, as well as dementia.
The study also indicated that environmental influences begin early in life, with high or low body weight at age 10 and maternal smoking during pregnancy affecting health and mortality decades later.
Researchers also examined factors that reduce the risk of death from chronic diseases, finding that having a partner, being employed, and financial stability significantly extended lifespan.
Cornela van Duijn, professor of epidemiology at Oxford Population Health, stated in a accompanying the paper’s release that their research highlights the significant impact of modifiable exposures on health, whether through individual choices or policies aimed at improving socioeconomic conditions, reducing smoking, or promoting physical activity.
The researchers plan to continue their work by further investigating factors such as diet, exposure to new pathogens like COVID-19 and bird flu, and environmental elements like plastics and pesticides, which they believe are potentially significant but understudied influences on lifespan.
