Aging-Related Inflammation Is Not Universal Across Human Populations. Really!

Is this perhaps a nice example of confirmation bias in scientific research? Seems so! Or shall we call it junk science?

When comparisons with indigenous people are biased! It is very popular to do such comparisons between individuals living in highly developed societies and those living in more rural, primitive conditions. The myth of the Noble Savage (since about 1670s CE) comes to mind.

Maybe the hypothesis of chronic, low-grade inflammation as a "hallmark of aging" is flawed too.

Only two indigenous populations were studied. Sorry, too few!

No mentioning at all of the shorter lifespans of the indigenous people! What a glaring omission! How many indigenous individuals live up to 100 years? Many of them don't live long enough to develop chronic, low-level inflammation with age.

Apparently, the researchers were strangely oblivious (except for briefly mentioning it) that the indigenous people were suffering from other, serious health conditions that are largely overcome by individuals living in highly developed societies.

"Inflammation, long considered a hallmark of aging, may not be a universal human experience, according to a new study by researchers ... The research suggests that "inflammaging"—chronic, low-grade inflammation associated with aging—appears to be a byproduct of industrialized lifestyles and varies significantly across global populations. The findings are published in Nature Aging ...

While the inflammaging signature was similar between the two industrialized populations, it did not hold in the Indigenous groups, where inflammation levels were largely driven by infection rather than age. ...

Key findings include:

• Approximately 66 percent of Tsimane had at least one intestinal parasitic infection; over 70 percent of Orang Asli had a prevalent infection.
• Inflammaging markers were strongly linked to chronic disease in industrialized populations, but not in Indigenous groups.
• The study challenges the assumption of universal aging biomarkers, suggesting instead that immune-aging processes are population-specific and heavily influenced by the exposome—the totality of environmental, lifestyle, and infectious exposures.

..."

From the abstract:

"Inflammaging, an age-associated increase in chronic inflammation, is considered a hallmark of aging. However, there is no consensus approach to measuring inflammaging based on circulating cytokines.

Here we assessed whether an inflammaging axis detected in the Italian InCHIANTI dataset comprising 19 cytokines could be generalized to a different industrialized population (Singapore Longitudinal Aging Study) or to two indigenous, nonindustrialized populations: the Tsimane from the Bolivian Amazon and the Orang Asli from Peninsular Malaysia.

We assessed cytokine axis structure similarity and whether the inflammaging axis replicating the InCHIANTI result increased with age or was associated with health outcomes.

The Singapore Longitudinal Aging Study was similar to InCHIANTI except for IL-6 and IL-1RA.

The Tsimane and Orang Asli showed markedly different axis structures with little to no association with age and no association with age-related diseases. Inflammaging, as measured in this manner in these cohorts, thus appears to be largely a byproduct of industrialized lifestyles, with major variation across environments and populations."

Aging-Related Inflammation Is Not Universal Across Human Populations | Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health "Environment Plays Key Role in Health Outcomes, Particularly in Industrialized Societies"

Nonuniversality of inflammaging across human populations (no public access)

How Native Americans guarded their societies against tyranny. Really!

Interesting claims about democracy among American natives preceding the Democracy in America by the Founding Fathers and Mothers.

However, is this also again glorification of the Noble Savage or romanticizing of indigenous people? Summed up in one term: wishful thinking or embellishment. 

One issue is e.g. the lack of contact with other, external powers by the Native Americans as far as we know. E.g. they did not have to worry to much about invasions until the Europeans (other than Spaniards/Portuguese) came. Nature's abundance may have also helped to reduce warfare and strife.

The article also mentions the Little Ice Age (which only ended around 1850 CE) as one of the reasons why some large civilizations declined.

"When the founders of the United States designed the Constitution, they were learning from history that democracy was likely to fail – to find someone who would fool the people into giving him complete power and then end the democracy.

They designed checks and balances to guard against the accumulation of power they had found when studying ancient Greece and Rome. But there were others in North America who had also seen the dangers of certain types of government and had designed their own checks and balances to guard against tyranny: the Native Americans.

Although most Americans today don’t know it, there were large centralized civilizations across much of North America in the 10th through 12th centuries. They built massive cities and grand irrigation projects across the continent. Twelfth-century Cahokia, on the banks of the Mississippi River, had a central city about the size of London at the time. The sprawling 12th-century civilization of the Huhugam had several cities of more than 10,000 people and a total population of perhaps 50,000 in the Southwestern desert. ...

In the 13th century, though, a global cooling trend began, which has been called the Little Ice Age. In part because of that cooling, large-scale farming became more difficult, and these large civilizations struggled to feed their people. Elites began hoarding wealth. The people wanted change. ...

As they formed these new and more dispersed societies, the people who had overthrown or fled the great cities and their too powerful leaders sought to avoid mesmerizing leaders who made tempting promises in difficult times. So they designed complex political structures to discourage centralization, hierarchy and inequality and encourage shared decision-making.

These societies intentionally created balanced power structures. For example, the oral history [???] of the Osage Nation records that it once had one great chief who was a military leader, but its council of elder spiritual leaders, known as the “Little Old Men,” decided to balance that chief’s authority with that of another hereditary chief, who would be responsible for keeping peace.

Another way some societies balanced power was through family-based clans. Clans communicated and cooperated across multiple towns. They could work together to balance the power of town-based chiefs and councils.

An ideal of leadership

Many of these societies required convening all of the people – men, women and children – for major political, military, diplomatic and land-use decisions. Hundreds or even thousands might show up, depending on how momentous the decision was.

They strove for consensus, though they didn’t always achieve it. In some societies, it was customary for the losing side to quietly leave the meeting if they couldn’t bring themselves to agree with the others. ..."

How Native Americans guarded their societies against tyranny

How Native Americans guarded their societies against tyranny. Really!

Another noble savage story?

Did the French explorer La Salle even understand the native languages? Maybe in these "important meetings" they were discussing the next wedding or a festival or some other trivial matter.

How peaceful were the Native Americans really? How much do we really know about their warfare or lack thereof among each other?

"... These societies intentionally created balanced power structures. For example, the oral history of the Osage Nation records that it once had one great chief who was a military leader, but its council of elder spiritual leaders, known as the “Little Old Men,” decided to balance that chief’s authority with that of another hereditary chief, who would be responsible for keeping peace. ...

The Haudenosaunee Great Law holds a royaner to a high standard: “The thickness of their skin shall be seven spans – which is to say that they shall be proof against anger, offensive actions and criticism. Their hearts shall be full of peace and good will.” In council, “all their words and actions shall be marked by calm deliberation.” ...

The French explorer La Salle in 1678 noted with admiration of the Haudenosaunee that “in important meetings, they discuss without raising their voices and without getting angry.” ..."

How Native Americans guarded their societies against tyranny

From Confederate general to Cherokee heritage: Why returning the name Kuwohi to the Great Smoky Mountains matters. Really!

Oh what an ideological nonsense! What an arbitrary move!

The myth and worship of the Noble Savage continues!

Why don't we restore the name that the stone age people used? Oh, we do not have this name.

Or how often did indigenous people rename places? Should we not undo that as well? Oh, we lack records for that.

"It’s not every day that the name of a mountain is restored to the one used by Indigenous peoples for centuries. ...

Though known as Kuwohi by the Cherokee people for hundreds of years, explorer Arnold Guyot effectively ignored that history after he surveyed the mountain range in 1859. Guyot named the peak “Clingmans Dome” after his friend Thomas Lanier Clingman, a North Carolina U.S. senator and a Confederate brigadier general during the Civil War. Clingman never set foot on this mountain, but his name remained there for 165 years until now. ...

What is place name repatriation?

The government’s renaming of the mountain to Kuwohi is a significant example of place name repatriation, or the return of an original, Indigenous name to a particular place or landscape. ..."

From Confederate general to Cherokee heritage: Why returning the name Kuwohi to the Great Smoky Mountains matters

Great Smoky Mountains National Park

Indigenous Communities around the world Reclaim Health to break the cycles of historical trauma caused by colonization. Really!

As if indigenous peoples never were colonizers themselves!

This colonization propaganda and demagoguery is so annoying!

The Noble Savage stereotype is tiring and naive!

"Indigenous partners from around the globe are using their communal strengths to break the cycles of historical trauma caused by colonization—and improve health outcomes in their communities.

 

Since December 2022, a group including people from First Nations, Canada; Aboriginal peoples from Australia; the Māori peoples from Aotearoa (New Zealand); and Indigenous hosts from the southwestern U.S., and Johns Hopkins Center for Indigenous Health have been collaborating. ..."

Global Health NOW: Egypt Builds on Hep C Success; Indigenous Communities Reclaim Health; and ‘Thousands of Little Virus Factories’

‘We Are All Connected’ Indigenous peoples are overcoming centuries of colonization by reclaiming the health of children and families.

Canada under Prime Minister Trudeau is paying huge restitution/reparations to indigenous people

Of course, Trudeau does this not directly, but disguised as lavish negotiated settlements of class action lawsuits! Very clever!

Americans watch out! This might already be happening or this approach will be copied in the U.S.!

The road to hell is paved with good intentions! It is a perversion to believe that reparations/restitutions for human rights violations in the past is a form of justice. Most of these demands are utter nonsense and excessive. Indigenous people wer no saints either as the demagogues want us to believe! The Noble Savage is a myth! And where does this end? Whenever the demagogues are satisfied? These kind of demands serve mainly to create discord within Western societies!

"Despite the large federal budget deficits and mounting debt, the explosive growth of Indigenous spending is expected to continue – and it's being driven largely by settlement payouts.

A new Fraser Institute study out today finds that federal Indigenous spending rose from about $11.5 billion in 2015/16 to $25 billion in 2021/22 — and will reach a projected $35.5 billion in 2026/27!
Negotiated settlements of class action lawsuits, including the recent $40 billion child welfare settlement, comprise much of this increase. ..."

Indigenous Spending in Budget 2022