Biologically Inherited PTSD?
by: Dave Belden on December 28th, 2010 | 11 Comments »
It should be impossible, shouldn’t it? But now it’s looking possible and some researchers think they have found evidence of it.
A major milestone in the development of evolutionary science was the defeat of the idea held by evolution’s first great theorist, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744 – 1829), that offspring could inherit the characteristics that their parents had acquired during their lifetimes. This was before it was worked out that biological inheritance works through genes and the language of DNA. While your DNA can be damaged, there is nothing you and your mate can do to otherwise change the genes you pass on to your biological kids. So if you learn to live in the desert or play the violin, you can teach the desert or violin skills to your kids but they won’t inherit them. “Lamarckism” became a major heresy in evolutionary science.
There is a great deal of hope and comfort in this for anyone who has lived through the worst that humans can do to each other: war, genocide, famine, prison, or other horrors. At least your kids can get a fresh start, if you can raise them somewhere safe. Yes, your own fears and trauma will inevitably be transmitted to them in some ways, but that will happen culturally, not, thank goodness, biologically. Biologically they will be a blank slate.
Now it appears it is not as simple as that.
In the summer of 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon. Although the conflict lasted less than four months, it is notorious for the massacre of hundreds of civilian refugees in Beirut by Lebanese militias, while the Israeli army stood by. Some of the returning Israeli soldiers developed post-traumatic stress disorder, suffering nightmares and flashbacks about what they had seen. When Zahava Solomon, an epidemiologist with the Israeli army, examined the figures, she found that PTSD rates were highest in one particular group: those whose parents had survived the Holocaust in Europe during the second world war.
Publishing her finding in 1988, Solomon suggested that the children of Holocaust survivors might have learned this vulnerability through hearing their parents’ stories of what had happened to them. Twenty years on, neuroscientist Rachel Yehuda has a different explanation: their predisposition to PTSD was determined even before they knew who their parents were, when they were still in the womb.
Yehuda, who directs the Traumatic Stress Studies Division of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City, is one of a growing number of researchers who think that our response to stress is shaped early in life, sometimes even in the womb. Those effects don’t change the genes we inherit, but they do alter their activity, via so-called epigenetic mechanisms. This can determine our risk of mental illness in later life – not only PTSD but perhaps also depression, anxiety and other conditions.
The quote is from an article in the New Scientist that looks like it’s only available to subscribers but inevitably someone has already posted it all on their blog, here.
Epigenetics covers the whole question of how the genes are expressed. If the genes are instructions, if I understand this right, they are less like ones that say “always do this” and more like ones that say “in condition a, do this; in condition b, do that, etc.” What happens in the womb is not just a matter of the DNA, but of the conditions the mother provides.
The findings about people whose parents lived through the Holocaust of course concerned people who were already adult. New studies of the children of women who were pregnant and living at or near the World Trade Center during the 9/11 horror began at an early enough age to identify that the babies’ chemistry was already somewhat damaged (lower cortisol levels). I won’t try to summarize it all.
What does this mean for healing and repairing the world? We are more familiar with the idea that pregnant woman’s diet may affect her foetus’ development. In an article in today’s New York Times, about medical journalist Annie Murphy Paul’s new book “Origins: How the Nine Months Before Birth Shape the Rest of Our Lives” (Free Press), Paul is quoted saying that her biggest critics
… have not been scientists but “ordinary women who say that this is going to make women more anxious and that you’re adding to the burden that pregnant women already feel.”
“My answer to them is that the research is real, it’s happening and we are going to keep hearing about it,” Ms. Paul said. “We are in a kind of ‘worst of all worlds’ now, with women bombarded by these sensationalized messages from the media. If we can learn more about it and see the big picture, that is better than the other options: ignoring it or dismissing it or letting scare tactics drive us crazy.”
My hope is that while it is one kind of comfort to imagine one’s children are a blank slate, there may be a different kind of comfort in the idea that they are not. For one thing, if they do grow up more susceptible to stress, it wasn’t all the way you raised them (not that it ever is, anyway, but a lot more blame gets laid at parents’ doors than at wider elements in society). For another, every time we learn something about the way people really are, it helps us to both have empathy for each other and to work out how to guide ourselves into what we want to be.
If we humans really are hardwired for war and domination, then we have to socialize ourselves very differently than if we really are primarily hardwired for cooperation and empathy (even if obviously more than capable of war of domination in certain circumstances). (The italics are to mark how little we really know yet about what we really are, but it is ever clearer that we are not simply blank slates at birth, and you don’t have to agree with all Steven Pinker’s political opinions to accept that).
Every time we learn more about what we really are like, we have more hope of healing.
Sorry, Dave, this is the kind of “research” that is spurious and actually belongs like most social “science” in the realm of pseudo-science, in my view. We haven’t come close to understanding the tremendous potenial of human beingness, in all its complex interaction of biochemistry and pschological development.
Yet we allow studies such as these (completely contradicted by the studies of children from England starved and traumatized in and out of the womb the ravages of World War II) to allow us to continue to reduce the amazinga nd multifaceted lifelong learning and growth and development potential of NORMAL human capacity by explaining (actually “blaming”) normal human emotions (such as aggression) to trauma in the womb.
The holocaust enduring psychiatriatrsist (and fully devloped human being) Victor Frankl was often asked about his opinion after almost a hundred years of practice with some of the most vulnerable human beings of the twentieth century, about whether children could be born “bad seed” .
The good doctor wrote in the Journal of Existential Psychology in the late sixties an essay entitled “The Frail Flower” in which he stated unequivocably that from his experiential knowledge and observations of hundreds of people needing healing, many presenting in extreme distress, that he had met only one in his lifetime of practice that could even possibly be considered to have been born a “frail flower” (he disliked the term “bad seed). Even in that instance he was certain that it was not in fact the case that the child was born frail, but rather that the he himself did not have sufficient knowledge to understand the combination of factors that led to the disordered behaviors that were harmful.
There is no question but that we are complex beings with active dynamic receptive biochemistry that can be influenced even in the womb by events that surround us. However until we actualize our lifelong potential to grow and to develop and until we begin to recognize that we are incapable of understanding the true risks benefit ratio for any one person, because of the amazing capacity for protective compensation and healing genes we too often damage in life outside the womb from social darwinism and extreme unctiousness that cripples through focus on magnifying potential weaknesses instead of developing compensatory strengths…we will continue to stumble along claiming we are contrubuting to the storehouse of human capacity building rinstead of drastically and brutally limiting it.
It is normal (and amazing) for people to have a range and capacity of emotions that include aggression, attraction, affection, altruism, selfprotection, affinity, autonomy and their multifarious ilk. These types of expressions of FEELING and SENSINg also are expressed in physiological range of expression and inhibition which is determined in the main by socialization comboned with temperament. However, we have the unfortunate shortsightedness and extreme hubris to assert causation and usually limitation to the development of balance, harmony and optmal interfunctionings of humans to genetic predetermination when in fact our primary enculturation is the lead and our biochemistry , not a geneological “mapquest” follows.
Of course we are not blank slates but we are also not doomed by our physiology. As social beings it is critical that we developas beings who mature in ALL of our capacities and develop them as agents who are both independent and interdependent in societies which do not bludgeon us into enforced , capitulating homogeneity but rather encourage diversity in harmony.
Yes, as a psychotherapist, I have seen the heritages of past generations’ traumas in the form of various anxieties and depressions and am convinced that the study of epigenetics is shedding new light on how these are “inherited”. We now know that how genes express is influenced by environmental conditions and that intergenerational patterns are set up by events taking place in a particular generation. Our deterministic understanding of genetics has blinded us to the Native American wisdom that necessitated consideration of impact of decisions for the “seventh generation.” How sad that we are living in a corporate society that doesn’t look even past the next quarter’s monetary profits.
I believe that how ‘genes vs. experience’ determines our fate, is beyond our realistic sphere of ultimate influence. Don’t forget the ‘higher powers’ of the universe that have always outwitted any human accomplishments when Chance (Fate or Nature….) simply changed circumstances (or genes), and turned everything we’d done to dust. Like volcanoes that actually determine landmasses and history, they outdo anything we can accomplish on large scales. (Are volcanos, then, ‘good for us’ or not? As is the weather: ‘good’ for some creatures, ‘bad’ for others at any given time. ‘Good’, long-term? How do we really measure?)
My wish is that all of us devote more time and thought to our close relationships no matter what, and to local living conditions. They seem to be the only things ultimately in our hands as humans, albeit, also with sad limitations, and great demands on our energies and abilities.
I notice that when we concern ourselves so much with ‘global’ issues, we lose sight of what’s dearest of all: human intimacy and interdependence and the immense power that has to determine the quality and worth of our lives on earth. (Can we really ‘multi-task’ on so many vast levels……? Is that not taking on more than we humans can deal with?)
I’m saddened by the burden we’ve taken on ourselves to ‘save the earth’ and ‘heal mankind’, instead of focusing more on healing local, closer-to-home issues——- because it’s only there that we actually can have deep, authentic satisfaction from our efforts and our lives. It’s particularly sad because even in our smallest, closest circles we find ourselves as much ‘lost’ in confusion as in the universal issues……
“In the summer of 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon. Although the conflict lasted less than four months, it is notorious for the massacre of hundreds of civilian refugees in Beirut by Lebanese militias, while the Israeli army stood by”
—————————————————————————————————————————————————
David, I think the a basic premise of the article has to be corrected here. The trauma in Lebanon did not start with the 1982 Israeli invasion, annd did not last only 4 months.. It started in 1975 when a horrific civil war erupted between the Christian Phalange and the Muslim militias/PLO. Lebanese Christians and Muslims endured multiple massacres (Tel Zaatar and Damaur). Over 50,000 died even before the Israeli army set foot in Lebanon in 1982. What Israel stepped into was a bloodied, chaotic country which had not resolved its deep divide. We see that divide hiding under the carpet of Lebanon’s so called Cedar Revolution.
I spent over 9 months in Lebanon as an Israeli soldier over a period of 2 years.. In my 2nd time serving, I witnessed the brutality of the factional hatred when hostilities broke out between the Druze militias and the Phalange I saw instances where villages were shelled indiscriminately by both factions in the Shouf Mountains. I saw fighters go off to battle in the morning and return home in the evening as if it were a
9-5 job. The only way to stop both sides was to issue warning shots over their respective headquarters.. When the IDF finally left the area, all out war broke out.
Making the focus of the study the Israel’s 1982 invasion is a simple attempt to politicize scientific research. Israel should not be made the only whipping boy for PTSD in Lebanon as it was not the cause of Lebanon’s bloody past.
If you want to produce an accurate study, one has to start with an honest premise. This premise is as dishonest as they come and that’s not because I think that Israel is blameless.
Mr Stein,
Thanks for bringing in your own personal experience of the Lebanese war. It brings more perspective to the topic. War and trauma; ethnic hatred and trauma; political power struggles and trauma; so many people suffer so much. The conflicts are never resolved with war, and I pray only that we humans use our intelligence, knowledge and wisdom to find better ways to deal with life’s pain and challenges.
Greater then the sum of ones parts – Science can give one a some what basic understanding – Of ones chemical reactions – But simply forget – Man – Woman – Creatures on this planet – Life is Greater then the sum of ones basics parts.
Now is it really a bad thing? Ones genes have been created one to have anziety?
Survival!!! Is what these creation are for – when one has these basic survival genes – and sees – a situation thats goes against them – or do the situation – what these genes have created with-in one self for suvival – then ones soul is harmed – “The greater sum” – Then a massive conflict is there by created – Take the story of the tax guy – Knowing it was wrong and asked for forgiveness – knowing he had sinned – but the rabbi – proclaimed How great he was – not knowing he did wrong .
Another simple example – Look at the neo-conners – Bush Cheney – They are good at running there mouths – how tough – how great they are – and what they can do – But those who actually – do – are the ones that get conflicts of knowing – THIS IS WRONG – but to go back and live in the system – They must say it’s alright – was good not bad – thus PTSD.
But if you look at those who don’t know it’s wrong – are liken unto a simple mouth runner – who are liken unto a bully – until they actually meet – on a battle field – Then they cower away – go get drunk and beat there wifes.
Science can give you a basic understanding – but it can not see the sum of the Greater Part.
Shirea,
Much more important than my own personal experience is the need to offer a more accurate premise to this study. Israeli entered into a country that had already been traumatized for 7 years under a brutal civil war. The scars of war were already well establsihed. 4 months of war in 1982 was just a small contribution to the cause of PTSD for a generation of Muslims, Christians and Druze in Lebanon
It is important to at least try not to politicize science. We see that happening with stem cell research and with global warming data. It is also imperative not to fall into the old Cartesian “mind/body” duality of nature versus nurture. Rather, it is a combination of both with studies showing quite conclusively that epigenetic phenomena do modify the way gene expression occurs. While Darwin trumped Lamarck, the later is having an important resurgence in the recognition of environmental influences. I wish I could quote the incredible recent study of how a community, beset with periods over centuries of either feast or famine manifested in grandchildren and great-grandchildren the effects of the experience of the grandparents and great-grandparents in ways previously thought genetically impossible. We certainly see the effects of the Holocaust on the third and fourth generation in ways not explicable by psychological factors alone.
Sheldon.
There have been studies of children of Holocaust survivors. I think that focus wa not how they were wired, but more the fact they were casuaties of the child rearing environment created by the victims.
Being a child or a young adult fighting for suvival in a death camp would most certainly effect how they are raised. I had such a friend, and the way I would discribe his household was emotionally charged.
I have good news! there is a cure for PTSD. It is not a conventional one.
From my childhood, I had some PTSD. Then as my marriage was comng to an end, the PTSD got much worse, from being screamed at every day.
I had to be willing to try anything to get relief, in order to find the cure for me.
It was, EMC2, also known as Sanctuary, created by Stephen Lewis, MD. that cured me. Starting with the second two weeks on this program, I was experiencing extreme PTSD; as is always true with holistic healing, I was retracing in order to get cured. It was so bad that I was not able to sleep at night for two weeks. And then, suddenly, it was completely gone. I can now recall former painful events, by choice, but the horrible emotion attached to them is gone. I no longer have flashbacks.
I freely recommend this program to anyone.
Good luck to any and all who have suffered from this condition.
All i wanted to know is if it was possible to be in womb and have ptsd years later. You see my mother had a daughter before me but died during birth, back in those days Dr’s suggested the best thing to do was to get pregnant straight away again. Then comes me only 11mths between me and the first child. Is is possible that during the pregnancy obviously my mother would have been down, paranoid (of it happening again), depressed etc but instead of her having physical symptoms they were felt by me for the full 40wks. You see i have all the above symptoms they really started rearing there head with i turned 15. Since then when i have had a big event in my life mainly relationship separation i have become very depressed and paraniod etc there is no family history of depression etc i am the first and no one understands. So my question is, is it possible that the ptsd was passed thru to me during my mothers pregnancy? It is a very long stretch but one i believe in cause realistically its the only thing (answer) that makes sense to me for my condition.