
Succeeding Against the Odds Can Make You Sick - syadegari
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/sunday/why-succeeding-against-the-odds-can-make-you-sick.html?_r=0
======
majkinetor
This thing is something people observed for a long time and its totally
contextual - In "How to make stress your friend" TED talk, Kelly McGonigal
showed that people who believe that stress is damaging will actually get it
that way and vice versa.

I wonder how much of it actually boils down to chronically high cortisol
levels. People that perceive stress as harmfull are more prone to its damage
and we know that positive thoughts and meditation can negate that effect to
some degree or even produce benefits.

Knowing that effect exists is one thing, but how do we protect ourselves ?

In chronic making of cortisol adrenal gland becomes deficient in Vitamin C
which is used in the process [1]. This has direct effect on immunity (all
animals produce more vitmin C in stresfull times to protect from it). Chronic
insufficiency will not lead to scurvy (you only need tiny amount of C to
prevent that) but will produce ill health particularly combined with smoking
and bad eating habits which is typical for lower socioeconomic class (talking
about it, blacks, the most affected, are regularly deficient in vitamin D too,
another potent immunity booster).

The effect is multifactorial from that point - for example Vitamin C
insufficiency changes cholesterol transformation to bile acids which leads to
high cholesterol levels [2] which can provide some explanation for
cardiovascular events.

Insufficiency is the level that will not result in terminal disease but in
suboptimal health and shorter lifespan (i.e. RDA sux) because body will start
to utilize triage [3].

Hence, I suggest everybody to forget about 60mg bullshit and use couple of
grams of Vitamin C as few daily doses to protect from John Henryism effect.
Afterall, that is what our closest relatives who have the same disfunctinal
GULO gene - primates - do: they eat grams of C in the wild.

[1]
[http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/86/1/145.long](http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/86/1/145.long)

[2]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4685043](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4685043)

[3] [http://www.bruceames.org/Triage.pdf](http://www.bruceames.org/Triage.pdf)

~~~
chillacy
> ‘They started asking people, “how much stress have you experienced in the
> last year?”’ The doctors also probed whether participants believed that
> stress was bad for their health – and then looked at the records to see who
> died. ‘People who experienced a lot of stress in the previous year had a 43
> per cent increased risk of dying. But,’ McGonigal continues, ‘that was ONLY
> true for the people who also believed stress was also harmful for your
> health. People who experienced a lot of stress but did not view stress as
> harmful were no more likely to die – in fact, they had the lowest risk of
> dying of anyone in the study, including people who had very little stress.’

I'm not sure the causation goes in that direction. Couldn't it also be that
those who take damage from stress feel that stress is bad for them, and those
who aren't affected by stress negatively feel that it's good for them? To
throw a silly example... Vampires believe that sun is harmful, humans believe
a bit of sun is good for them. But believing won't make a difference for the
vampire.

~~~
coldtea
I thinks there's a similar, simpler, explanation:

1) People who say they don't stress 2) People who say they stress but don't
believe it's harmful 3) People who say they stress and believe it's harmful

I find the (3) group is the one actually stressing, feeling all the anxiety
etc.

The (2) group just talks about feeling stressed, but they just mean that they
had lots of responsibilities etc, they didn't suffer actual stress (the mental
issues associated with it) like the (3) group.

~~~
majkinetor
What do you mean 'I find' ? How do you find ? By observation ?

Stress has unique biochemical pattern that can be measured.

~~~
coldtea
> _What do you mean 'I find' ? How do you find ? By observation ?_

By the power of thinking. That is, by considering the provided data, and
coming up with what looks to be more plausible.

Sure, it might be wrong.

But without that ability, even the best data are useless, because data are
nothing without the interpretation part.

> _Stress has unique biochemical pattern that can be measured._

That's irrelevant, though, in this case, because they didn't measure those. As
the grandparent quotes: "They started asking people, “how much stress have you
experienced in the last year?" \-- so it's based on self-reporting.

------
divbit
TLDR (or at least what I took from it): Too much adversity produces stress
that is bad for the body in that it ages your immune system much faster than
it should.

Sounds plausible.

~~~
treyfitty
Important qualifier: (I only read up to the middle) the results were largely
associated with African American subjects.

~~~
afterburner
Yes, they kept saying the negative effects didn't happen to whites, so I'm not
sure what the takeaway here is. Life is harder for black people?

~~~
segmondy
Success is harder for black folks. If they don't leave the poorer areas they
grew up in, did they really succeed? There's an increase risk of being a
victim if you are richer than most in a poorer area. if they leave, they are
socially isolated from their comfort zone and friends, labeled a sell out,
have to conform to social norms of the new environment. In both cases friends
and relatives constantly beg for money. The worry of losing it all is very
real. Yes, life is harder for blacks in America. A black African that
succeedes in Africa doesn't have as much stress.

~~~
travmatt
This has largely been my experience.

You'd probably also be interested in "The short and Tragic Life of Robert
Peace", a young man who went from inner city poverty, to a degree in molecular
biophysics and biochemistry from Yale university, to being killed in a drug
robbery.

------
renlo
Isn't it just that people who are 'more diligent and [tend] to strive for
success' tax their bodies more by working harder? Whereas 'lazier' people tend
to give their bodies more time to recuperate? Adversity isn't the cause; it's
working to overcome adversity. Similarly, being rich doesn't make one
healther; being rich gives one more access to healthcare and the means to take
time off of work. I think the distinction is important.

~~~
trustfundbaby
True, but this is the telling bit

> The focus on black adolescents is significant. In much of this research,
> white Americans appeared somehow to be immune to the negative health effects
> that accompany relentless striving. As Dr. Brody put it when telling me
> about the Pittsburgh study, “We found this for black persons from
> disadvantaged backgrounds, but not white persons.”

~~~
autokad
I am not convinced.

they are using a person's ability to get a cold (by having it basically
sprayed in their face) as their operational definition of health.

to me this is extremely flawed. not only does past exposure play a huge role,
so does DNA, let alone other behavioral habits that may separate the groups
beyond just 'the system is against them'.

i dont know anything about who was selected in the Pittsburgh study, but being
from that area I know there is huge opportunity for ethnic selection bias even
within the 'white' group.

------
epmaybe
When I was in a course on health disparities, we referred to this phenomenon
as the "John Henry effect"

"The term was first used by Gary Saretsky (1972) to describe the behavior of
John Henry, a legendary American steel driver in the 1870s who, when he heard
his output was being compared with that of a steam drill, worked so hard to
outperform the machine he died in the process"

------
ysavir
I wonder if they confused the cause for the symptom.

Is reality that people who succeed against the odds are more likely to get
sick, or that people who get sick frequently are more likely to fight against
the odds?

------
bootload
_" The focus on black adolescents is significant. In much of this research,
white Americans appeared somehow to be immune to the negative health effects
that accompany relentless striving."_

Poverty in youth, is a predictor of future poor health outcomes. This is the
conclusion of so many Dunedin study papers. [0] An unexpected finding, the
effects of poverty are ^not^ reversed by future wealth. I can't find the
specific study for this, however another report displays another unexpected
find, _" The high-need/high-cost group of adults could be identified as young
as age 3years on the basis of their ‘brain health,’"_. [1]

While poverty is the root cause, race determines poverty, the health outcomes
are lifelong.

Reference

[0]
[http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/publications](http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/publications)

[1] [http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/news-and-
events/article/53](http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/news-and-events/article/53)

------
Nomentatus
Light. pRGCs. Remember that other research shows that conscientiousness
clearly leads to longer life. So diligence turns out to be opposite to
conscientiousness; I suspect because it leads to extended hours. If you blow
your biological clock, your whole daily hormonal cycle goes with it.

------
automatwon
_The Trump administration could do much more to damage Americans’ health than
just repeal the Affordable Care Act and leave people without access to
hospitals and medications._

And somehow they manage to tie it back to Trump

~~~
FrancoDiaz
It's the NYT. They had to find a way.

~~~
refurb
You just don't know high-quality, unbiased journalism when you see it. /s

------
phkahler
I don't see anything new here. Stress is hard on people. Those who strive to
succeed against the odds are subjecting themselves to higher stress levels.
The article seems to be trying to imply a causation that is unfounded.

------
fdsfsaa
You know what also makes you sick? A lack of professional accomplishment,
missing respect from your peers, and a general sense of purposelessness. It's
easy to look at the costs of ambition and ignore its benefits.

~~~
gicadin
The qualities you are listing affect your emotional health. The article
focuses on the physical health of the body. One does affect the other but
that's not the point of the article.

------
dstaten
"a dearth of yoga studios"

------
kirse
_Dr. James expects John Henryism can now be seen across Western democracies,
wherever people are inculcated with a Protestant sense of personal
responsibility and belief in self-reliance._

This is garbage. What actually is the source of all this unneeded suffering is
when people choose to believe the all-pervasive Western media, movie, and
music refrain that success is measured by material wealth and prosperity. The
Protestant work ethic has nothing to do with an ego-fueled, greedy striving
for material wealth at all costs.

The Protestant work ethic is centered on the notion that work is a holy
vocation, ordained by God. This belief stems back to when God placed man in
the garden of Eden to _work_ the garden (Genesis 2:15). The Protestant work
ethic is working simply for the sake of enjoying the gift of labor, which was
deemed _very good_ at the beginning. Further, the Protestant work ethic also
makes room for a Sabbath day of rest, something often foreign to American
successaholics.

Lastly, both Jesus (Mark 4:18-20) and Paul (1 Timothy 6:8-10) and Solomon
(Proverbs 23:4) make it abundantly clear the sacrifices involved with
worshiping wealth and material prosperity (i.e. the standard-issue "American
Dream")

~~~
dstaten
This is more God/Bible than I think I've ever seen on HN

~~~
throwanem
One tends to hesitate.

------
wolfspider
Just for fun I'll go ahead and translate how this article reads in my mind-
since thankfully I don't naively believe that I am of a singular race or
ascribe my personality to some form of nationalism which has only existed for
a little over 200 years (here is how we seriously talk in my house).
Monoracials continuing to divide themselves into imaginary compartments have
discovered that thinking too hard about a society of pro-inbreeding (we don't
use the word 'racist' just 'pro-inbreeding') can cause auto-immune disorders.
The antiquated pagan-but-not-pagan work ethic is what typifies the monoracial
experience as most of their life is based on overt simplifications. Just for
fun we will bring up the current political climate where most Americans have
chosen a single race for the outgoing president and have applied it's meaning
into somehow being contrary to the one born with a silver spoon in his mouth-
who happens to be very pro-inbreeding. When we look at things like pure-bred
dogs which are born with a gamut of mental problems and physical deficiencies-
its easy for any group of monoracials to say 'That's how I want to be like a
crazy pure-bred dog that's me!'. The 'Blacks' (the author doesn't specify here
if black means African, West Indian, Hispanic, Moorish, etc..) as this expert
points out are the only people worth mentioning because if you are not of a
singular race (in your head of course no one is of a singular race) than you
don't exist and nobody cares about your troubles.

~~~
RangerScience
I like the term "monoracial".

In your view, how granular is that? That is - if someone is half Italian and
half Swedish - are they monoracial?

