How to do things with epigenetics: An investigation into the use of metaphors to promote alternative approaches to health and social science, and their implications for interdisciplinary collaboration

Abstract

Epigenetics is a multifaceted field within genetics and genomics which focuses on discovering mechanisms involved in gene expression and regulation. It came to public attention around the turn of the millennium when the human genome began to be deciphered. Initial findings from epigenetics research held the promise of changing how we think about health and illness, evolution and heredity; speculations about how individuals and populations could begin to control such processes through epigenetics were then picked up in the public realm. In this article we concentrate on two normally distant domains within the public sphere: the advertising of alternative health products and services, and the promotion of alternative approaches to social science, especially around how social science deals with the ‘biosocial’. Using insights from social representations theory and methods aligned with metaphor analysis, we investigate the meanings of epigenetics rooted in the use of metaphors and commonplaces that are circulating in current popular parlance and that are used to promote academic theories and ideas as well as tangible products and services. We compare and contrast them and assess their implications for collaborations between natural and social scientists. Our findings reveal some surprising similarities between the metaphors and commonplaces used by advertisers and social scientists, based in large part on the fact that both groups draw on the work of prominent epigeneticists. In both instances some fundamental tenets of mainstream biology are contested, and hopes are created for improving individual or population well-being through the manipulation of epigenetic mechanisms. Both domains share some misunderstandings of epigenetics that might lead to problems with interdisciplinary collaborations between social and natural scientists.

Communicating science: epigenetics in the spotlight

“…Another study of British and American radio coverage of epigenetics found it to be couched in language as deterministic as for genetics research [ 13 ]. While social scientists have themselves put forth social representations of epigenetics strongly rooted in a breakdown of the boundaries between the biological and the social, and even hailed the ‘death’ of genetic determinism [ 14 ], they have also forewarned of the pernicious aspects of ‘epigenetic reductionism’ [ 15–17 ]. Referring to Jörg Niewöhner’s notion of the ‘embedded body’ from his ethnographic observation of environmental epigenetics research practices [ 18 ], Margaret Lock noted ‘the tendency, visible already in epigenetic research, to move rapidly toward systematized somatic reductionism’ [ 16 ].…”

“…On the other hand, in an analysis focusing mainly on German media, and on a broad range of publication types, the theme of how epigenetics is redefining the nature versus nurture debate was seen to have only gained media importance in more recent accounts, and of having a more positive slant in weekly magazine reports of an advice-giving nature. The authors report that these stories emphasize ‘an individual’s fixedly determined fate is not that “inevitable”, after all, but—as it is suggested—can be prevented by way of positively changing one’s own environment’ [ 19 ], a message of power and control that has also been found to be emphasized in marketing materials for epigenetic products and services, such as skincare creams and fitness and wellness programs [ 14 ]. Similarly, a recent study of a very broad range of media, including social media and commercial website publications, found that epigenetics was ‘steadily depicted as giving the general public the capability to “take control”’ [ 20 ].…”

Metaphors as tools for understanding in science communication among experts and to the public

“…It should be noted that metaphor use in the field of epigenetics has been criticized for not conveying accurate understanding of the subject (Dubois et al, 2019;Nerlich et al, 2020;Taylor & Dewsbury, 2018). However, in our study we will only provide a descriptive analysis of metaphor use in the epigenetics literature, and refrain from normative assessment of the metaphors employed.…”

Health Inequalities: Law & the Pain of Others

“…It has the potential to be used for progressive ends, rather than ignored and solely mobilised to shore up discriminatory and punitive policies and practices (Lewis and Thomson, 2019). It should not be assumed that there are only two pathways through epigenetics; that is, either wholesale rejection, or the sort of uncritical engagement with the life sciences that ends up ‘biologising’ life (Nerlich, Stelmach and Ennis, 2020). Key to a responsible engagement with epigenetics is a willingness to identify and address difficulties.…”

“…Metaphors also enable complex ideas to be communicated more readily and allow different contexts and disciplines to be bridged. This includes the communication of scientific knowledge claims to the public, as seen with the ubiquity of the ‘switch’ metaphor in public communication of epigenetics (Nerlich, Stelmach and Ennis, 2020). The passage of time and processes of aging, depletion, and illness are universal experiences and some of our most familiar tropes.…”