Korte S Mechiel, Koolhaas Jaap M, Wingfield John C, McEwen Bruce S
Animal Sciences Group, Wageningen University and Research Centre, Box 65, Edelhertweg 15, 8200 AB Lelystad, The Netherlands.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2005 Feb;29(1):3-38. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.08.009. Epub 2004 Dec 10.
Why do we get the stress-related diseases we do? Why do some people have flare ups of autoimmune disease, whereas others suffer from melancholic depression during a stressful period in their life? In the present review possible explanations will be given by using different levels of analysis. First, we explain in evolutionary terms why different organisms adopt different behavioral strategies to cope with stress. It has become clear that natural selection maintains a balance of different traits preserving genes for high aggression (Hawks) and low aggression (Doves) within a population. The existence of these personality types (Hawks-Doves) is widespread in the animal kingdom, not only between males and females but also within the same gender across species. Second, proximate (causal) explanations are given for the different stress responses and how they work. Hawks and Doves differ in underlying physiology and these differences are associated with their respective behavioral strategies; for example, bold Hawks preferentially adopt the fight-flight response when establishing a new territory or defending an existing territory, while cautious Doves show the freeze-hide response to adapt to threats in their environment. Thus, adaptive processes that actively maintain stability through change (allostasis) depend on the personality type and the associated stress responses. Third, we describe how the expression of the various stress responses can result in specific benefits to the organism. Fourth, we discuss how the benefits of allostasis and the costs of adaptation (allostatic load) lead to different trade-offs in health and disease, thereby reinforcing a Darwinian concept of stress. Collectively, this provides some explanation of why individuals may differ in their vulnerability to different stress-related diseases and how this relates to the range of personality types, especially aggressive Hawks and non-aggressive Doves in a population. A conceptual framework is presented showing that Hawks, due to inefficient management of mediators of allostasis, are more likely to be violent, to develop impulse control disorders, hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias, sudden death, atypical depression, chronic fatigue states and inflammation. In contrast, Doves, due to the greater release of mediators of allostasis (surplus), are more susceptible to anxiety disorders, metabolic syndromes, melancholic depression, psychotic states and infection.
为什么我们会患上与压力相关的疾病?为什么有些人会出现自身免疫性疾病的发作,而另一些人在生活中的压力时期会患上忧郁症?在本综述中,将通过使用不同层次的分析给出可能的解释。首先,我们从进化的角度解释为什么不同的生物体采用不同的行为策略来应对压力。已经很清楚的是,自然选择维持着不同性状的平衡,在一个种群中保留高攻击性(鹰派)和低攻击性(鸽派)的基因。这些人格类型(鹰派 - 鸽派)的存在在动物王国中很普遍,不仅存在于雄性和雌性之间,也存在于同一性别跨物种之间。其次,给出了关于不同应激反应及其工作方式的近因(因果)解释。鹰派和鸽派在潜在生理机能上存在差异,这些差异与它们各自的行为策略相关;例如,大胆的鹰派在建立新领地或保卫现有领地时优先采用战斗 - 逃跑反应,而谨慎的鸽派则表现出冻结 - 隐藏反应以适应环境中的威胁。因此,通过变化积极维持稳定性的适应性过程(应变稳态)取决于人格类型和相关的应激反应。第三,我们描述各种应激反应的表达如何能给生物体带来特定的益处。第四,我们讨论应变稳态的益处和适应成本(应变稳态负荷)如何导致健康和疾病方面不同的权衡,从而强化了达尔文的压力概念。总体而言,这为为什么个体对不同压力相关疾病的易感性可能不同以及这如何与人格类型范围相关,特别是种群中的攻击性鹰派和非攻击性鸽派,提供了一些解释。提出了一个概念框架,表明由于对应变稳态调节因子管理不善,鹰派更有可能变得暴力、患上冲动控制障碍、高血压、心律失常、猝死、非典型抑郁症、慢性疲劳状态和炎症。相比之下,鸽派由于应变稳态调节因子释放更多(过剩),更容易患上焦虑症、代谢综合征、忧郁症、精神病状态和感染。