Do Black Adult’s Brains Age Quicker Than Others?

By: India Marseille

A new study has found that the brains of black adults in the U.S. age quicker than both Hispanic and white adults; moreover, their brains show signs linked to Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia in middle age, which was an unexpected finding.

A STAT news article, *Brains of Black Americans age faster, study finds, with racial stressors a likely factor*, was recently released on the study, but the STAT article omits some vital information from the study. News articles missing facts about newly published studies have a negative reputation for making the findings seem more sensational to readers than they truly are. Because of the possible consequence of missing information, it is important to dissect a study holistically and share as much information if possible, no matter how unimportant it may seem.

The study, *Brain Aging Among Racially and Ethnically Diverse Middle-Aged and Older Adults*, was published in a press release by Jama Neurology and on Nov 14, 2022. The press release does not offer much information about the study. It only includes a three-sentence summary of the study’s findings. The Jama report, however, consists of an in-depth breakdown of the study, which states that the brain scans of 1,467 subjects from two cohort groups that the STAT article labels as “racially and ethnically diverse” were studied.

News articles sharing a study’s more in-depth details about the data collection and participant demographics can provide readers with more context and tools to interpret the study’s findings best. In this study’s case, this is extremely important due to the lack of information provided in the press release. Despite the STAT article having much more information than the press release, it does not mention some of the vital facts shared in the study’s report. Some unmentioned notable facts disclosed in the study’s report are that the subjects ranged from 25 years old to 98 years old. Furthermore, the data was taken over the course of eight years for one group and two years of the second group, and all MRI scans were taken at Columbia University.

The STAT article states that the study found that Black adults, mostly in their mid 50s, had a higher chance of having a greater amount of “white matter lesions” in their brains than their white or Hispanic counterparts of the same age. The STAT piece defines the lesions as indicators of cerebrovascular disease which is important because the disease is linked to both Alzheimer’s disease and a decline in cognitive function.

The STAT piece claims that scientists believe the cause of the early brain aging in black people is a result of the collective amount of racial stress black people deal with throughout life, such as discrimination and fear of personal safety, which scientists refer to as weathering. The study itself, however, states that social hardships “may be partially” responsible for the early aging of black people’s brains, which hints at there being other possible reasons. Because of the way it explains the scientist’s hypothesis, the wording of the STAT article misleads the reader. It makes social struggles appear as the primary or sole reason for early brain aging when scientists themselves state they believe that is only a possible part of the cause. The STAT article could have mentioned a disclaimer that shared that other factors could be the cause of the study’s findings and that more research needs to be conducted until researchers know what the causes truly are to avoid possible confusion among readers.

The STAT piece showcases the importance of the study by declaring that 6 million people in the United States have Alzheimer’s. However, the STAT report does not share how much more likely black people are to be diagnosed with the disease than white people, which could be very useful information due to the results of this study. Readers and article writers can find that specific statistic online where the Alzheimer’s Association provides it.

The STAT piece successfully lays the foundation of the study by linking this study’s new findings to previous discoveries. It shares that the study reinforces the earlier conclusion that vascular disease is highly likely harmful to the health of Black people’s brains. The STAT article also clearly states what stood out about the study’s results by sharing the visual comparison of aging with this quote from Indria C. Turney, the study’s lead author and cognitive neuroscientist: “The brains of Black participants in mid-life looked like the brains of older adults.”

Due to the background information provided with the STAT article’s statistics and reference to other studies’ previous findings, the article appears not to over-exaggerate the impact of Alzheimer’s in the U.S. when explaining the importance of the study’s findings. The STAT article also appears well-balanced due to its inclusion of several independent sources, such as Stephanie Monroe, the executive director of African Americans Against Alzheimer’s, and Andrea Gilmore-Bykovskyi, an Alzheimer’s researcher and professor of emergency medicine who had no affiliation with the study.

With another source, the STAT article also brings to light the fact that the study’s findings showcase the need for more research to be done on creating treatments for the causes of dementia that possibly disproportionately affect black communities and others similar to them, but it does not directly say if there is or isn’t available cures or treatments for the early aging of brain’s. That leaves it to the reader to assume if there is or isn’t. The piece, however, does make it very evident that brain deterioration preventions do exist, and through the quote of an independent source, it claims that those preventions need to be shared more with the communities largely affected.

Despite its positives, the STAT article does have some faults, as it does not share how the study was funded. Clarifying that the study does or doesn’t have a conflict of interest enables the reader to have more trust or skepticism in the study’s findings. Where the study received its funding is also missing from the article. Nonetheless, in this case, this appears as something other than vital information for the reader since none of the authors appear to have a conflict of interest in providing funding for this study.

The study outright shares the limitations in its report, which include that both cohorts had fewer white subjects, which could affect the statistics found, and suggest that future research be conducted with a larger sample size of participants since the sample size of this study is not very large. Another significant limitation that the article should have noted is that the two cohorts used different MRI machines, which the study states “could have influenced the findings somewhat.”

Overall the study’s Jama Neurology report is the best source of information to understand the study’s execution and findings holistically, but the STAT news article is a fair and easily readable source to use as a stepping stone and starting point to understand the study’s report prior to reading it. Despite what the STAT news article is missing, it gives a good explanation of the study, especially when read alongside the report.