Beauty: In the Genes of the Beholder?

Megan Fox, Anthony Joshua, Zoe Saldana, Henry Cavill… all undeniably stereotypically beautiful people. But what makes someone so beautiful? Is it the way they smile? Is it the help of beauty products? Or is it because of their genetics?

It is no secret that being stereotypically beautiful has its perks, also known as ‘pretty privilege’. Research has revealed that stereotypically attractive people have been shown to have better jobs, earn more money, and, if arrested, get more lenient sentences in court. The ever-constant striving for beauty has grown into a multi-billion-dollar industry, to reduce wrinkles, clear blemishes and make our skin glow. But why do we put so much stock in beauty?

The evolutionary hypothesis suggests that we are genetically influenced to seek out beautiful people, because it is a sign of genetic superiority, making them the perfect mate. Like some birds carry out mating dances, or how lions fight to assert dominance, humans may be using beauty to determine whether someone would make a good partner. If we look at some of the stereotypically beautiful traits, and how they may make you appear as a good option for mating: youthful appearance = more likely to be able to produce offspring; clear complexion = appear to be in good health; shiny hair = indicator of a good diet. Although, when we look at a person, we may not necessarily be thinking ‘hmm… will this person make a good mate?’, the evolutionary hypothesis suggests that this is what we are subconsciously doing. And the interesting part is, all these traits have a genetic component.

Studies using twins have revealed that 75% of our facial composition is influenced by our genetics, meaning that many of our facial features – particularly those around the nose and mouth – have been passed down from our parents, but how many of these facial features, and the genes that control them, are truly responsible for our beauty?

One study which looked at the genetics of beauty asked judges to look at photographs of people, and rate them on attractiveness. The scientists then looked at the DNA of the people in the photographs to see if there were any variations in the genes in those who were voted as most attractive, compared to those who were voted as least attractive. The scientists found that there were indeed some variations in genes, and the differences depended on the person’s gender. In the women who were rated as most attractive, there was a variation to the gene which effects body mass (the ratio of height and weight), compared to women who were rated as least attractive. In the men who were rated as most attractive, there was a variation found in the gene which effects blood cholesterol levels, which plays a role in the creation of testosterone (the primary sex hormone in males), compared to men who were rated as least attractive.

So, do these two genes really determine beauty? The short answer: no. Although this study is very interesting as early evidence for the genetics of beauty, this study also needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. The study only involved white, midwestern Americans with European ancestry, and as we all know, beauty standards differ depending on ethnicity and culture, so this study is not representative. Furthermore, beauty is an incredibly complex construct to break down and define, and the researchers themselves recognised that beauty is not determined by a single gene, but by multiple genes; individually these genes have a very small influence, it’s the cumulative effect that defines how someone looks. This study also did not consider environmental factors (like smoking) which can change a person’s appearance, and also has a huge influence on perceived beauty.

Therefore, overall, research does provide an interesting insight and starting point into understanding the genetics of beauty.  However, beauty is a highly changeable and complex construct, so it’s incredibly difficult to achieve conclusive findings. Although research shows that being stereotypically beautiful has its perks, it has not yet conclusively been found what makes someone beautiful, and therefore, research into the genetics of beauty still has a way to go.

I’d like to conclude with this: one of the most important concepts of genetics is variation, or the differences in genes between people in a population. We need variation in our species to survive and flourish. So, look at yourself, see all the ways you are unique, and realise that each and every one of your variations is beautiful.

 

References

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/scientists-find-the-genes-that-determine-beauty#How-the-study-found-beauty

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1008030

https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=220005

https://xenlogic.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/the-science-of-beauty/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27zckfxIfAQ

 

Disclaimer

The information in this blog is for information and entertainment purposes only. I am not a medical professional, so I have never and will never give medical advice in this blog. You should always speak to a healthcare professional about your unique health needs. My opinions are entirely my own and do not reflect the organisations or people I work for. I only discuss published literature in this blog which are referenced with links.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Zombies: Can Gene Editing Cause an Apocalypse?

Scientists have long known that our DNA sequences can and do change. These changes can occur naturally or following exposure to mutagens or viral infections. Differences in DNA sequences are the reason that we have different coloured hair, are different heights, and have different eye colours. Changes in DNA sequence also mean that we can develop genetic disorders; early onset Alzheimer’s, some cancers, HIV and Cystic Fibrosis are all examples of disorders caused by changes in the DNA sequence. So, can we treat these disorders by changing the DNA sequence back? Gene editing is where DNA is added, removed, or altered at certain locations in the genome. Although gene editing is used in a wide range of situations, such as in the food industry, the first successful use of gene editing in humans was in 1995, when scientists were able to temporarily treat patients with severe immune system deficiency. Since then, advancements in gene therapy have come on leaps and bounds, and in 2020, the ...
Read more

Testing: Put Your Genes Under the Microscope

What do you think of when someone says ‘Mutation’? The X-men? A zombie apocalypse? In reality, a mutation is simply a naturally occurring, random change in a gene. These mutations often have no effect, but occasionally, they can be harmful; for example, they could increase a person’s risk of developing cancer, a genetic disorder, and other rare diseases. However, scientists can detect these gene changes through genetic testing. There are several types of genetic testing, and they can be used to test individuals at different life stages: pre-natal testing detects harmful mutations in a foetus before birth; childhood testing is usually used to confirm a medical diagnosis or predict whether a disorder may develop and therefore requires observation. Any mutations detected during pre-natal and childhood testing are usually due to an inherited genetic mutation; conversely, adult genetic testing is used to predict late-onset genetic disorders, usually caused by mutations that occur in that ...
Read more

Rudolph and Santa: Why Can We Use Animals to Investigate Humans?

In some cases, when carrying out scientific research, you cannot perform early investigations on humans due to ethical reasons. Therefore, to observe the impact of investigations in a real-world setting, rather than relying on theoretical or clinical research alone, we need a substitute to take the place of humans. For example, we could take a strain of Covid-19 and spray a bunch of bleach on it in a lab. Congratulations, we now have a potential way of killing Covid-19, let’s now just inject bleach into people to have the same result…not such a great idea (right Trump?). Ultimately, understanding scientific concepts and solving them in a clinical, theoretical setting, does not always translate into real-world solutions. Animals allow a kind of ‘intermediate’ to suggest how humans might respond, and thus have been vital in helping us understand human phenomena. But why do animals make the perfect ‘intermediate’? Widya Mulyasasmita, a geneticist from Stanford University, had a very cle...
Read more