Much research indicates that exposure to early life adversity (ELA) predicts chronic inflammatory activity, increasing one’s risk of developing diseases of aging later in life. Despite its costs, researchers have proposed that chronic inflammation may be favored in this context because it would help promote immunological vigilance in environments with an elevated risk of infection and injury. Although intuitively appealing, the assumption that exaggerated inflammatory activity predicts favorable immunological outcomes among those exposed to ELA has not been tested. Here, we seek to address this gap, examining the links between exposure to ELA, inflammation, and immune function. Consistent with others’ work, results revealed that those from low socioeconomic status (SES) childhood environments exhibited exaggerated unstimulated inflammatory activity relative to what was observed among those from higher SES childhood environments. Further, results revealed that – although levels of inflammation predicted the magnitude of immunological responses in those from higher SES backgrounds – for those who grew up in low SES environments, higher levels of inflammation were unrelated to the magnitude of immunological responses. Results suggest that exaggerated inflammatory activity in the context of ELA may not predict improved ability to manage acute immunological threats.

许多研究表明，早年经历逆境 (ELA) 预示着慢性炎症活动，增加了晚年患衰老疾病的风险。尽管成本高昂，但研究人员提出，在这种情况下，慢性炎症可能会受到青睐，因为它有助于在感染和受伤风险较高的环境中提高免疫警觉性。尽管直觉上很吸引人，但尚未对以下假设进行检验，即夸大的炎症活动预示着暴露于 ELA 的人群会产生有利的免疫学结果。在这里，我们试图解决这一差距，研究暴露于 ELA、炎症和免疫功能之间的联系。与他人的工作一致，结果显示，相对于在较高社会经济地位 (SES) 童年环境中观察到的情况，那些来自低社会经济地位 (SES) 童年环境的人表现出夸大的未受刺激的炎症活动。此外，结果表明——尽管炎症水平预测了来自较高 SES 背景的人的免疫反应程度——但对于那些在低 SES 环境中长大的人来说，较高水平的炎症与免疫反应的程度无关。结果表明，在 ELA 的情况下夸大的炎症活动可能无法预测管理急性免疫威胁的能力提高。结果显示，尽管炎症水平预测了来自较高 SES 背景的人的免疫反应程度，但对于那些在低 SES 环境中长大的人来说，较高水平的炎症与免疫反应的程度无关。结果表明，在 ELA 的情况下夸大的炎症活动可能无法预测管理急性免疫威胁的能力提高。结果显示，尽管炎症水平预测了来自较高 SES 背景的人的免疫反应程度，但对于那些在低 SES 环境中长大的人来说，较高水平的炎症与免疫反应的程度无关。结果表明，在 ELA 的情况下夸大的炎症活动可能无法预测管理急性免疫威胁的能力提高。