Highbloodpressure (HBP) is themost important risk factorworldwide for the development of cardiovascular disease and beyond [1]. It has been known that inverse associations exist between cardiovascular risk factors and socioeconomic status, whether being measured by occupation, incomeor education. Back in the 1980s, itwas hypothesised that initiating factors for the pathogenesis of essential hypertension could be from social environment, such as weight gain and environmental stress [2,3]. Reductions in health and social inequalities could play an important role in impressive declines in cardiovascular disease-related incidence, biomarkers, and mortality [4]. Since social determinants of hypertension in adults and the very old people have received less attention and measures of them were not addressed comprehensively previously, we aimed to study the role of socioeconomic circumstances in hypertension for adults and the very old in a national, population-based setting. Datawere extracted and analysed in the UK Longitudinal Household Survey (Understanding Society, access available via: http://www.understandingsociety.org.uk/) Wave 1, 2009–2010, being a national, population-based, multi-year study among people above 16 years old. Study design and sampling method were described and published in detail in the working paper series [5]. Information on demographics, living and work conditions, and self-reported HBP (Has as doctor or health professional ever told you that you have any of the condition listed? What age were you when you were first told you had it?) was obtained by household interview. Study variables which aimed to describe potential social determinants of hypertension included age, sex, birthplace, body mass index, education, marital status, salary (proxy of occupation), and willingness to stay in the current neighbourhood (proxy of perception on neighbourhood satisfaction). Likert scale was used for assessing neighbourhood satisfaction [6]. In the subsequent analysis, we also examined regional variance. Analysis involved chi-square test, t-test, and logistic regression modelling. Adjustments weremade to control for covariates mentioned above and age of onset (binary: 0 = ex-hypertension, 1 = new onset hypertension) [6]. Effects were estimated by using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), with p value b0.05 considered statistically significant. Statistical software STATA version 12.0 (STATA, College Station, Texas, USA) was used to perform all the analyses. Since it is a secondary data analysis in the present study, no further ethics approval is required. Of 50,994 people included in the cohort, 8706 (18.3%) had ever HBP and 508 (1.0%) people had their first hypertension (incident hypertension) at the agewhen theywere interviewed. Table 1 shows the demographic and social characteristics of the study cohort. In Table 2a, we have shown that female sex (OR 2.05, 95%CI 1.58–2.66, P b 0.001), born in the North Ireland (OR 0.39, 95%CI 0.20–0.77, P =0.01) and body mass index (OR 2.21, 95%CI 1.51–3.25, P b 0.001 for being overweight and OR 1.56, 95%CI 1.20–2.05, P = 0.001 for being obese) were significantly associated with hypertension in the very old aged 80 and above. In the middle-aged adults (aged 40–79), female sex (OR 0.84, 95%CI 0.75–0.95, P = 0.004), less education (OR 1.14, 95%CI 1.01–1.28, P = 0.04), body mass index (OR 2.26, 95%CI 1.73–2.95, P b 0.001 for underweight, OR 1.95, 95%CI 1.68–2.26, P b 0.001 for being overweight, and OR 3.41, 95%CI 2.92–3.99, P b 0.001 for being obese), and marital status (OR 1.24, 95%CI 1.03–1.48, P = 0.02 for married/registered