Incidental Affect, Facial Expressions, and Risk

Emotional facial expressions are potent social signals that can change people’s feeling states and shape judgments of targets that are unrelated to the expressions. Whether they originate from other individuals or advertisements in the environment, facial expressions are undoubtedly one of the most prominent emotional stimuli. Thus, there is a great need to examine how facial expressions can influence potentially consequential judgments and decisions that involve uncertain or risky prospects, as such decisions are greatly impacted by emotion. The domains of finance and health could particularly benefit from such an examination. In the financial domain, expressions of other individuals could shape investment behavior. For instance, facial expressions may trigger emotional reactions that can focus an individual on either the unwanted consequences or benefits of a risky option. In the health domain, individuals’ evaluations of the risks and benefits associated with a medical treatment could be guided by the emotionality depicted on the face of a doctor. This second domain has particular relevance to older individuals due to their greater preference for positively over negatively valenced stimuli and the importance of effectively promoting preventative health behaviors for older adults. Thus, two studies were conducted in order to examine the role of emotional facial expressions in judgments and decisions involving risk in the financial and health domains. The first study examined whether the posing of positive (happiness), negative (fear), and neutral facial expressions could influence participants’ affective responding and ultimately their sub-optimal risk-taking and risk-avoidant behavior in a financial investment task. In Study 1, the facial posing manipulation did not have the intended effect on participants’ changes in self-reported valence. Specifically, in the neutral-posing condition, participants reported the greatest increase in negative valence and demonstrated significantly greater sub-optimal risk aversion in comparison to the fear-posing condition. Furthermore, significant relations between participants’ facial responding and sub-optimal risk seeking behavior were discovered in the neutral posing condition. Specifically, decreased corrugator and increased zygomaticus activity in response to affectively neutral expressions in the neutral-posing condition was related to increased risk seeking. This relationship between fEMG activity and risk seeking was consistent with previously described relations between positive and negative affective and risk seeking. Thus, fEMG may be a useful tool when attempting to evaluate how individuals’ affective responses to stimuli relate to their risk seeking behavior in financial decision tasks. The second study explored whether spontaneous facial responses to emotional facial expressions presented during an influenza vaccine commercial could change participants’ evaluations (behavioral intentions, risk perceptions, and integral feelings) regarding the flu vaccine. Importantly, this study included older and younger adults to examine whether aging-related increases in the preference for positive over negative information could lead to differential influences of positive and negative facial expressions on the above-mentioned evaluations. Manipulating the facial expressions in the commercial had a significant, albeit unpredicted effect on participants’ evaluations. Relative to those who watched the smiling doctors, older and younger adults who watched the concerned doctors felt better about the vaccine. Furthermore, older adults who watched the smiling doctors reported greater increases in worry about contracting the flu in comparison to those who watched the concerned doctors. Overall, findings of Study 2 suggest that concerned rather than happy facial expressions should accompany messages that are aimed at increasing vaccination behavior

Clinical utility of azilsartan–chlorthalidone fixed combination in the management of hypertension

Azilsartan–chlorthalidone fixed combination is a new drug in the management of hypertension. Azilsartan has been shown to have greater blood pressure-lowering effects than other angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), and the debate regarding the superiority of chlorthalidone over hydrochlorothiazide has been ongoing for years. The combination is unique because it is the first to partner an ARB with this, possibly more effective, diuretic. This review will address trials involving both components of this drug, as well as phase III trials involving the fixed-combination product. The article will also discuss the benefit of combination therapy in the treatment of hypertension

Revised Phase Diagram of the Gross-Neveu Model

We confirm earlier hints that the conventional phase diagram of the discrete chiral Gross-Neveu model in the large N limit is deficient at non-zero chemical potential. We present the corrected phase diagram constructed in mean field theory. It has three different phases, including a kink-antikink crystal phase. All transitions are second order. The driving mechanism for the new structure of baryonic matter in the Gross-Neveu model is an Overhauser type instability with gap formation at the Fermi surface.Comment: Revtex, 12 pages, 15 figures; v2: Axis labelling in Fig. 9 correcte

Antithymocyte Globulin Plus G-CSF Combination Therapy Leads to Sustained Immunomodulatory and Metabolic Effects in a Subset of Responders With Established Type 1 Diabetes.

Low-dose antithymocyte globulin (ATG) plus pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) preserves β-cell function for at least 12 months in type 1 diabetes. Herein, we describe metabolic and immunological parameters 24 months following treatment. Patients with established type 1 diabetes (duration 4-24 months) were randomized to ATG and pegylated G-CSF (ATG+G-CSF) (N = 17) or placebo (N = 8). Primary outcomes included C-peptide area under the curve (AUC) following a mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) and flow cytometry. "Responders" (12-month C-peptide ≥ baseline), "super responders" (24-month C-peptide ≥ baseline), and "nonresponders" (12-month C-peptide < baseline) were evaluated for biomarkers of outcome. At 24 months, MMTT-stimulated AUC C-peptide was not significantly different in ATG+G-CSF (0.49 nmol/L/min) versus placebo (0.29 nmol/L/min). Subjects treated with ATG+G-CSF demonstrated reduced CD4+ T cells and CD4+/CD8+ T-cell ratio and increased CD16+CD56hi natural killer cells (NK), CD4+ effector memory T cells (Tem), CD4+PD-1+ central memory T cells (Tcm), Tcm PD-1 expression, and neutrophils. FOXP3+Helios+ regulatory T cells (Treg) were elevated in ATG+G-CSF subjects at 6, 12, and 18 but not 24 months. Immunophenotyping identified differential HLA-DR expression on monocytes and NK and altered CXCR3 and PD-1 expression on T-cell subsets. As such, a group of metabolic and immunological responders was identified. A phase II study of ATG+G-CSF in patients with new-onset type 1 diabetes is ongoing and may support ATG+G-CSF as a prevention strategy in high-risk subjects

Sexual Selection: Do Flies Lie with Asymmetric Legs?

SummaryA newly described species of empidid or ‘dance fly’ shows a bizarre polymorphism in their forelegs, which presumably serve as a mating lure. This trait may have evolved by frequency-dependent deceptive male signalling

Most people share genetic test results with relatives even if the findings are normal: Family communication in a diverse population.

PURPOSE: With increasing utilization of genetic testing, sharing genetic information can become part of general family health communication while providing biological relatives with important information about their own genetic risk. Importantly, little is known about motivations for and barriers to family communication of genetic information in historically underserved populations. METHODS: Using mixed methods, we explored patient experiences with family communication in a study population of English- and Spanish-speaking adults aged 18 to 49 years, enriched for participants from historically underserved backgrounds. Risk screening for hereditary cancer guided genetic testing for cancer risk genes and other medically actionable findings. RESULTS: Most participants overall (91%), including most with normal findings (89%), shared or planned to share their results with relatives. Common motivations for sharing results were to give relatives information about their genetic risk and because the participant thought the results were interesting. Reasons for not sharing were limited contact with relatives, perceptions of limited clinical utility for relatives, and concern that discussion of genetic information was stigmatized or taboo. CONCLUSION: Results demonstrate high rates of sharing genetic information, indicate motivations for sharing go beyond facilitating genetic testing for relatives, and suggest general willingness to share genetic information as part of family health communication