Suchergebnisse

Abstract
This article examines how images of self-cannibalism, or autophagy, configure a subjectivity that emphasizes the internalization of precarious existential conditions resulting from contemporary neoliberal principles. With a focus on mental health, I argue that the combination of self-cannibalism and individual responsibility inculcates an individual rather than collective response to mental health pathologies. I demonstrate how the dominant medical model of treatment paradoxically minimizes and internalizes the social and economic factors that contribute to identity formation, and I suggest that the conventional self-other antagonism of cannibalism transforms into a new self-self antagonism. By internalizing principles of competition and self-reliance in neoliberal capitalism, the contemporary subject subscribes to the very conditions that undermine the healthy social and interactive features that define a stable community life. Autophagy shifts away from the negative associations of cannibalism and toward the positive yet paradoxical associations of autophagy as a model of self-sustainability.

Three experiments examined the inhibition of escalation of aggression. Subjects either punished incorrect or rewarded correct responses made by a confederate on a learning task. In Experiment 1, some subjects were interrupted midway through the learning trials, and some of the interrupted
subjects coded their responses up to that point. The interruption and coding had no effect on escalation of reinforcement intensity over trials. In Experiment 2, half the subjects were individuated and half were de-individuated. Hall of each group expected to meet the "victim"
following the trials and half did not. Neither variable impeded escalation. In Experiment 3, half the subjects were provided with a "hot-line" that could be used to summon the experimenter. Some subjects were also videotaped during the experiment. The presence of the hot-line reduced
the overall intensity of aggression relative to the no hot-line group.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility of a low sodium meal plan intervention aimed at reducing seated blood pressure (BP) in residents of a government-subsidized congregate, senior living facility. METHODS: The Satter House Trial of Reduced Sodium Meals (SOTRUE) was an individual-level, masked, randomized, controlled pilot study, testing the feasibility of administering a low versus typical sodium meal plan to adult residents of Jack Satter House, a section 202 congregate living facility in Revere, MA, subsidized by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Adults over age 60 years received 3 isocaloric meals with two snacks daily over a 14-day period. Both meal plans were equivalent in potassium and macronutrients, but differed in sodium density ( 2 mg/kcal). The primary outcome was seated systolic BP (SBP) averaged over 2 visits (days 10 and 14) using an Omron HEM-907XL automated cuff. Our objective measure of compliance was morning urine sodium-creatinine ratio. RESULTS: We randomized 20 participants (95% women, 95% white, and mean age 78 +/− 8 years), beginning in October 7, 2019. Baseline characteristics were evenly distributed between groups. Dietary compliance was high (only 2 discontinued meals) and follow-up was 100% with the last participant ending November 4, 2019. Baseline SBP changed from 121 to 116 mm Hg on the typical sodium meal plan (N = 9; mean difference of −5 mm Hg; 95% CI: −18, 8) and 123 to 112 mm Hg on the low sodium meal plan (N = 11; mean difference of −11 mm Hg; 95% CI: −15.2, −7.7). Compared to the typical sodium meal plan, the low sodium meal plan non-significantly reduced SBP by 5 mm Hg (95% CI: −14, 4) and non-significantly reduced urine sodium-creatinine ratio (%-difference −36.0; 95% CI: −60.3, 3.4). Effects on SBP were greater in the subgroup using hypertension medications at baseline (−13 mm Hg; 95% CI: −26, −0) and changes in SBP from baseline were correlated with changes in urine sodium-creatinine ratio (Pearson's r = 0.31). ...