Category Archives: Human Behavior

Human Behavior

What is the association between long-term salt usage behavior and risk of premature mortality? – News-Medical.Net

In a recent study published in the European Heart Journal, researchers assessed the impact of increased salt consumption on life expectancy.

The impact of dietary salt intake on human health has always been debated. Recent studies report that sodium intake was inversely related to the risk of all-cause mortality and thus positively associated with healthy life expectancy across 181 countries globally. On the other hand, previous studies have found contradictory results stating the negative association between sodium intake and mortality risk.

In the present study, researchers assessed the correlation between the number of times a person adds salts to foods and the risk of premature mortality.

In a population-based study called the UK Biobank study, the team recruited over 0.5 million individuals from 22 assessment centers across England, Scotland, and Wales between 2006 and 2010. Based on the availability of complete data, 501,379 individuals were eligible for the main analysis.

The participants answered a questionnaire at baseline asking them if they added salt to their foods. The individuals were required to answer the question by selecting one of the five options, including: (1) never/rarely, (2) sometimes, (3) usually, (4) always, and (5) prefer not to answer. The participants were also asked if they had made any dietary changes in the last five years, which were answered by choosing one of the five options: (1) no, (2) yes, because of illness, (3) yes, because of other reasons, and (4) prefer not to answer.

The team also obtained urinary samples from the participants at baseline. Potassium and sodium levels present in the samples were detected using the ion-selective electrode method. The team subsequently log-transformed the concentrations of urinary potassium and sodium to normalize data distribution. Furthermore, the 24-hour sodium excretion was evaluated based on the urinary concentrations using the gender-specific INTERSALT equations.

The eligible participants were further asked to complete the 24-hour dietary recalls conducted based on the Oxford WebQ from 2009 to 2012 which queried the persons about their consumption of over 200 food types and more than 30 drinks over the past 24 hours. Almost 189,266 participants had complete data on the number of times they added salt to their foods, dietary information, and realistic total energy intake.

The team obtained data related to the deaths and death dates and calculated the person-years at risk from the beginning of the study to the end of the follow-up period, date of death, or 14 February 2018, whichever occurred first. Mortalities that occurred before 75 years were termed premature. Furthermore, the team constructed a life table to estimate the life expectancy of eligible participants based on: (1) population mortality rates specific to the gender and age obtained from the Office for National Statistics, (2) the sex-specific hazard ratios (HRs) of all-cause mortality in each group for which the frequencies of adding salt to foods were identified as compared to the reference cohort, and (3) the prevalence of each gender based on the frequencies of adding salt to foods.

The study results showed that participants with a higher frequency of adding salt to foods were likelier to be non-White, male, and have a higher body-mass index (BMI). Participants who added salt more often were also more likely to have cardiovascular diseases and diabetes but less likely to have hypertension and chronic kidney disease (CKD).

The team observed a graded association between a higher frequency of adding salt to foods and higher urinary sodium levels. Participants who never/rarely, sometimes, usually, and always add salt to their food had log-urinary sodium concentrations of 1.86, 1.90, 1.92, and 1.94 mmol/L, respectively. On the other hand, there was an inverse association between the frequency of salt addition and urinary potassium concentrations. Furthermore, the team found a substantial positive correlation between the frequency of salt added to foods and the evaluated 24-hour sodium excretion.

Among participants who never/rarely, sometimes, usually, and always add salt to their food, the HRs for all-cause premature mortality were 1, 1.02, 1.07, and 1.28, respectively. In the case of cause-specific mortality, a higher frequency of salt added to foods was remarkably correlated with the increased hazard of cancer mortality and cardiovascular disease mortality, but no such association was observed for respiratory mortality and dementia mortality.

The team also noted that 50-years older women who self-reported that they always added salt to their food had approximately 1.50 years less life expectancy. Men who always added salt had 2.28 years less life expectancy compared to their counterparts who rarely or never added salt to their foods.

Overall, the study findings showed that the higher frequency of adding salt to foods increased all-cause premature mortality and a decline in life expectancy.

See original here:
What is the association between long-term salt usage behavior and risk of premature mortality? - News-Medical.Net

Human Behavior

Mass shootings and the news media: Catching up to the science of PACEs – ACEs Too High

How do we, as a country, learn about mass shootings and gun violence? The news media. How do we learn about the best approaches to prevent mass shootings and gun violence? The answer should be the news media, but its not. Yet.

People who know about the science of positive and adverse childhood experiences (PACEs) understand that PACEs are at the root of violence. The news media is getting there. In the last couple of years of mass shootings, more articles examined the childhood of the shooter, but more could be done, as I pointed out in essays I wrote after theBuffalo, New York, andUvalde, Texas, shootings.

After last weeks mass shooting in Highland Park, Illinois, two new threads appeared:

My take on examining shooters families: I think its great to report what happened in a shooters familyas long as a reporter takes a trauma-informed approach. That means reporting without using words of blame, shame or punishmentso a headline that says Are the parents to blame? would change to What happened in that family?

Parents pass on ACEsand positive childhood experiences (PCEs), for that matterto their children. So, if they arent cognizant of their own ACEs, how can they possibly understand their childs ACEs? And where did parents get their ACEs and PCEs? Fromtheirparents and environment. How to break the cycle? Educate families, organizations and communities about PACEs science, and integrate practices and policies based on PACEs science in all organizations in every community.

My take on the online cultures of violence:At the moment, the proposed solutions are to understand the subculture and moderate the content. Its not hard to figure out where different violent spaces are, Emmi Conley, an independent researcher of far-right extremist movements, digital propaganda and online subculturestold NPR. Whats hard is what do you do once you find one, if the red flag still falls within free speech territory. Because currently we have no intervention abilities, we only have law enforcement. I have another idea: It seems to me that these subcultures provide a perfect opportunity to reach out and help youth who are in dire need of a caring adult and counseling. Thats a project worth funding!!

Ongoing issues: Theres the ongoing issue of the news medias obsession with mass shootings, while mostly ignoring aggregate shootings,which receive little attention. And then the dire news of too many incidents of violence that lead news organizations to not cover important stories, and in almost every community, not cover the type of violence that costs communities the most in heartbreak and dollarsfamily violence. This headline in the Washington Post points out that mass shootings may be going the way of family violence coveragetoo little coverage to help a community figure out how to prevent the violence.There are too many mass shootings for the U.S. media to cover: News organizations must make agonizing decisions about which shootings deserve on-the-ground reporting, and for how long.

Theres a more contextual, solution-oriented way to cover crime and violence. First, incorporate violence coverage into a health section. Then:

Here are a few thoughts about where we are now. (Make a note of the next few graphs. You might be surprised.)

Violence prevention proponents note that the challenge to change attitudes toward violenceto convince Americans that violence is predictable and preventableis no different from the attitudes public health experts faced when they suggested in the 1950s that stopping smoking would reduce lung cancer rates and in the 1960s that wearing seat belts and not driving under the influence of alcohol would reduce automobile deaths and injuries.

For example, until the 1960s, traffic deaths and injuries were typically blamed on the nut behind the wheel. Prevention approaches were limited to admonitions to drive safely. Then, public health experts, law enforcement agencies, transportation departments, injury control scientists, consumer advocates, public policy makers and vehicle manufacturers began looking at auto deaths and injuries as a public health issue. Instead of studying only how the human factor contributed to crashes, they also investigated the vehicle and the environment. In 1975, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration began accumulating information through its Fatal Accident Reporting System (FARS). FARS uses police records and death certificates to accumulate data on the driver (age, sex, blood alcohol level, if wearing seatbelt), the vehicle (vehicle identification number that reveals make, manufacturer and product characteristics) and the environment (weather, location and roadway conditions). To recommend specific safety improvements, researchers used FARS data to identify unsafe conditions in driver behavior, vehicles and the environment.

As a result, over the last 30 years and often amid great controversy, car manufacturers added collapsible steering columns, seat belts, shoulder harnesses, roll bars, padded dashboards, anti-lock braking systems, airbags and safety glass to the vehicles they made. States passed laws requiring seat belts for all riders and car seats for young children, and they created stiff penalties for people driving under the influence of alcohol. Highway engineers improved the safety of roadways and intersections. If the death rate from auto crashes had remained the same as it was 30 years ago, an estimated 80,000 to 100,000 people would be dying annually on the nations highways compared with the 40,000 who now die in highway crashes.

When public health researchers began identifying the risk factors that contribute to auto crashes, journalists began reporting breaking news of traffic injuries and fatalities differently. They began including the type of car and its manufacturer, whether people were driving drunk or wearing seatbelts, the conditions of the road or intersection, and whether stop lights were functioning or stop signs were in place. Feature articles focused on automobile safety design, laws to prevent drinking and driving, vehicle recalls to correct safety problems and court cases that addressed auto safety issues.

Similarly, since the 1980s, hundreds of national, state and local violence prevention research projects and programs have emerged. Physicians, public health experts, epidemiologists and social scientists are using the public health model to study violence. They analyze the relationship among the person who is killed or injured, the weapon and the physical, economic and social environments in which violence occurs. In 1983, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention initiated a program to study the causes of violence and founded the Center for Injury Control and Prevention. In 1984, U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop declared that violence was as much a public health issue for todays physicians as smallpox was for the medical community in previous generations.

Identifying the risk factors of violence is a complex undertaking. There are many different types of violenceviolence in which women, children, the elderly and men are injured and killed in their homes by family members; gang violence; dating violence; violence by acquaintances; violence by strangers; etc. Risk factors vary with different types of violence and often from community to community. Some of the risk factors that have been identified as contributing to high levels of the many types of violence include: poverty, racial segregation and discrimination, unemployment, the ready availability of alcohol, the ready availability of firearms, the portrayal of violence in the media, being male, being young, a lack of education in child rearing, childhood exposure to lead, abuse as a child, witnessing violent acts in the home or neighborhood, the belief in male dominance over females and isolation of the nuclear family.

Violence is a difficult epidemic to understand and control because no one factorelimination or redesign of guns, decrease in availability of alcohol or reduction of media violencewill prevent all violence. Each type of violence in a community results from a unique combination of social, cultural, biological and economic risk factors and thus requires a unique combination of preventive measures. Therefore, prevention approaches must involve a unique combination of people who attempt to solve the problem: doctors, researchers, community organizers, lawmakers, police officers, judges, social workers, teachers, parents and citizens.

Traditionally, journalists have reported violent incidents as only a law enforcement and criminal justice issue. But now that an epidemiological approach to violence has been established, the media can expand their reporting of violencein breaking news as well as featuresto identify factors that contribute to violence.

_______________

I wrote the eight paragraphs above in 1997.(Reporting on Violence, a handbook for journalists.) Thats 25 years ago! And I wasnt the first to make these points.

Over those last 25 years, the main development that has changed our understanding of violenceand one that is actually leading to remarkable solutionsis theCDC-Kaiser Permanente Adverse Childhood Experiences Study, which was published in 1998 and opened the door to our understanding of why humans do what they do. Since then, weve learned that the roots of violence and being a victim of violence are the same roots that lead to chronic disease, mental illness, and economic problems; they lie in the science of positive and adverse childhood experiences. This knowledge has provided a new mindset on how to change human behaviorcriminal, unhealthy or unwanted behavior. This mindset changes a traditional approach of using practices and policies based on blame, shame and punishment to an approach that uses practices and policies grounded in understanding, nurturing and healing. (SeePACEs science 101for more details about the science as well as links to articles about people who are using it.)

If reporters or editors want some ideas on how to provide more context in crime reporting (with a deeper understanding of PACEs science),send them here.

____________________

If youre interested in becoming more involved in the PACEs science community, join our companion social network, PACEs Connection. Just go toPACEsConnection.comand click Join. PACEsConnection.com is the leading advocate for information about the science of positive and adverse childhood experiences (PACEs) and the rapidly expanding, global PACEs science movement.

Like Loading...

Link:
Mass shootings and the news media: Catching up to the science of PACEs - ACEs Too High

Human Behavior

New study sheds light on the link between racial resentment and perceptions of reverse racism in the United States – PsyPost

Increased engagement with politics on social media predicts future decreases in racial resentment among liberals in the United States, according to new research published in Computers in Human Behavior. But this doesnt appear to be the case for conservatives or independents.

What drew my interest to this topic was the public opinion data and individual stories telling us that an increasing number of White Americans perceive that they are facing discrimination for being White, also called reverse racism, study author Ian Hawkins, a visiting assistant professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

This perception seems to conflict with what is actually occurring as extensive research tells us that minority groups still face the most discrimination. But regardless of whether increased reverse racism is occurring or not, perception is key and can be a motivating factor for some White Americans. I wanted to further understand what influences and possibly contributes to this idea of reverse racism.

For their new study, Hawkins and his colleagues analyzed longitudinal data from 621 White participants, who completed online surveys in August 2016, October/November 2016, and November/December 2016. The participants completed questionnaires regarding their engagement with politics on social media, strength of white identity, political identity, racial resentment, and perceptions of reverse racism.

The researchers found that increased engagement with politics on social media was indirectly linked to decreased perceptions of reverse racism via lower racial resentment.

That is, participants who reported greater engagement with politics on social media were less likely to agree with statements such as Its really a matter of some people just not trying hard enough; if Blacks would only try harder, they could just be as well off as Whites. Lower racial resentment, in turn, was associated with decreased perceptions of reverse racism (e.g. These days non-Whites benefit from preferential treatment that puts Whites at a disadvantage.

However, the negative relationship between social media engagement and racial resentment was only observed among political liberals not conservatives or independents.

We found that engaging with politics on social media reduced reverse racism through reduced racial resentment, but that this relationship was influenced in part by participants who identified as liberal, Hawkins told PsyPost. We also show that having a more conservative political identity is related to increased reverse racism beliefs via higher racial resentment attitudes. Altogether, social media engagement, political identity, and racial resentment all had an influence on reverse racism beliefs.

But the study, like all research, includes some caveats.

Our study only examined how social media use influences different beliefs like racial resentment and reverse racism, Hawkins explained. But media content that might contribute to these attitudes likely comes from various sources rather than just solely social media. Future research should examine how entertainment television, video games, the news, etc. might also influence reverse racism.

Beliefs like reverse racism are harmful and increasingly becoming more widely held and mainstream, Hawkins added. These attitudes do not operate in a vacuum as they likely have implications for policies or political candidates that individuals support or their willingness to participate in collective action. Because of this we need continued information on what is motivating reverse racism and what role social media and identity play.

The study, How social media use, political identity, and racial resentment affect perceptions of reverse racism in the United States, was authored by Ian Hawkins and Muniba Saleem.

Here is the original post:
New study sheds light on the link between racial resentment and perceptions of reverse racism in the United States - PsyPost

Human Behavior

Dr. Mark Goulston on why Democrats keep losing: They’re afraid of their own anger – Salon

In a series of recent decisions that have taken away women's reproductive rights and freedoms, given guns more protection than human lives, neutered the federal government's power to protect the environment in a moment of global climate disaster and further dissolved the separation of church and state, the radical right-wing justices on the Supreme Court are attempting to force American society back to the Gilded Age if not before.

As a practical matter, the new-old America that the Supreme Court is serving as a wicked midwife for will be a society where women, Black and brown people, gays and lesbians, and other marginalized groups will have their basic civil and human rights greatly reduced, if not stripped away altogether.

This is a judicial coup by a nakedly partisan institution that is publicly collaborating with the Republican-fascist movement to end America's multiracial, pluralist democracy. To this point, the response of Democratic leaders, including President Biden, has been pathetically, pitiably, embarrassingly weak.

RELATED:The Joe Biden reality show: Most stage-managed presidency in history keeps undermining itself

Shortly after the Supreme Court issued its rulingin the Dobbs case that reversed the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, House Democrats responded by singing "God Bless America" on the Capitol steps.

Two weeks later, the Biden administration finally responded to the court's evisceration of reproductive rights and freedoms by issuing an executive order that enhances some protections for women seeking reproductive health services as well as their medical providers. The executive order is intended to "protect access to medication abortion," emergency medical care for pregnant people and contraception. It mandates both the Department of Justice and Health and Human Services to defend the rights of women who need to travel across state lines to access reproductive health care and to ensure that those who experience pregnancy-related medical emergencies can access the care they need, no matter where they are in the country.

It had been clear for at least two months how the Supreme Court would rule in the Dobbs case; nothing about this decision came as a surprise. Yet for some reason, the Biden administration took two weeks to respond. When it finally did so, as Claire Lampen writes at the Cut, Biden's response was wholly insufficient to the challenge. Republicans are openly pursuing "new laws that penalize not just providers but also patients, opening them up to surveillance by their neighbors ... and by data brokers," Lampen notes, as in Missouri's attempt "to incentivize private citizens to report people they suspect of crossing state lines" to terminate a pregnancy. Some legislators have already "proposed criminally charging patients directly," and sincerely intend to "pass a federal abortion ban, reconsider gay marriage, scrap the right to birth control."

Joe Biden continues to oppose expanding the Supreme Court in order to neutralize its radical right-wing justices, and has declined to explore allowing access to abortion and other reproductive health services on federal land, including military bases. He now says he supports a Senate filibuster "carve-out" on the issue of reproductive rights, but has done nothing to make that happen.In a statement to the Washington Post on Saturday, the Biden administration even suggested that those who want a more robust defense of women's reproductive rights and freedoms are "out of step" with "the mainstream of the Democratic Party."

Have today's Democrats forgotten how to fight? Or are they refusing to do so because too many of them are beholden to the same moneyed interests that also back the Republican-fascists and the "conservative" movement? Whatever the explanation, at a moment when America desperately needs spirited defenders of democracy, the Democratic Party's leaders are acting demoralized, with little fighting spirit.

In a recent essay at Medium, Dr. Mark Goulston, a leading psychiatrist, former FBI hostage negotiation trainer and the author of the bestsellers "Just Listen" and "Talking to 'Crazy,'" offers a provocative explanation for the Democratic Party's weakness. He argues that Democrats are "highly conflict avoidant" and that such a temperament has made them "mincemeat to the vast majority of the GOP who is allegiant to Donald Trump."

In my recent conversation with Goulston, he expanded on this analysis, arguing that Democrats keep losing to the Republicans because they refuse to speak passionately, clearly and in declarative terms to the American people. He warns that Republicans, especially Trump loyalists, are bullies who embrace and welcome conflict, and that Democrats do not fight back effectively because they refuse to acknowledge the reality that bullies must be confronted and cannot be negotiated with or defeated with rational arguments. Goulston further explains that Trump's followers remain loyal to him precisely because of his antisocial and anti-human behavior, not despite it.

Goulston also explains that many members of America's political class and the news media are naive or in denial about the nature of human evil, and therefore continue to express shock and surprise at each new revelation about the obvious crimes of the Trump regime.At the end of this conversation Goulston shares the advice he would give to Biden and other Democratic leaders about how to break their pattern of self-defeating behavior and formulate a winning plan to defeat the Republicans and preserve American democracy.

American society is experiencing multiple crises at once. Democracy is in crisis, and fascism is in the ascendancy. The pandemic has killed more than a million people in this country. There is extreme social inequality. There are mass shootings. The country is in a state of perennial grief and mourning but with no real catharsis or reckoning. It feels like America is on the verge of self-destruction, a form of societal and political suicide. How are you making sense of all this?

What you are describing is not just one moment of "suicidality." There are actually several moments or a prolonged period of time where people who feel suicidal form psychological adhesions to death as a way to take away their pain. It's not a psychological attachment, because a person can reason through that. A psychological adhesion is different: A person tucks that in their back pocket, so to speak. When you get slightly past the impulse, you reassure everybody: "I'm fine." But in your back pocket is this option, this exit strategy, this permanent solution to a temporary problem that you can always exercise if things get really bad. People don't talk about it because they don't want to scare others.

People who are depressed and suicidal feelhelpless, powerless, useless, worthless, meaningless and purposeless. It appears pointless to go on. We are seeing this on a societal level.

People who are really depressed and suicidal feel despair at the end. If you break down the word despair, it means "unpaired." Unpaired with the future, hopeless. Unpaired with the ability to get out of the challenging situation. You feel helpless, powerless, useless, worthless, meaningless and purposeless. When those feelings are all lined up like some dark one-armed slot machine, it appears pointless to go on. Death is viewed as a way to take the pain away. We are seeing this on a societal level.

America is also in the midst of a moral crisis. Fascism is a form of evil. What Trumpism has wrought and encouraged is fundamentally evil, yet the country's leaders and the larger political and news media class appear terrified of using the appropriate moral language.

It is important to identify evil at the earliest opportunity and then to stop it. You have to confront and stop evil in order to protect the people that you care about. You also need to identify evil in order to escape it. Most people we encounter are not evil. We are lucky in that way. But evil people do in fact exist. Denial of that fact is not healthy.

As a clinician, when you look at Donald Trump and his followers, what do you see?

The people that have trouble with conflict are not bullies. Bullies like to stir up conflict. Such people can get the best of us not only through their bullying behavior but also through their whining and excuse-making behavior. They can outrage us with their behavior. But if we are the type of person who is uncomfortable becoming enraged, then we will do everything we can to suppress our desire to confront that bully, to fight back, to stand up to them in a strong way.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

As soon as the bully sees that we are restraining ourselves, then they push us harder from being outraged to turning that anger inward through a dynamic I call "in-rage." Most people are so uncomfortable with their anger and rage they use almost all their energy to keep a lid on their feelings. Many Democrats, and other rational-minded people more generally, believe in respectful discourse. Those feelings of rage, and how the bully behaves, neuters and neutralizes them.

Here is how to confront a bully. Step one, identify those bullies in your life. Step two, never expect them to act differently when you talk with them. Never expect them to be decent because that's not who they are. Step three, always hold a bit of yourself back so that you're not off balance if the bully tries to provoke you. Finally, when the bully tries to provoke you, look clearly in their eyes. Stare at them firmly.

Don't try to intimidate them, but hold their gaze. By doing that you are communicating to the bully: "You know and I know what you just did and it didn't work." When you communicate that in a measured way, the bully is going to get more agitated. You can then try to engage the bully in a reasonable way or decide to disengage. Tell the bully, "If what you have to say is important, you need to talk to me instead of at me." You just hold your ground from there.

Why are so many members of America's political class and the mainstream media repeatedly "shocked" and "stunned" by Donald Trump's antisocial and anti-human behavior? This is a common reaction to the "revelations" about Jan. 6 and the violence at the Capitol, including Trump wishing death on Mike Pence. Trump has behaved this way for most if not all of his public life. If a person keeps being shocked by obvious behavior, what does that reveal about their personality defects? Are they really shocked, or are they just pretending?

The reason they're shocked is because a person cannot be partially sociopathic or narcissistic. It's a slippery road when you allow sociopaths or narcissists to ride over you unchecked. The denial, and giving such people the benefit of the doubt, just encourages them.

People on the left are afraid to acknowledge the dark parts of their personalities, such as anger and rage. Therefore, they deny to themselves that Donald Trump and other sociopaths and narcissists are dangerous.

People on the left, the Democrats especially, are also afraid to acknowledge the dark parts of their personalities, such as anger and rage. Such feelings fill them with shame. Therefore, they deny to themselves that Donald Trump and other such sociopaths and narcissists are so dangerous. Leading Democrats such as Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi need to learn to talk to the public in a very authoritative way. They smile and talk so rationally. They need to show some emotion and passion.

One of the reasons I believe Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton is that Donald Trump was declarative, and Hillary was explanatory. Hillary Clinton was showing the American people that she was really prepared for the responsibilities of being president of the United States. In an effort to be convincing, she wasn't compelling. Donald Trump was declarative, which meant you knew where he stood. You might not have agreed with him. But Trump was able to hook his base precisely because of how declarative he was, and is, in his speech.

Trump was also being a type of role model for his followers. He showed them that you don't have to sit on your anger and suppress it. You can act on it. Why keep in all that built-up frustration? Trump told his followers, "Let's go get even with whoever's bothering us! Join me, because we could all shoot someone in Times Square and still get elected! Hey, it's fun!"

Ultimately, Trump appeared on the stage and let the genie out of the bottle as a role model for unsuppressed and unrepressed thoughts and feelings. Many Americans of a certain background and political orientation who have a buildup of frustration and anger psychologically adhered themselves to Donald Trump. This is not a mere attachment. It is a psychological adhesion, which explains why they remain so loyal to him.

When the Supreme Court announced that it was taking away women's reproductive rights and freedoms, leading Democrats went outside on the Capitol steps and started singing. Nancy Pelosi read a poem. It was one of the most pathetic things I've ever seen.How do the Democratic Party's leaders see the world? Why would they default to that kind of pitiful behavior and think that's how you fight back against a bully?

Maybe they were singing to keep themselves from forcefully responding to the Republicans. They were trying to suppress their rage. It may also be that those Democrats were singing hymns to calm themselves down because they were being triggered, and they realized that it is dangerous to escalate with a sociopath or narcissist.

The latter are much more comfortable going off the cliff than most people are. They're going to push you to the limits of what you can tolerate emotionally. A sociopath or narcissist is not afraid of being outrageous. If it is your nature to be uncomfortable with becoming enraged, you're going to want to steer away from those feelings.

By comparison, the Republicans and Trump's other followers love becoming outraged. They use a vocabulary full of rageful words. They love that Trump is disrespectful to others, that he calls his enemies and people he dislikes names. Trump is getting his feelings off of his chest. His followers love that. Meanwhile, the Democrats just repress and suppress their dark feelings.

What do the Republicans and the larger right-wing movement understand about emotion that the Democrats do not?

Many Republicans, especially the likes of a Ted Cruz or Mitch McConnell, don't care about contradicting themselves. To them, it doesn't matter what they say. They're aligning themselves with who they perceive to be the person in power in this case, Donald Trump because they don't want to trigger his ire and they don't want to lose their own followers.

I'm guessing that a lot of the Republicans were raised by decent parents, and at least when they were children they were taught that certain values and ethics and morality were important. But being a politician became more important than those values. "Politician" became the core identity that supersedes other things.

In your recent article at Medium, you described the Democrats as being "highly conflict avoidant," and said that they deal with conflict in an unhealthy way, which helps explain why the Republicans and Trumpists are rolling over them. How does this unhealthy behavior manifest itself on a day-to-day basis?

They are hiding their legitimate outrage and other feelings under a mask of civility. They appear neutered in the eyes of the public because they are not expressing healthy, aggressive feelings. When someone who is neutered goes up against someone who is outrageous in their behavior, the neutered person loses.

If you had the opportunity to speak with President Biden in private what would you say to him?

I would ask him, "What is really going on?" I would keep pushing him on this question to get at the real answer. At some point Biden would say, "I'm a decent person but I am really angry at Trump and want him to get his comeuppance." Biden could never say that in public because it would be taken out of context.

Today's Democrats appear to be obsessed with compromise and finding an acceptable middle ground with the Republicans. But the Republicans only care about winning and power and are now openly willing to embrace fascism, political violence, white supremacy and other anti-democratic and anti-human values. In essence, this is an abusive relationship on a national scale and the Democrats are content to keep being abused. How can they break this cycle?

If I was consulting for the Democratic Party's leadership, I would ask them, "What is your desired outcome?" They might say, "Well, the desired outcome is that we find a way to get the Republicans and Trump to listen to reason and that would in turn break their cult."

I would continue by asking them, "What's the specific approach that you're taking that you believe will get Trump's followers away from his cult?" I would continue pushing them by asking, "Do you actually believe that what you just said would work?"

I would get the Democrats to agree that their current approach is flawed and doomed to failure. Perhaps that would help them open up and admit that they don't know what else to do.

I would get the Democrats to agree that their current approach is flawed and doomed to failure. Perhaps that would help them open up and admit that they don't know what else to do. I would continue pressing them by asking, "What has been your success rate these last four or so years?" In that moment, perhaps the Democratic Party's leadership could have some type of realization or epiphany and come up with a better plan.

You can't convince another person of their flawed approach to decision-making or life more generally. You have to get them to a point of self-discovery. Brainstorming with them is helpful too. "Good, now you're being open. Let's be open and see what might work. What do we know about these other kinds of personalities? What do we know about bullies?"

The Democratic Party's leaders need to have a moment where they realize: "We have to find a way to sound really angry, pissed off and insulted by Donald Trump and his followers. We have to do it a way so that whoever watches us knows that we're pissed off in no uncertain terms. We can't act like we are trying to sugarcoat our anger." That is how the Democrats can start to win.

Read more on Donald Trump and America's mental health:

Originally posted here:
Dr. Mark Goulston on why Democrats keep losing: They're afraid of their own anger - Salon

Human Behavior

‘Where The Crawdads Sing’ Explores Individual Liberty As A Survival Tool – The Federalist

In another time, Where the Crawdads Sing, written by Delia Owens, would be a coming of age, murder-mystery, romance drama with a raw and magnetic appeal. But in a time when all is politically scrutinized, reviewers ask whether Crawdads is green enough, and if Kya Clark is a pink hat-aligned woman.

However, what America finds in both the bestselling novel and the Reese Witherspoon-Taylor Swift-Daisy Edgar-Jones movie coming to theaters this week, is that Kya Clark governs herself in liberty and discipline, keeps to her family values, and is hard not to see as an all-American inspiration.

Editors note: Minor spoilers ahead.

Kyas story begins near the age of birth suffering violent child abuse. Her father physically and emotionally destroys the family that would have raised her. Crawdads pulls no punches on Pas brutality, yet also describes the way his prior choices in the face of economic depression and war corrupted his habits and decayed his mental health. Owens, a wildlife biologist with nonfiction science publications to her name, paints nature as a struggle for survival, and from the novels start rises an undercurrent that society is like an ecosystem in which all are susceptible to pitfalls, yet responsible for their steps and missteps.

Fully abandoned by age six, Kya comes into tension with truancy officers. The district pursues her, but throughout the hunt, Crawdads' tone favors an independent life in the marsh that suits the young girl. The feeling evoked is remarkably real for a child in an almost unbelievable situation. We grip onto the girl who increasingly thrives in nature, who would lose the nesting birds who provide her comforting songs and feathers if child protection were able to pluck her out. Her victory over their chase affirms that seemingly ruinous events in life may need to compost, as detritus in the marsh, enabling regeneration without intervention.

Along the way to maturity in the wild, Kya discovers that affordable gasoline lets her motor through the marsh and beyond the Intracoastal waterway. She can make private transactions of collected mussels for lifes basic necessities with the local merchants. Storekeepers Jumpin and Mabel take to her as would family.

Her mind and body developing, Kya and a boy, Tate, meet for private instruction on subjects beyond schoolbook reading alone. Sharing lessons on how awareness of nature all around them can quicken their verbal faculties, Kya and Tates schooling arrangement is far from standardized public education. Tate teaches Kya without union job security because he sincerely wants to. Their educational and social relationship is fruitful, pure, and passionate, illustrating both academic and social benefits of school choice.

Kyas worst fortunes gradually turn promising. At the pubescent onset of bleeding, Kya privately confides and asks Mabel for guidance. Mabel reassures Kya that startin life is special, and only women can do it. A shared life with someone in marriage becomes Kyas intimate yearning.

Kya breaks into financial independence as a wetlands biology author. Her fastidious illustrations earn the trust of her publisher and readers. Previously a total unknown, her uncensored solo discoveries are not only her economic lifeline but a boon to scholars. Despite town gossip about her swamp filth and mobs attacking her shack, Kya is undistracted from her patient observations.

Even Kyas ancestors, in their absence, endanger her independent life on the land through neglect of the property taxes. Her free way of life, though, is ultimately preserved when, to Kyas relief, she is able to cover the low back taxes by herself.

To all this wild growth, Chase Andrews is a foil, a life subsumed by the same public administrations whose officers would have hunted Kya down. Popular and victorious on the ball field, Chase is made into a hero in a school district so out of touch that it looks down its collective nose at Kya. Chase is lionized within the district despite prevalent beliefs that he tramples on the hearts and bodies of women and wildlife.

When Chases body is discovered, the novels suspense surges to a head. An intricate trial ensues til almost the finale. Most of the town hardly entertains critiques of Chase, nor itself, for the treatment of the types like Kya who live in the marsh. Their miseducations would never let them.

Unlike the pretenders who warp reality by evading true contact with it, as does Chase, the traditional working men are in-touch, reliable, strong, and sensible, including Scupper, Tate, Jumpin, Tom, and Jodie (Kyas brother). With woman and man connecting in nature, Crawdads envisions the sexes in harmony.

Owens says her idea for Crawdads came while face to face with lions and elephants, as she realized how much our behavior is similar to the animals. A spellbinding theme to todays readers, the idea of the animal in human nature also emerged in framing the U.S. Constitution. The founders realized our moral state was animal-like in its capability for both sublimity and tyranny. This inspired the Constitutions enumerated limits, checks, and balances on power, as well as the complimentary idea that moral cultivation is essential to civil society.

Inalienable rights let us, like Kya Clark, chart our own course. Conservative undertones are woven into Crawdads' earthy narrative in a way that seems more than coincidental. Owens muses on survival and territorial advantage in nature and human behavior. If the author were probed about consent of the governed, liberty, and family values in relation to the theme of the wild-like human condition, it would be interesting to hear her thoughts.

Crawdads is a cultural achievement; it does not need to be a culture warrior. It speaks to the soul not of environmentalist America or feminist America, but, refreshingly, the soul of America.

If true to the book, the movie directed by Olivia Newman (Chicago Fire, FBI) and starring Daisy Edgar-Jones (Normal People) as Kya, will showcase indefatigable red-blooded boys and girls, free men and women living unbridled and steadfast.

Michael Bedar works in media and design, enjoys building and managing small construction, wrote a novel, "Sweet Healing," about freedom and wellbeing, and is married and raising children. He learned boating in and around marshes.

Here is the original post:
'Where The Crawdads Sing' Explores Individual Liberty As A Survival Tool - The Federalist

Human Behavior

How to be less judgmental on social media and in real life – Vox.com

Casting judgment on others has never been so easy. Social media gives onlookers the opportunity to scoff at a persons every choice, from how they dress to what they feed their children. How people have behaved during the pandemic has inspired plenty of judgment in its own right: At the height of restrictions, adherence or lack thereof to masking and social distancing measures practically became barometers of peoples characters, indicating a lack of personal responsibility and empathy or an abundance of hysteria and over-caution, depending on your views.

While it gets a bad rap, in pre-modern times, judgment helped keep people safe. Judgments were alarm bells allowing humans to distinguish between toxic and harmless food, trustworthy and untrustworthy tribe members, and hardworking and lazy kinspeople, explains psychologist Carla Marie Manly, author of Joy From Fear: Create the Life of Your Dreams by Making Fear Your Friend.

Judgment is also a signal that someones behavior is unusual or out of context to your particular in-group, says Adam Moore, lecturer of psychology at the University of Edinburgh, who studies judgment and decision making. The role that automatic judgment plays, Moore says, is social signaling, social norm reinforcing.

But in todays mobile, digitally facilitated world, judgment can take on new, toxic forms, Moore says. When you silently cast judgment on someone from afar based on an Instagram story, you dont get feedback from other people or even the subject of your judgment and you dont learn how to make comments or critiques in a constructive way. Normally in a social situation, you judge somebodys behavior, and their response to you helps to calibrate your interaction with them, and also the responses of other people around you, Moore says. Because so much of our lives are disconnected from each other we dont perceive that body language and we dont perceive that social feedback anymore.

Digital platforms also incite and prioritize outrage and conflict, making it easy to look down on others from your moral high horse. When people are constantly sneering at others on public platforms, the perception of what normal social judgments should look like is skewed. In normal communities and in normal, functional families, passing judgment on other peoples behavior, it functions very well, Moore says. Families rarely break up because somebody says, Hey, youre acting like a jerk at a Fourth of July party.

While judgments help signal social norms and allow us to identify our people, mean-spirited critiques are unproductive. Discernment, on the other hand, can help you identify unhealthy and toxic behaviors, Manly says. In todays polarized world, its important to detect when someones attitudes and beliefs pose a threat to others rights and well-being. Unless someones behavior is actively harming themselves or others (in which case, you should name the behavior, tell the other person how youre feeling, and set boundaries on how youd like them to act moving forward), learning to curb petty moral righteousness is possible, but requires slowing down your thoughts and having some empathy.

If youre motivated to stop hurtful critiques, you have to evaluate their source. When you feel a twang of annoyance when a friend impulsively books a vacation despite constantly complaining about money, ask yourself why youre upset by this behavior or what purpose your anger or annoyance serves in this instance. Anger is often a signal that another person isnt taking your well-being into consideration or theres a conflict, Moore explains. Does your friends last-minute trip conflict with upcoming plans the two of you have or is it simply something you wouldnt personally do?

Do I have any reason to demand that other people in this situation care more about me than whatever signal theyre trying to send? Moore says. Even if the answer to that question is yes, having to stop and think about it often turns the volume down on things.

In order to reframe judgmental thoughts, you need to catch them in the act. We have to pull back and go, Im being judgy, I dont really want to do that, Manly says. If you find yourself whispering a snide remark to your friend about a strangers shoes, try to reframe the judgment by complimenting the persons confidence, for instance. Just as being judgmental is a practiced habit, so is stopping thought patterns that lead to hurtful observations and assumptions. If we come to notice were doing something that is unhealthy and pause and stop it, then we are far less likely to go down that path, Manly says. Thats why I like compensating because if I do catch myself doing something thats comparative, rather than just noticing, I give myself other positive hits [like] look at their beautiful smile.

Manly also suggests looking back on previous moments of judgment and thinking about what you could do better next time. Recall a moment you made a judgmental remark. What was the response? Would the statement make someone feel better about themselves if they heard it? Do you feel better about yourself having remembered it? If not, allow these reflections to guide you so the next time you see someone talking on speaker phone on the subway, for example, you can instead internally marvel at their interesting phone case instead of scoffing at having to hear their entire conversation.

When people buck social conventions, those casting judgments are often quick to be offended before considering a reason why someone else is engaging in that behavior. Say your colleague is quitting their job before landing a new one and youre outraged at their irresponsibility. Instead of jumping to conclusions, get curious and ask them about their reasons for resigning or what they hope to accomplish during their time off. Curiosity is the antidote for judgment, Manly says. Manly suggests meeting those youre unjustly judging with compassion: hoping theyre happy and doing well.

When it comes to differences of opinion, it can be easy to assume that someone who doesnt share your beliefs is evil or stupid, Moore says. Instead of reacting aggressively in an attempt to change their mind, Moore suggests thinking of a good-faith reason why someone would think this way as a means to slow down the judgment process. What does the person youre judging know about their behavior or beliefs that you dont know?

For example, when it comes to relatives with differing political opinions, Moore suggests thinking about how the loved one ended up believing what they believe: the media they consume, the people they surround themselves with. I find that helps me to not make toxic judgments about other peoples motivations, he says. Its really, really easy and very, very tempting to assume that people who disagree with you about something that you believe in very strongly or have very strong beliefs about are evil or stupid.

Of course, you should never compromise on important moral and social issues, Moore says. Relationships with people whose views are antithetical to your own will have to be renegotiated and youll need to decide how to move forward if you want to maintain contact. But you can control your initial assumptions of them based on their beliefs. What function is expressing those judgments serving right now? Moore says. Am I trying to build consensus about an issue or am I just trying to wave my flag and say Im of the red tribe or the blue tribe or the green tribe?

There are very few things you can do to convince people your way of thinking and living is ideal. Save for the occasions where someones behavior is dangerous and harmful, Manly says to focus only on what you can control. We can only control our behaviors, our thoughts, and our actions.

Many human behaviors are actions signaling to others what kind of person you are or what groups you belong to, Moore says. Instead of criticizing your aunt for constantly sharing bizarre Minion memes on Facebook, consider shes just vocalizing her membership in the coalition of Minion-lovers. Understanding actions underlying meanings can help you avoid pointless arguments trying to sway someone to your side of an issue.

Instead of judging and attacking and hoping others see your way, sympathize with others reasoning for their actions, dont feed into toxic thoughts, and lead by example.

You cant make somebody value the things that you value, Moore says. All you can do is try to gently demonstrate that valuing the things that you value makes the world around you better and people will want to move there in some intellectual or moral sense.

Even Better is here to offer deeply sourced, actionable advice for helping you live a better life. Do you have a question on money and work; friends, family, and community; or personal growth and health? Send us your question by filling out this form. We might turn it into a story.

Original post:
How to be less judgmental on social media and in real life - Vox.com

Human Behavior

Scientists unravel the neuronal metabolism in learning and memory – News-Medical.Net

Exploring the predictive properties of neuronal metabolism can contribute to our understanding of how humans learn and remember. This key finding from a consideration of molecular mechanisms of learning and memory conducted by scientists from Russia and the U.S. has been published in Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

The emerging trend in neuroscience is to consider the work of neurons as anticipatory and future-oriented, although this approach is not yet mainstream and features in just a few publications. In a paper entitled 'Neuronal metabolism in learning and memory: The anticipatory activity perspective,' Yuri I. Alexandrov, HSE Professor and Head of the V.B. Shvyrkov Laboratory of Psychophysiology at the Russian Academy of Sciences Institute of Psychology, and Mikhail V. Pletnikov, Professor of the Department of Physiology at the State University of New York, University at Buffalo, argue that neurons behave proactively because they strive to survive-; just as all living organisms. Neurons use microenvironmental metabolites as 'food', and neuronal impulse activity is aimed at obtaining these metabolites. Rather than responding to an incoming signal, neurons proactively trigger an influx of needed substances to the cell, such as neurotransmitters.

When a specialized set of our neurons fire together, we act to obtain a behavioral outcome, while the neurons also obtain their own micro-outcome in the form of needed metabolites. This process can be described as metabolic cooperation of cells, involving not only neurons but also glial, somatic, glandular, muscle and other cells throughout the body. This principle of how cells work is central to learning, which essentially means creating systemwide groups of metabolically cooperating cells that drive human behavior."

Yuri Alexandrov, Professor at HSE School of Psychology

The researchers note that for a long time, the 'stimulus-response' paradigm was dominant in the study of molecular mechanisms of learning and memory; it was assumed that just as the entire human body responds to environmental stimuli, neurons respond to incoming impulses which cause excitation of certain parts of the neuron's membrane. The neuron either fires or does not fire, depending on whether or not the excitation reaches a certain threshold.

Back in 1930s1970s, the Russian physiologist Peter Anokhin developed his theory of functional systems, including the concept of 'integrative activity of neurons', according to which a neuron's excitation causes intraneuronal chemical processes-; rather than a summation of local excitations on the membrane. These chemical processes lead to a neuronal spike.

Building on Anokhin's theory, his student Vyacheslav Shvyrkov and colleagues developed a systems-oriented approach to the study of neurons. However, Anokhin's understanding of the sequence of events was traditional: excitation of a neuron comes first, followed by a response.

'An important recent step in understanding how neurons work has been the idea that a neuron's anticipatory activity, rather than an external impulse, is what comes first. The neuron does not respond to incoming excitation but proactively triggers an influx of activity,' Alexandrov explains.

The authors argue that exploring systemwide intercellular metabolic cooperation as a learning mechanism could be a promising area of focus for further experimental research.

This approach, they believe, could lead to breakthroughs in studying the behavior of malignant cells and in developing new cancer treatments.

'Malignancies consist of cells that metabolically cooperate not only with their immediate environment but also with other cells in the body. We plan to conduct experimental studies to explore tumor cell responses to diametrically opposed individual behaviors, such as striving towards a desirable event or avoiding an undesirable or dangerous one. This can give us insight into how various systemwide cellular integrations impact tumor cells' survival. As a result, we hope to propose an effective approach to influencing tumor cells through human behavior, Alexandrov concludes.

Source:

Journal reference:

Alexandrov, Y.I., et al. (2022) Neuronal metabolism in learning and memory: The anticipatory activity perspective. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104664.

More:
Scientists unravel the neuronal metabolism in learning and memory - News-Medical.Net

Human Behavior

Pet of the Week: Smoot | Pet of the Week | thedaonline.com – The Daily Athenaeum – thedaonline

Meet Smoot! Smoot is a cute bearded dragon lizard who does a great rock impersonation. He loves to sit on his log under his heat lamp and observe his domain (the house and/or off the balcony). Nothing phases him... he is super chill and a great buddy for long car rides. Smoot is more judgmental of human behavior than any cat, always with his nose in the air. When he is feeling particularly energetic, all he wants to do is bolt around the house and/or outside while on his leash. Each time he does a spurt of running around somewhere, Smoot looks back at me to see if I'm still there. He loves to eat live bugs and the choicest fruits, but hates eating his vegetables. Smoot doesn't do any tricks, but he is (mostly) potty-trained, and everyone loves to watch him eat because he looks like a dinosaur. His favorite treat is bananas- he goes bananas for bananas. He also likes eating clover flowers and the bees that pollinate them.

Submitted by Catherine Smith.

Go here to read the rest:
Pet of the Week: Smoot | Pet of the Week | thedaonline.com - The Daily Athenaeum - thedaonline

Human Behavior

Algorithm claims to predict crime in U.S. cities before it happens – SecurityInfoWatch

A new computer algorithm can now forecast crime in a big city near you apparently.

The algorithm, which was formulated by social scientists at the University of Chicago and touts 90% accuracy, divides cities into 1,000-square-foot tiles, according to a study published in Nature Human Behavior. Researchers used historical data on violent crimes and property crimes from Chicago to test the model, which detects patterns over time in these tiled areas and tries to predict future events. It performed just as well using data from other big cities, including Atlanta, Los Angeles and Philadelphia, the study showed.

The new tool contrasts with previous models for prediction, which depict crime as emerging from hotspots that spread to surrounding areas. Such an approach tends to miss the complex social environment of cities, as well as the nuanced relationship between crime and the effects of police enforcement, thus leaving room for bias, according to the report.

It is hard to argue that bias isnt there when people sit down and determine which patterns they will look at to predict crime because these patterns, by themselves, dont mean anything, said Ishanu Chattopadhyay, Assistant Professor of Medicine at the University of Chicago and senior author of the study. But now, you can ask the algorithm complex questions like: What happens to the rate of violent crime if property crimes go up?

But Emily M. Bender, professor of linguistics at the University of Washington, said in a series of tweets that the focus should be on targeting underlying inequities rather than on predictive policing, while also noting that the research appears to ignore securities fraud or environmental crimes.

And other crime prediction models previously used by law enforcers have been found to erroneously target certain people based on a narrower set of factors. In 2012, the Chicago Police Department along with academic researchers implemented the Crime and Victimization Risk Model that produced a list of so-called strategic subjects, or potential victims and perpetrators of shooting incidents determined by factors such as age and arrest history.

The model assigned a score that determined how urgently people on the list needed to be monitored, and a higher score meant they were more likely to be perceived as either a potential victim or perpetrator of a gun crime.

But after a lengthy legal battle, a Chicago Sun-Times investigation revealed in 2017 that nearly half of the people identified by the model as potential perpetrators had never been charged with illegal gun possession, while 13% had never been charged with a serious offense. In contrast, the tool designed by Chattopadhyay and his colleagues uses hundreds of thousands of sociological patterns to figure out the risk of crime at a particular time and space.

The study, Event-level Prediction of Urban Crime Reveals Signature of Enforcement Bias in U.S. Cities, was supported by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Neubauer Collegium for Culture and Society.

___

2022 Bloomberg L.P. Visitbloomberg.com.Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Go here to read the rest:
Algorithm claims to predict crime in U.S. cities before it happens - SecurityInfoWatch

Human Behavior

UST Strengthens Presence in the Health Tech Sector with Strategic Investment in Israeli SaaS Start-up Well-Beat – PR Newswire

Innovative new digital patient engagement solution allows for dynamic personalization and improved outcomes

TEL AVIV, Israel and ALISO VIEJO, Calif., July 6, 2022 /PRNewswire/ --UST,a leading digital transformation solutions company has announced that it will strengthen its presence in the healthcare technology market with a strategic investment inWell-Beat, a pioneering Israeli start-up that adds a human touch to healthcare through patient-centered behavioral AI. The investment in Well-Beat is the latest example of UST accelerating the adoption of emerging tech solutions in healthcare and transforming lives through the power of technology.

By investing in Well-Beat, UST is helping to bring one of the success stories of the innovative Israel start-up tech ecosystem to a wider global market. Combining the size and scale of UST with the agility of Well-Beat, this strategic investment will put digital transformation to work for patients at a time when healthcare delivery systems are strained and intelligent patient engagement is increasingly critical.

"At UST, we work with academia, innovators and entrepreneurs from across the global start-up community to bring the very best transformational solutions to market. However, we only directly invest in less than one percent of our partnerships those that represent the best of the best in emerging health tech. Well-Beat has earned its reputation as a successful innovator in the rapidly evolving HealthTech space, and we're thrilled to offer a platform which empowers them to continue their groundbreaking work," said Sunil Kanchi, Chief Information Officer & Chief Investment Officer, UST.

UST, together with Well-Beat, created a first-of-its-kind digital patient engagement Software as a Service (SaaS) solution that dynamically adapts to each individual patient over time, delivers personalized conversational guidelines to the clinician at the point of care, offers customized prompts that are shaped by the profile of each individual patient and helps deliver direct and indirect behaviorally guided motivational nudges to patients based on over 1,400 unique factors.

Utilizing information gathered through medical records, connected devices and short patient surveys, Well-Beat's technology dynamically adapts patient communication to provide intelligent interventions and highly customized experiences. Furthermore, this latest patient engagement solution designed in collaboration with UST is able to seamlessly operate within the existing health tech ecosystem of any healthcare delivery organization. This includes working with electronic health record (EHR) systems, public cloud providers, patient registries and existing wellness or care management applications.

Capable of operating without mandating changes to existing workflows or onboarding to a new platform, this dynamically personalized digital patient engagement solution is designed to help healthcare organizations achieve greater returns on their existing IT investments as well as achieve higher response rates and better engagement through their existing communication channels.

"As healthcare transitions outside the four walls of the hospital, the behavioral AI powered patient engagement solution that UST has built with Well-Beat enables healthcare organizations to effectively engage high-risk patients - resulting in improved care outcomes," saidRaj Gorla, Chief Executive Officer, UST ContineoHealth.

"Well-Beat is excited about strengthening our relationship with UST. The increased collaboration and ability to leverage UST's vast experience and resources will help us continue to deliver personalized patient outreach," saidRavit Ram Bar-Dea, Co-Founder & Chief Executive Officer, Well-Beat. "We feel that UST's leadership and expertise across the entire healthcare technology ecosystem and continuum is tailor-made to complement our strengths as we look to bring new products to market."

About UST:

For more than 22 years, UST has worked side by side with the world's best companies to make a real impact through transformation. Powered by technology, inspired by people, and led by our purpose, we partner with our clients from design to operation. Through our nimble approach, we identify their core challenges, and craft disruptive solutions that bring their vision to life. With deep domain expertise and a future-proof philosophy, we embed innovation and agility into our clients' organizationsdelivering measurable value and lasting change across industries, and around the world. Together, with over 30,000 employees in 30+ countries, we build for boundless impacttouching billions of lives in the process. Visit us atwww.UST.com

About Well-Beat:

Well-Beat providesa next-generation patient behavioral change solution, based on human behavior, expert understanding and proprietary data-driven technology. At its core, the solution empowers healthcare providers and organizations to dramatically increase patient engagement and treatment regime adherence.

The company's mission is to bring humanity to healthcare through raising the level of engagement and personal responsibility of patients to their health and wellness regime. By incorporating Well-Beat insights into their daily practices, healthcare providers can generate more effective face-to-face meetings with patients, along with digital intelligent interventions, to ultimately provide the most suitable wellness program and approach for each patient. Through adjustment of personalized interactions to every patient, Well-Beat enables healthcare organizations to boost their operational efficiency, increase revenues and reduce long-term healthcare costs, while maintaining the level of treatment. Learn more athttps://www.well-beat.com/

Media Contacts, UST:

Tinu Cherian Abraham+1 (949) 415-9857

Merrick Laravea+1 (949) 416-6212

Neha Misri+91-9972631264[emailprotected]

Media Contacts, U.S.:

S&C PR+1-646.941.9139[emailprotected]

Media Contacts, Australia:

Team Lewis[emailprotected]

Media Contacts, U.K.:

FTI Consulting[emailprotected]

Logo: https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/1422658/UST_Logo.jpg

SOURCE UST

Read more from the original source:
UST Strengthens Presence in the Health Tech Sector with Strategic Investment in Israeli SaaS Start-up Well-Beat - PR Newswire