Although support for extremely punitive policies toward PWAs has declined, AIDS remains a stigmatized condition in the United States. The persistence of discomfort with PWAs, blame directed at PWAs for their condition, and misapprehensions about casual social contact are cause for continuing concern and should be addressed in HIV prevention and education programs.

Social isolation has been recognized as a major risk factor for morbidity and mortality in humans for more than a quarter of a century. Although the focus of research has been on objective social roles and health behavior, the brain is the key organ for forming, monitoring, maintaining, repairing, and replacing salutary connections with others. Accordingly, population-based longitudinal research indicates that perceived social isolation (loneliness) is a risk factor for morbidity and mortality independent of objective social isolation and health behavior. Human and animal investigations of neuroendocrine stress mechanisms that may be involved suggest that (a) chronic social isolation increases the activation of the hypothalamic pituitary adrenocortical axis, and (b) these effects are more dependent on the disruption of a social bond between a significant pair than objective isolation per se. The relational factors and neuroendocrine, neurobiological, and genetic mechanisms that may contribute to the association between perceived isolation and mortality are reviewed.

In a two-wave national telephone survey, a probability sample of English-speaking adults indicated their attitudes toward gay men at Wave 1 (1990-91; n = 538) and toward both gay men and lesbians approximately 1 year later (n = 382 at Wave 2). At Wave 1, heterosexuals reporting interpersonal contact (31.3%) manifested more positive attitudes toward gay men than those without contact. Their attitudes were more favorable to the extent that they reported more relationships, closer relationships, and receiving direct disclosure about another's homosexuality. At Wave 2, these findings were generally replicated for attitudes toward lesbians as well as gay men. Cross-wave analyses suggest a reciprocal relationship between contact and attitudes. Theoretical and policy implications of the results are discussed, with special attention to the role of interpersonal disclosure in reducing stigma based on a concealable status.

Social isolation has been recognized as a major risk factor for morbidity and mortality in humans for more than a quarter century. The brain is the key organ of social connections and processes, however, and the same objective social relationship can be experienced as caring and protective or as exploitive and isolating. We review evidence that the perception of social isolation (i.e., loneliness) impacts brain and behavior and is a risk factor for broad-based morbidity and mortality. However, the causal role of loneliness on neural mechanisms and mortality is difficult to test conclusively in humans. Mechanistic animal studies provide a lens through which to evaluate the neurological effects of a member of a social species living chronically on the social perimeter. Experimental studies show that social isolation produces significant changes in brain structures and processes in adult social animals. These effects are not uniform across the brain or across species but instead are most evident in brain regions that reflect differences in the functional demands of solitary versus social living for a particular species. The human and animal literatures have developed independently, however, and significant gaps also exist. The current review underscores the importance of integrating human and animal research to delineate the mechanisms through which social relationships impact the brain, health, and well-being.

Research involving nonhuman primates (NHPs) has played a vital role in many of the medical and scientific advances of the past century. NHPs are used because of their similarity to humans in physiology, neuroanatomy, reproduction, development, cognition, and social complexity—yet it is these very similarities that make the use of NHPs in biomedical research a considered decision. As primate researchers, we feel an obligation and responsibility to present the facts concerning why primates are used in various areas of biomedical research. Recent decisions in the United States, including the phasing out of chimpanzees in research by the National Institutes of Health and the pending closure of the New England Primate Research Center, illustrate to us the critical importance of conveying why continued research with primates is needed. Here, we review key areas in biomedicine where primate models have been, and continue to be, essential for advancing fundamental knowledge in biomedical and biological research. Am. J. Primatol. 76:801–827, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.