You are here: Home / Archives for science in the media

Football frets: The evidence on repetitive head injuries

September 6, 2012 By 1 Comment

With football season underway, many Americans are spending their weekends cheering on their favorite teams at stadiums and tuning in to watch televised games.  Personally, I enjoy following my college football team. But I always feel a sense of dread when a player takes an especially hard hit.

It turns out, those repeated hits add up to some real neurological problems for football players.

A study published this week in the journal Neurology followed nearly 3,500 football players who played at least five seasons in the N.F.L. from 1959 to 1988.

Over the course of the study, 334 of the players died. When researchers from the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health reviewed their death certificates, they found Alzheimer’s disease was an factor in seven of the deaths and Lou Gehrig’s disease was a factor in seven others. These rates are more than three times what you would expect to see in the normal population.

This new study is part of a growing body of research on the neurological repercussions of repeated head injuries. Another study published earlier this year found repetitive head impacts over the course of a single season may negatively impact learning in some collegiate athletes.

And a center at the Boston University School of Medicine has documented evidence of a condition called Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy, or CTW, a progressive degenerative disease of the brain found in people with a history of repetitive brain trauma.

The N.F.L. is investing in more research. This week, the organization donated $30 million to the National Institutes of Health for research on the connection between brain injuries and long-term disorders. That’s a good thing, because this is one topic we need more evidence on.

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, Health and Wellness, In The Media Tagged With: , ,

Slimming it down? New evidence on low-calorie diets

September 4, 2012 By 5 Comments

Over the past few years, you may have heard the buzz about the potential for a low-calorie diet to prolong life and prevent chronic medical conditions like heart disease and cancer.

While the concept of restricting calories has been around for decades, a longitudinal study of monkeys published in 2009 seemed to provide definitive evidence that eating less was good for you. The study by researchers at the University of Wisconsin found a diet of moderate caloric restrictions over 20 years lowered the incidence of aging-related deaths and reduced the incidence of diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular disease, and brain atrophy.

But last week, a new longitudinal study of different species of monkey raised questions about the idea of restricting calories to improve health. The study included 121 monkeys split into two groups. The experimental group was fed 30 percent fewer calories than the control group.

In the study published last week, which was sponsored by the National Institute on Aging, the monkeys on restricted diets did not live any longer than those with normal diets. Rates of cancer and heart disease were the same for monkeys on restricted diets and normal diets. While some groups of monkeys on restricted diets had lower levels of cholesterol, blood sugar and triglycerides, they still did not live longer than the monkeys who ate normally.

The study is interesting from a health perspective because it raises questions about the notion of restricting calories to improve health. But it’s also a prime example of why it’s important to collect data from more than one study.

“This shows the importance of replication in science,” Steven Austad, interim director of the Barshop Institute for Longevity and Aging Studies at the University of Texas Health Science Center, told the New York Times. Austad, who was not involved in either study, also explained that the first study was not as conclusive as portrayed in the media.

The take home message: It’s important to collect evidence from multiple studies before drawing conclusions, even when the data seems extremely convincing.

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, Health and Wellness Tagged With: , , , , ,

Evidence-based Olympics, Part II: The facts on fitness products

August 7, 2012 By Leave a Comment

We’ve all seen the advertisements of the sweaty, exhausted athlete pausing to take a sip of a brightly-colored drink and then going on to score the winning goal or set a personal record. Magazines and web sites – especially in these days when Olympic athletes dominate the news – are filled with fitness products that supposedly make you perform better or recovery more quickly.  But are any of those claims true?

A group of researchers at the University of Oxford set out to answer that exact question. They analyzed magazine advertisements and web sites of 104 different fitness products looking for real evidence behind their claims. Then they wrote to manufacturers of fitness products asking for references to research that backed up their claims.

But their study did not find much credible evidence. More than half of the web sites they reviewed did not provide any references. They did find a total of 146 specific references to study, but they were only able to find 76 studies to review.

None of the studies they found were systematic reviews. Eighty-four percent were judged to be of high risk-bias, and only 58 percent used randomization. In total, only three of the studies were judged to be high quality.

The study was thoroughly reported on in the New York Times, along with responses from beverage manufacturers and from health and nutrition experts not involved in the study.

Politics aside, there is a clear lack of evidence about whether performance-enhancing products really work.

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, Health and Wellness, In The Media Tagged With: , , ,

Evidence-based Olympics: The science of sport

August 3, 2012 By 1 Comment

Much of the world is watching the 2012 Olympics with excitement as athletes attempt to swim faster, jump higher and dive more gracefully than humans ever have before.  The casual spectator might be surprised at the amount of science that goes into competition at the Olympic level.

Here at EBL, we tracked down a round-up of media on scientists working with Olympic athletes to help them become the best they can be.

Among the interesting research is a study trying to determine the most efficient freestyle stroke technique for swimmers. A mechanical engineering professor at John Hopkins University used laser body scans and underwater video of two Olympic-level swimmers to create a computational fluid dynamic model to compare the two different freestyle strokes. His work determined that a method known as the “deep-thrust” swimming style is the most effective way to swim freestyle.

Another professor of biomedical engineering at the University of California is using physics to help elite divers. She installed force sensors on diving platforms to measure the forces divers use when they begin their dives. “The athletes feel the forces and the coaches see the effect of the forces,” Professor Jill L. McNitt-Gray explained. “By measuring forces, they could both get a sense of what they actually are.”

And a mechanical engineer at Sheffield Hallam University in the United Kingdom studies the role technology has played in the history of sport. He’s written extensively this year on the effects of rule changes and technology on sporting performance over time.

Certainly, there are many more examples of science in sport such as aerodynamic helmets used in cycling and the biological effects of endurance sports, to name two.

When it comes down to individual competitions, luck and human spirit certainly do play a role – especially at the Olympics. But it’s interesting to take a look behind the scenes to see the role that science plays as well.

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, Health and Wellness, In The Media Tagged With: , , , , ,

The science of political campaigns

July 17, 2012 By 1 Comment

The 2012 presidential candidates will spend billions of dollars to encourage people to vote for them this year.  Independent analysts currently estimate that President Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney will spend more than $6 billion in their campaigns. But how do they really know that money will bring them votes?

It turns out there is an emerging cadre of researchers using scientific techniques – specifically the randomized controlled trial – to find out which campaign strategies actually bring people to the polls.

Among them are Todd Rogers, a behavioral psychologist at Harvard University, and David Nickerson, a political science professor at the University of Notre Dame. Together, they conducted a study in the 2008 Democratic primary in Pennsylvania that attempted to determine whether get-out-the-vote reminder calls made a significant difference in voter turnout.

For the study, Rogers came up with some questions that would ask people about their plans on voting day such as “What do you think you’ll be doing before you head to the polls on Tuesday?” and “Where do you think you’ll be coming from that day?” His theory – based cognitive psychology principles – was that these questions would plant a seed voters’ minds to helps them remember to vote.

The researchers used the questions in a randomized controlled trial. Some citizens received phone calls asking the questions, others received the standard get-out-the-vote call and others did not receive a phone call. They found a dramatic result: People who were asked the planning questions were twice as likely to vote as people who were not.

There are other examples of scientific studies applied to campaign strategies. Rogers and a colleague at Yale University found evidence that messages which tell people high turnout is expected are more effective at motivating voters than messages which emphasize low voter turnout.

And a review of field studies in get-out-the-vote campaigns found that many of these strategies improve voter turnout, but tend to mobilize well-represented groups of people and miss under-represented groups – effectively widening disparities in the electorate.

Here at EBL, we think it is great news that social scientists are applying scientific methods to the art of political campaigning – especially where so much money is involved. And we hope it’s information that candidates use in their campaigns.

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, In The Media Tagged With: , , , , , ,

The media gets it right: The health effects of coffee

June 26, 2012 By 2 Comments

Here at EBL, we love it when a major media outlet takes a fair and balanced look at the evidence.  As we’ve written about before, mainstream publications don’t always present all of the evidence.  But this week, the New York Times published an excellent update on the health effects of coffee.

Health writer Jane Brody first wrote up a thorough review of the health effects of coffee in 2008.

Among the findings she reported:

  • Drinks with fewer than 550 milligrams of caffeine, which includes a Grande brew from Starbucks, are equally as hydrating as drinking pure water. (Many previous reports have touted coffee’s diuretic effects.)
  • There is very little evidence that coffee increases your risk of heart attack or abnormal heart rhythms.
  • Coffee causes a small, temporary rise in blood pressure, but there’s no evidence that it leads to chronic hypertension.
  • And on a positive note, coffee is found to increase alertness, happiness and endurance in aerobic activities. It also helps blunt the feeling of pain. (No wonder so many Americans love it so!)

Brody’s update, published this week, was based on a study published in May in the New England Journal of Medicine. Here’s how she summed it up:

“When smoking and many other factors known to influence health and longevity were taken into account, coffee drinkers in the study were found to be living somewhat longer than abstainers. Further, the more coffee consumed each day — up to a point, at least — the greater the benefit to longevity.”

That’s good news on two fronts: Coffee drinkers the world over can enjoy brews without worry, and the New York Times gets accolades for balanced, comprehensive reporting.

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, Health and Wellness, In The Media Tagged With: , , ,

Studies on same-sex parenting: The details matter

June 20, 2012 By 1 Comment

Here on EBL, we’ve talked frequently about what makes for quality research. There’s new research out this month on gay parents that illustrates the importance of seeking out high quality research.

A new study by a University of Texas sociologist  surveyed nearly 3,000 Americans ages 18 to 39 to ask about their family structure growing up. Of the participants, 248 grew up in households where one parent  had a same-sex relationship at some point.  The study found that children of these parents were more likely than kids in other family structures to be on public assistance, unemployed or in therapy as adults, among other negative outcomes.

To collect information about same-sex parenting, the study asked: “Did either of your parents ever have a romantic relationship with someone of the same sex?” and then asked whether participants had lived with their parents at the time.

But the question does not collect enough information about these families. Are they parents involved in heterosexual marriages who had an affair, or divorced and then entered into a same-sex relationship?  We just know. The study didn’t ask any questions about whether participants were raised in stable homes with committed parents who were of the same sex.

The study has sparked a flurry of media attention, including the New York Times and Time magazine, among other

s, with plenty of criticism. And the criticism is merited, said Ritch Savin-Williams, Director of the Sex and Gender Lab at the Cornell’s College of Human Ecology.

“The research design of this study is sufficiently flawed (inappropriate comparison group) as to merit disbelief in the findings,” he said. “It is unclear if this major shortcoming was lack of scientific rigor or in some part influenced by the funding sources that have both religious and political agendas.”

There is a systematic review on same-sex parenting that provides more answers. The review looked at 33 studies that lesbian, gay and heterosexual parents. Their analysis found no difference in parenting ability or the children’s psychological and social success between same-sex and heterosexual parent partners.

Clearly, the issue of same-sex parenting is politically-charged for a lot of reasons. The point we’d like to make here on EBL is that it’s important to understand the details of research study, and draw your conclusions with all of the evidence.

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, In The Media, Youth Development Tagged With: , , , ,

Disney takes its cues from the evidence

June 11, 2012 By Leave a Comment

In major news this week, the Walt Disney Co. banned the advertising of junk foods from its television, radio and Internet programming. Under the new guidelines, advertisers who want to promote food and beverages on Disney programming for children must meet guidelines on serving size, calories, and fat and sugar content.

While it’s inspiring that such a large company is interested in promoting health among kids, I was even more inspired that Disney created a policy based on real evidence. Because, in fact, there is a growing body of evidence that links media consumption – and specifically advertisements – with negative health outcomes for children.

This systematic review, for example, looked at 173 studies examining the relationship between media consumption and health outcomes among children. In 80 percent of the studies, more media exposure was associated with a negative health outcome, and childhood obesity had the strongest correlation. This analysis considered the quantity of media that children watched, but not the content.

Another meta-analysis found a significant association between the proportion of children overweight and the number commercials per hour on children’s television, especially ads that promoting junk foods. The study used data from surveys of advertising on children’s television and estimates of the prevalence of overweight among children, in the U.S., Australia and eight European countries. It concluded the quantity and content of advertising on children’s television programs has a specific effect on children.

It’s great to see a major company taking cues from the evidence in an effort to improve the health of children!

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, Health and Wellness, policy Tagged With: , , , , ,

Exaggerating neuroscience in the news

May 22, 2012 By Leave a Comment

The 1990s were proclaimed the “Decade of the Brain” by President George W. Bush – an action that bolstered neuroscience research and continues to spur discoveries about one of the most important human organs.

Neuroscience researchers have made strides in a myriad of realms – personality, economics, human develop and medicine, to name a few.  Of course, these discoveries have been reported and discussed across news channels and the Internet, including here on EBL.  (We’ve written about the impact on video games on the brain and the benefits of meditation, to name a few.)

Now a new study in the journal Neuron calls into question how well the media have explained neuroscience research. The study reviewed articles publishes in six major British newspapers from 2000 to 2010. The study found three ways that the brain is commonly portrayed in the media.

The first is the idea of brain as a resource that needs to be protected an optimized through, for example, doing crossword puzzles or avoiding television.  This concept makes it seems like “exercising” the brain is as simple a strengthening a muscle, which is an inaccurate simplification.

The second is the idea of the brain as a way to quantify the difference between people – the idea that gender, sexual orientation and conditions like substance abuse and obesity show up in our brains. While differences in our personalities and behaviors certainly do show up in our brains, it doesn’t mean that women, or gay people or alcoholics are the same.

The third idea is that the brain provides biological proof of our experiences. While it’s true that our experiences do show up in our brains, the review found that media stories often overextend brain research. For example, a study showing that informational overload can crowd out empathy was presented as evidence that social networking websites like Twitter rob people of compassion, even though there’s no proof that the evidence extends that far.

“You can do without a lot of your body parts – but without your brain, you just aren’t you,” said Barbara Ganzel, a researcher at Cornell’s College of Human Ecology who studies the impact of trauma on the brain. “The mystery of the connection between your brain and ‘you’ is exciting and scary and complicated. While we’re beginning to better understand the connection, there is a long road ahead before we will fully comprehend the answers to many of these questions.”

The take-home message: While we’re making great strides in neuroscience research, the media often extends the actual evidence in ways that may not be completely accurate. The brain is the most complex organ in the human body, and one we’re not likely to understand fully for a very long time.

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, Health and Wellness, In The Media Tagged With: , , ,

Probiotics and antibiotics: A good combo?

May 15, 2012 By Leave a Comment

If you have taken antibiotics or cared for a small child taking them, you have likely seen first-hand the effects the medicines can have on the digestive system.  The problem comes from the antibiotics – which are designed to kill bacteria – wiping out the productive bacteria that help the digestive system function properly.

One treatment doctors have explored is using probiotics – live microorganisms that can be consumed – to replenish the body’s productive bacteria. But what does the evidence say?

A systematic review this week in the Journal of the American Medical Association compiled data from 82 randomized, controlled clinical trials to come up with the best advice we have on using probiotics together with antibiotics.

The review concluded that probiotics do reduce the prevalence of diarrhea associated with taking antibiotics, but the data available didn’t provide additional details.

An article in the publication Family Practice News did note that most of the studies included in the review did not demonstrated a significant benefit from using probiotics when looked at on their own. But the complication of data show a benefit.


The review also noted that, on the whole, the quality of the research on probiotics is considered low. Many of the studies lacked enough evidence to evaluate the risk of probiotics and did not report on adverse events related to them.

The bottom line: Probiotics are a good avenue for treating diarrhea associated with taking antibiotics, but much more evidence is needed to develop solid clinical guidelines. Sometimes a systematic review serves the purpose of spotlighting areas that need additional research. That seems to be the case here.

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, Health and Wellness Tagged With: , , ,

Energy drinks: Bad for kids, bad for your teeth

May 8, 2012 By 3 Comments

Brightly-colored, sugar-filled energy and sports drinks are everywhere – in vending machines, cafeterias and gas stations.

While they may seem like a healthy alternative – athletes drink them, after all – most lack nutritional value, and many contain caffeine. The evidence actually shows these drinks can be detrimental to kids and harmful to teeth.

First off, a systematic review commissioned by the American Academy of Pediatrics found that sports drinks – which don’t contain caffeine, but do have a lot of sugar – lead to obesity and tooth decay among children. And energy drinks – which do contain caffeine – can interfere with sleep, lead to anxiety and cause dehydration.

A more recent study published in the journal General Dentistry and covered by National Public Radio found both energy and sports drinks contain high levels of citric acid, which erodes tooth enamel, leaving teeth more prone to cavities and decay.

There’s certainly a place for sports drinks – specifically to replace electrolytes and energy stores in both children and adults who exercise vigorously for more than an hour at a time. But for the public at large, these drinks are essentially empty calories.

So help to discourage children from downing sports drinks unless they’re actually playing a sport.  And the next time you’re picking up a beverage to go with that sandwich or need to quench your thirst on a long drive, stick with water.  It’s the healthier choice.

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, Health and Wellness, Youth Development Tagged With: , , , ,

Real evidence linking taxes and death

April 17, 2012 By Leave a Comment

With U.S. income taxes due today, there will surely be banter around water coolers across the country on the subject of taxes, including a myriad of jokes about paying Uncle Sam.

“If my business gets much worse, I won’t have to lie on my next tax return.”

“When it comes to taxes, there are two types of people. There are those that get it done early, also known as psychopaths, and then the rest of us.”

“Drive carefully. Uncle Sam needs every taxpayer he can get.”

It turns out, there’s actually something to that last one.

A study in the most recent issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, reviewed data on fatal road crashes from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration from the past 30 years. The study found there are consistently more fatal car crashes on Tax Day each year, compared with other days. On average there are 13 more deaths – approximately a 6 percent increase – compared with other days.

What is going on?  The study authors speculate that added stress of a deadline could lead to more distracted driving, or that people could be consuming more alcohol on tax day.  Whatever the reason, they suggest a public health campaign to remind people to drive carefully on Tax Day.

Drive safely today!

Filed Under: Evidence-Based Living, In The Media Tagged With: , , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »
Skip to toolbar