Why We Often Miscalculate Risk

 

Assessing risk is part of life. We do it hundreds of times every day, at least. Generally, we think we are pretty good at it. But controlled studies seem to show that we are not. Whether it is deciding whether or not to get a vaccination, invest in a particular stock, riding a bike without a helmet or deciding whether to drive or fly to a destination we actually have a pretty difficult time accurately assessing risk.

"Using evidence or data to communicate risk to the American public can be a fool’s errand," said Eric Horowitz in Psychology Today. "The most publicized “la, la, la, I can’t hear you!” moments involve people ignoring dangers that threaten ideology or political beliefs. Others may choose to ignore risks because immediate short-term pleasures are too alluring."

But often, it is simply that we assess the risk very poorly. Here are several things that may be keeping you for making an accurate assessment of risk in your daily life.

1. The real risk may be unknowable.  Data may be unreliable or unavailable altogether. Or we may be considering a new technology such as self-driving cars or Star Trek Transporters that have no record of performance to consider. 

2. Confirmation bias may color your assessment. When we try to evaluate the risk of taking some action, we find reasons to accept any evidence that supports the decision we want to make and devalue evidence that contradicts it. An example of this is smoking. When smokers are surveyed they overwhelmingly agree that smoking can result is serious health problems. Yet when asked about the risk to them personally many respond that it is very low. They will find reasons and justifications why the real risks do not apply to them. "I only smoke 5 per day" or "My parents smoked and lived into their 90s".

3. Sense of being in control. We tend to greatly underestimate risk when we feel we are in control of a situation. For example, studies show that people consistently overestimate their skill as a driver, or feel safer driving than flying. Similarly, we will usually overestimate the risk of situations that are new or unfamiliar to us.

4. Tribal norms. We tend to associate and spend time with people to agree with us and believe, mostly, the same things that we do. We tend to avoid those who do not. We choose sources of news and information that line up with our existing preconceptions. Social media reinforces this bias by showing us more and more of what we already accept as true and less and less of what we do not.

What can we do to improve our risk assessments and make more effective choices and decisions?

Rely on expert opinion and experience rather than strictly relying on our own hunches or gut feelings. The more you know the better choices you can make.

Actively seek out information that opposes what you believe about the risk. Be alert for your natural bias to exclude data that does not support your preconception. Of course the opposing opinions you will find are not necessarily correct but at least you are exposed to alternative thoughts on risk.

Consider the costs and payoffs. The fact that you think something is, or is not, risky does not necessarily mean that you should or should not do it. It may simply not be worth it. If you have celebrated a little too hard at the local pub, you might find the risk of driving home to be low. Its not far, you have done it many times, there won't be much traffic. And that may be true. But the consequences of being involved in an accident or worse are so severe, the low risk may not justify taking the chance.

So, punk. Do you feel lucky?

Ginko Biloba Linked to Cancer

The ginkgo tree is thought to be one of the oldest living trees, dating back more than 200 million years. Ginkgo leaf is often taken by mouth for memory and thought problems, anxiety, vision problems, and many other conditions. But there is no good scientific evidence to support most of these uses. There is emerging evidence however that it causes certain cancers, at least in laboratory animals.

Scientists at the National Toxicology Program fed lab mice Ginko biloba extract five times a week for two years. Researchers then found "clear evidence" that is caused liver cancer in some of the mice and "some evidence" of thyroid cancers. Some of the mice developed especially aggressive liver cancers and some developed more cancers "than had ever been seen in a NTP lab".

The FDA, in an uncharacteristic action, has been telling supplement manufacturers to stop adding Ginko biloba to foods or drinks but the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (a sick joke of a name if ever there was one) severely limits the FDA's ability to require compliance.

Although the cancers showed up in animals that were given very large doses, you may want to reconsider if you are presently taking Ginko biloba. No amount of a known carcinogen is really safe, and the supposed benefits of the supplement are largely unsupported by the science.

Mercury and Diabetes: New Links

 

Several animal studies have suggested that mercury can damage the pancreatic cells that are responsible for the body's production of insulin. More recent studies suggest a link between exposure to mercury and the incidence of type-2 diabetes in humans.

For example, in one study researchers followed over 3,800 people ages 20 to 32 for nearly 20 years and those with the highest levels of mercury had a 65% greater risk of developing diabetes over the study period compared with those having the lowest levels. This observational study does not prove that mercury causes diabetes, but there is a clear association. Many health authorities now advise that children and pregnant women avoid mercury entirely.

What to do? Avoid eating albacore tuna (light tuna has much lower mercury levels and should be limited but not necessarily avoided), shark, swordfish, tilefish and king mackerel. This is good news if you are a tilefish. Instead eat fish that are very low in or free from mercury. These include salmon, talapia and most freshwater fish - including catfish and trout.

Five Reasons to Eat Less Red Meat

 

How strong is the evidence that we would be better off eating far less red meat? Pretty good, it turns out. "We've seen that a high-red-meat intake is associated with coronary disease, stroke, diabetes and premature death," says Dr. Adam Bernstein of the Cleveland Clinic. "Other investigators have looked at colorectal cancer. So when you look at the whole picture, I'd say the evidence is very strong."

Here are five well established reasons why eating less red meat would be worth considering.

1. Live a longer life.

One outcome of the 2012 Health Professionals Followup Study and Nurse's Health Study was that those who ate more than half a serving (3oz) of red meat per day had a 30% greater chance of dying during the 30 year period of the study as those who ate less. The study, which included 120,000 participants, concluded that 8% of deaths of women and 10% of deaths of men could be prevented if people consumed less than 3oz of red meat per day. Other studies have reached remarkably similar conclusions.

2. Reduce cardiovascular disease and strokes.

Red meat is one of the largest sources of saturated fat in the American diet. In a Cleveland Clinic study that was part of the Nurse's Health Study and included 29,000 participants, those who ate more red meat had a 29% higher risk of heart disease than those who ate 3oz or less per day. Further, stroke risk rose by 30% for every two ounces of red meat consumed beyond 3oz per day. Lean meat had no detectable advantage.

3. Lower your cancer risk.

A joint report by the American Institute for Cancer Research and the World Cancer Research Fund said that, "To reduce your cancer risk eat no more than 18oz of red meat per week." For every serving (6oz) of red meat eaten per day the risk of colorectal cancer rises by 20%. There is some, although less compelling, evidence linking red meat consumption to pancreatic, espohageal and prostate cancers.

4. Avoid diabetes.

Processed red meats have long been linked to increased risk of developing Type-2 diabetes, but more recent studies now link it to unprocessed red meats as well. A Harvard study of over 200,000 participants tracked for 28 years concluded that for every 2oz of red meat eaten per day, the risk of type-2 diabetes rose by 32% (processed meats) and 12% (unprocessed meats). The polyunsaturated fats and iron in the meat are believed to be the causal factor but more research is needed.

5. Spare the environment.

The water and fossil fuels required to feed, process and transport red meat cause considerable environmental damage. The UN estimates that 80% of the groundwater consumed from aquifers is used for agricultural purposes, with 60% - 70% of that used to irrigate crops for animal feed. Cattle produce 7% of all the methane (a potent greenhouse gas) and nearly all of the ammonia that enters the atmosphere each day - equivalent to the amount of pollution created by one car in one day, per cow. (There are about 95 million cattle in the US alone.)

Huge tracts of land are deforested every year to make room for cattle to graze, and they produce - as anyone who has ever walked across a pasture realizes - prodigious amounts of solid waste. "The waste in big cattle feedlots can be properly composted," says Robert Lawrence at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. "But it almost never is. In a typical operation the manure is just bulldozed into big mounds from which there is an enormous release of methane." And then there is the fossil fuel cost of transporting both the animals and the meat.

Need even more reasons to reduce your consumption of red meat? Here is a longer list from Prevention Magazine.

The bottom line? Eat as little processed meat as possible... none is best. Reduce consumption of unprocessed red meat to under 20oz per week. Replace some meat with poultry, fish and beans.

What you eat is 100% up to you. What it does to you is not.

Ready-to-Drink Coffee-like Beverages

 

 

Coffee is one of the world's most popular beverages. It is prepared and savored in many different places and ways and, thanks to its high levels of antioxidants and beneficial nutrients, it also seems to be quite healthy. A single cup of coffee contains riboflavin (B12), pantothenic acid (B5), manganese, potassium, magnesium and niacin (B3). Studies show that coffee drinkers have a much lower risk of several serious diseases.  It may lower your risk of Type-2 diabetes, Parkinson's and dementia.

But leave it to food manufacturers to to take a cheap, healthy drink and make it neither.

Stores are full of ready-to- drink versions. Starbucks has converted it into sugar filled, fat laden, additive laced calorie bombs. And the iced coffees you are likely to find in the grocery store start off with 150 calories (per 6 oz serving) and go up from there. "Lite" versions are little better. In exchange for the flavor and benefits of coffee you are getting just one more unhealthy drink.

If you love your coffee, go ahead and enjoy it. Just make it yourself. It will be cheaper, healthier and exactly the way you like it. 

Energy Drink or Energy Drug?

 

 

"Energy" drinks are everywhere. The beverage makers sponsor models, music events and videos games. Advertisements for energy drinks are plastered on the walls at sporting events and on the jerseys of leading athletes. Red Bull, the market’s leading drink, even has its own television series and printed magazine. The makers of such drinks claim their elixirs will boost your immune system, enhance your performance and help you feel energized. They certainly are energizing the manufacturer's bottom line, with $53 billion worth of them being sold in 2018 alone.

In the US, almost 50 percent of adolescents and young adults say they buy energy drinks regularly. According to a study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 8 percent of young people drink energy drinks weekly, 20 percent think that energy drinks are safe drinks for teenagers and 13 percent think that energy drinks are a type of sports drink. But how safe are they, really?

Last fall, the parents of a 14-year old girl in Maryland sued the makers of Monster Energy drink after she drank two 24oz cans and then died of cardiac arrest. While that case is very unusual, more and more health risks are being linked to the drinks every week.

According to a 2019 study published in the Journal of the American Heart Association (JAHA), energy drinks can cause major health issues, including   increased blood pressure and a wealth of heart problems. Energy drinks have been "associated with cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, spontaneous coronary dissection, and coronary vasospasm," says the JAHA study.

Energy drinks can also disrupt sleep patterns, cause heart palpitations and anxiety, contribute to digestive problems, increase blood pressure and lead to dehydration, according to the National Institute of Health (NIH). Energy drinks “can be dangerous because large amounts of caffeine may cause serious heart rhythm, blood flow and blood pressure problems,” the NIH warned.

Despite this mounting evidence of health risks, there is no requirement to disclose on the drink labels what you are actually getting. Caffeine content, for example, does not need to be disclosed, although it often is. And the marketing of these drinks is heavily concentrated on adolescents between the ages of 13 and 17. As the regulatory status of energy drinks continues to be debated, a growing number of consumers and public health advocates are asking why and how a product loaded with caffeine and other stimulants became so popular among young people. The reasons are a mix of lax regulation, the use of caffeine as a performance enhancer among adults, and a bit of scientific uncertainty.

In the meantime, make sure you and your children understand the risks.

Losing Weight May Eliminate GERD Symptoms

 

As if being overweight or obese did not already cause enough health problems, a 2013 study published in the journal Obesity adds GERD to the list.

Researchers assigned 332 overweight or obese adult men and women to a weight loss program that included reducing daily calorie intake to under 1,500 and exercising for 60 minutes per day. After six months the average participant had lost almost 30 pounds and four inches off their waist.

Of the 1/3 of participants who began the study with symptoms of GERD, 80% showed improvement by the end of the study, including 65% for whom the symptoms disappeared entirely.

The study concluded that "the overall prevalence of GERD symptoms is high (37%) in overweight and obese subjects. A structured weight loss program can lead to complete resolution of GERD symptoms in the majority of these subjects."

If you suffer from GERD and you are overweight, you may be better off focusing on shedding pounds than looking for ways to manage the symptoms.