Channels
Log in register
piqd uses cookies and other analytical tools to offer this service and to enhance your user experience.

Your podcast discovery platform

Curious minds select the most fascinating podcasts from around the world. Discover hand-piqd audio recommendations on your favorite topics.

You are currently in channel:

Health and Sanity

Rashmi Vasudeva
Features writer on health, lifestyle and the Arts, digital marketing blogger, mother
View piqer profile
piqer: Rashmi Vasudeva
Wednesday, 29 November 2017

Next Time You Read Coffee Is Good For You, Think Again

When it comes to health reportage, if there is one issue that deserves shouting from the rooftops, it is this – in this age of information glut, how do we deal with alarmist health stories?

This article does all the shouting – competently. We are all suckers for bad health news and one sweep of the Internet will tell you that there is no dearth of it. As Brunel University’s James Carney says, bad news “sucks us into its orbit like a cultural parasite.” It is the same instinct that makes people gather at accident sites or hover around when two strangers are fighting – we are monitoring threats. Without thinking about it consciously, we are upping our survival instinct.

It is against this backdrop that scary health news that are often contradictory assume greater significance than mere piquing of curiosity or annoyance. The trouble today is health studies are too numerous and way too complex for the lay person who, when reading them, becomes either anxious, guilty, or worse, fatalistic. The result? No one is able to fathom their true implications.

Take the case of coffee. We have been admonished for long about ingesting all that caffeine, but in the past two weeks, you will not have escaped a spate of articles quoting a study that claims drinking two or three cups of coffee a day is good for you. As Aaron Carroll, a paediatrics professor rightly says, these studies are reported by the media as if they had been conducted in a vacuum. Studies are part of the scientific discourse and healthy scepticism will serve everyone well.

Understanding study types and their quality, as Carroll says, is vital. For instance, animal studies in a lab cannot completely replicate the human experience; cohort studies often do not test the real cause. And there are studies which fail in replication.

The crucial point the article is making is the urgent need for a certain amount of scientific literacy. And this cannot be stressed enough if we hope to tweak our habits according to the latest in science. 

Next Time You Read Coffee Is Good For You, Think Again
6.7
One vote
relevant?

Would you like to comment? Then register now for free!