At HumanaNatura, our goal is to both inspire and inform, so that each of us makes progressively healthier and higher quality choices over time. This strategy is in keeping with the scientific foundations of our natural health system, and with research suggesting that a mix of good facts and feelings best steers us toward improved life and health.

A new study by Harvard University affords a nice informational or teachable moment, one that can help us better understand and make use of the health research we encounter. In the new study, public health researchers found that reported soft drink consumption in teens was closely associated with reported violent behavior. For our discussion, the key words from the study are “associated” and “reported.”

When researchers state an association or correlation like this, they are indicating that two or more things have been observed moving together in a pattern. Correlations can be positive (with things moving in the same direction) or negative (moving in opposite directions) but they cannot be neutral (since no movement means no correlated or concurrent change). Importantly, association or correlation never means that causation or cause and effect has been established (that A causes B, or the reverse). In reporting on the new study, the researchers took pains to highlight that they have not shown causation between soft drinks and teen violence, in either a forward or backward direction.

When studies like this talk about a reported behavior or condition, they mean just that. Participants were asked one or more questions and gave a reply or report. As you might suspect, what we say we do and what we actually do can be substantially at odds with one another, either because we are intentionally withholding or exaggerating information, or because we have a distorted recollection or sense of the information. A much more reliable source of information is observed or measured behavior or data, and even better than this are observations and measurements that are double-blind (where neither the observed person nor observer is privy to key details of the measurement process).

If correlational and reported behavior studies are each less valuable than available alternatives, why have them at all? First, because they are often easier and much less expensive to perform. Second, they can suggest areas for more intensive follow-up research. And in the case of correlational research in particular, while it does not provide causal information, it can lead to insights that are quite useful. In this case, researchers have discovered that quite innocuous information about soda consumption may be a signal for teenagers that are at risk of acting violently, potentially leading to better directed social service interventions.

If you would like to learn more about research techniques to investigate correlation and causation, check out Correlation Does Not Imply Causation.

Please share this post…and the science of creating healthier modern life!

Perhaps like you, HumanaNatura is an active consumer and communicator of health science. Our use of science spans the design and guidelines of our four-part Natural Health System, the health and quality of life articles of our Article Library, and the updates we provide via NaturaLife on new scientific studies and research. Today, there is of course a lot of good and even great science available, which after all is the principal hallmark and driving force of our times. But there is a lot of bad science too – experiments and studies that are poorly conceived, conducted sloppily, or used to bolster rather than validate the soundness of a hypothesis or economic endeavor. So how do we, and you, separate good science from bad pseudoscience, and navigate conflicting scientific claims when we encounter them?

Ben Goldacre’s funny and insightful new presentation at TED, Battling Bad Science, offers important guidance for ferreting out bad science from good, and we hope you will give it a view.

For HumanaNatura, our approach to the use of science is to always look for peer-reviewed, independent research by established scientific institutions. We place a premium on randomized clinical trials and double-blind studies, consider experimental design and sampling methods before we publish, and look for findings that have been validated by multiple teams over time (including meta-analyses of earlier research). We always remember and normally highlight when a study suggests causation or correlation, remain careful with researcher and press inferences from experimental findings, and know that all dominating theories and paradigms are subject to refinement and revision based on new evidence. At the same time, we also understand the power of cross-disciplinary analyses and know these can begin crudely, appreciate rough new insights into existing research and data, and recognize that some studies may be less than perfect but still promising – all cases suggesting the need for added investigation, while still offering cause for pause.

Today, becoming an informed consumer of science is critical to progressive health and quality of life for individuals, communities, and our global society. We hope these guidelines are helpful to you and that you will always feel free to ask questions on the science that HumanaNatura uses and presents.

Please share this post…communicate the science of healthy modern life!

A new study of factors contributing to lifelong brain health concludes that half of Alzheimer’s cases can be prevented through healthier lifestyle choices. The new study, conducted by researchers at the University of California, counters widespread perceptions that chronic brain impairment with aging is not actionable. The new study involved a meta-analysis of lifestyle and Alzheimer’s diagnosis data covering a global sample set. It concludes that seven specific lifestyle factors combine to account for roughly 50% of the risk of this disease: low educational levels (19%), smoking (14%), physical inactivity (13%), depression (11%), midlife hypertension (5%), midlife obesity (2%), and diabetes (2%). Learn more about the new study and immediate steps you can take today to promote lifelong brain health at Alzheimer’s Study and Lifestyle Changes.

Photo courtesy of Garpen Brain