Myths

Note - this blog was ended in the summer of 2007. I left just a few old but popular posts online. The "Myths" item is a just a big collection of some old posts that I occasionally update.

I saw these myths passed off as true in the news media, so of course, they must be true!

Myth: "The collapse of a busy Interstate highway bridge in Minneapolis, MN is a prime example of our nation's crumbling infrastructure."
Truth: Actually, the NTSB determined that the collapse was caused by a design error and that corrosion played no role in the collapse nor were their pre-existing cracks that could have caused the failure. "Crumbling infrastructure" is a phrase of lobbyists hoping for trillions of bail out dollars for publicly funded construction projects.

Myth: Half of all personal bankruptcies are due to health care costs.
Truth: A 2005 study came to that conclusion. But the study had some curious defects. For example, 75.7% of those filing bankruptcy had health insurance. Only 27% of those filing bankruptcy had non-reimbursed health care costs in excess of $1,000 during the preceding two years prior to bankruptcy. Very few of those filing bankruptcy had high actual out of pocket medical costs. One view is that because the 2005 study was based on self reported information, those filing bankruptcy preferred to blame health care costs rather than admit other problems including over spending, taking on excessive debt, or losing a job. The conclusion is that the root cause of the overwhelming number of bankruptcies was a combination of spending beyond their means and losing jobs. Today, it is common to read in the press - and hear from politicians - that the majority of bankruptcies are due to a lack of affordable health care, even though that statement is not true. A 2008 study found again that the root causes of personal bankruptcy continue to be spending beyond their means. What does seem to be true is that about half of those filing bankruptcy blame health care costs - even though other factors are the root cause for most.

Myth: You must have your teeth and oral health checked every six months by your dentist.
Truth: According to the Cochrane Review (which conducts detailed reviews of published literature to determined evidence-based medicine guidelines) there is no evidence to support a dental check up every six months. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence has issued new guidelines for the UK's National Health System stating that examination frequency should be based on the specific and individual needs of each patient and not on an arbitrary calendar date. Guidelines for practitioners to use in making an evaluation are here. An opinion column in Nature suggests the six month period was based solely on maximizing earnings because health insurance programs provided for two checkups every 12 months - but that probably no one really knows where the six months came from.

Myth: The FBI and prosecutors routinely use "DNA matching" to nail their suspects. According to the FBI, the likelihood of mistakenly identifying someone by DNA could be 1 in a 100 Billion or even 1 in a trillion.
Truth: An Arizona criminal investigator has discovered that the assumed accuracy of DNA profiling may be way off - way, way off as she finds many matching samples from different people in their own Arizona database. The FBI denies this could be true but refuses to allow testing of a national database - the assumed accuracy of DNA matching has never been tested. This would be the same FBI that claimed "ballistics testing" of bullets could uniquely identify a weapon used in a crime when that eventually turned out to be totally false.

Myth: Toxins, sedentary life styles, environmental hazards, poor nutritional choices and violent crime are causing serious health problems for Americans.
Truth: Much to my surprise, heart disease, stroke, lung diseases and overall cancer rates are in decline and have been for a long time. The decline in the death rate is even accelerating - meaning dropping faster than ever (also see the "Related Stories" on that link). Even more interesting is that the incidence at which new cancers are diagnosed has fallen in spite of better diagnostics. Life expectancy is at an all time high and on average, increased by 2 years in just the past ten years (approximately)!

Myth: Dr. Atkins, of the well known low carbohydrate diet regime, died of a heart attack, undoubtedly due to following his own diet and his family sought to keep that information secret. He had an earlier heart attack and kept that secret.
Truth: According the Medical Examiner's report which is now available online the immediate cause of death was blunt trauma to the head due to a fall from an upright position (on ice). The report also indicates, on page 4, that there was a prior history of heart disease. The family disputes that account.

He had previously disclosed heart disease and there is some dispute over the cause - but he really did die of a blunt trauma to the head. The story behind how the urban myth that Atkins died of a heart attack, allegedly caused by his own diet plan, is rather interesting.

Dr. Fleming, a Nebraska doctor affiliated with a vegetarian advocacy group connected to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals requested a copy of the Dr. Atkins medical examination report. The doctor was, at the time allegedly promoting his own diet book (several are available at Amazon). The New York medical examiner's office, in violation of Federal law, sent the report to the Nebraska doctor who then, also allegedly in violation of Federal law, sent the report on to others in the vegetarian movement who claimed that Dr. Atkins hid his heart problems and had actually died of a heart attack, not a fall-the fall was merely a ruse to hide the heart attack from the public (false claims that were later recanted). The Nebraska doctor was a vehement critic of Atkins and low carbohydrate diets and sought to discredit both.

An organization affiliated with the doctor, the "Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine" (PCRM - less than 5% of its members are actually physicians) promoting its own nutrition concepts and opposed to use of animals was then involved in a law suit against Atkins Nutritionals claiming that Atkins diet had caused heart disease in a patient (more here). (The suit against Atkins was dismissed by a judge in a Dec 2006 without addressing PCRM's medical claims, ruling that a book about low carbohydrate lifestyle was permitted under the First Amendment.) PCRM, per news reports, claimed that Atkins had hidden previous heart problems, an accusation that was proven to be false as Atkins had been public about his own heart disease.

Dr. Atkins did suffer a heart attack in 2002 and this was publicly reported as caused by cardiomyopathy or a weakening of the heart caused by a viral infection. (One of the PCRM physicians, and others claim that ketogenic diets - or high protein diets - may be a cause of cardiomyopathy). Family members and colleagues were outraged at the illegal distribution of the medical examiner's report and the attempt to spin the story with false statements to discredit Atkins and the low carbohydrate diet.

After the allegations of PCRM played out in a non-skeptical media, Newsweek summarized what transpired and explained that Dr. Atkins did not die of a heart attack - and reveals additional details about PCRM. None of this had anything to do with the safety or non-safety, or the effectiveness or non-effectiveness of the low carbohydrate diet. It was strictly a matter of propaganda and PR moves, likely to influence a legal case through an incompetent media apparatus. A few years later, Gary Taubes took a fact-based approach to examining low carbohydrate and high carbohydrate diets with a best selling, heavily footnote referenced book and came to surprising conclusions that high carb diets are likely killing us, based on the evidence, and that there was never sufficient evidence to make a population-wide USDA recommendation to eat low fat/high carb.

Today there is an entire web site devoted to what the web site calls the "scams" of PCRM including that PCRM is funded in part by PETA. The background of the group shows that it is a very specialized, pro-animal rights organization masquerading as a medical group. But let us not expect the media to figure this out - that might require real work versus minor editing to a press release.

It is fair to say that Dr. Atkins died of blunt trauma to the head and that he had heart disease at the time of his death, a disease that might have been brought on by long term ketogenic dieting. It is false to say that Dr. Atkins died of a heart attack or heart disease.

(Note: I follow the low glycemic index approach to foods, and I eat whole foods unladen with lots of salt, sugars and MSG for flavoring and have no personal reason to defend Atkins. In fact, the low GI approach to eating seems to be what the PCRM doctor is recommending in his book. The Atkins extremely low carb diet is, in a way, an extreme form of low GI eating since meat has a glycemic index of zero.)

Myth: Pending home sales increased in June 2008 signaling improvements in the distressed housing market.
Truth: Amidst falling home prices, the media spin on a National Association of Realtors report has been that the market is finally stabilizing and sales are up! Except, the media spin - and this refers to about 99% of the media - had the story wrong and ignored the footnotes in the NAR press release. In fact, sales were down, a lot, year over year. But let's not let facts get in the way of "Baghdad Bob" at the NAR. (A good explanation of how our "debt crisis" developed - and it is not the "housing crisis" as labeled by the media - is here.)

Myth: Windows Vista is an upgrade to Windows XP.
Truth: Many any consumers think XP is an upgrade to Vista.

Myth: Home lighting uses 20% of household electricity.
Truth: 8.8%. For typical homes, the figure is anywhere from 5% to 10%. Switching from incandescent lights to compact florescent, assuming all existing lights are incandescent and can be switched, would reduce that 8.8% portion of household electricity by up to 75%. Thirty years ago, lighting was a larger percentage - but since then most homes have added electricity hogs like HDTVs, VCRs, appliances and several computers, thereby decreasing the share used by lighting.

Myth: Switching to compact florescent lights will save consumers money.
Truth: For lights that are frequently used and assuming compact florescent bulbs do indeed last longer this is likely true (about 1/3d of mine have had actual lifetimes less than incandescent bulbs - which is typical of what is reported at Popular Mechanics by users). This is not true when little used lights are replaced with compact florescent bulbs (CFLs)- such as lighting in closets, some hallways, automatic on/off motion sensing exterior lights, lighting under stairs, in utility rooms and in many bathrooms. The U.S. Congress passed a law that will ban the sale of most incandescent lights starting in 2012 - which means you will have to install these lights in places were they do not make sense. Philips, a lighting manufacturer, was a huge supporter of this law because they will make far more money per lighting unit sold - especially since many CFLs seem to have a surprisingly short useful life and must be replaced frequently. Further, when they fail, you may be required by law to drive to and deliver dead CFLs to a hazardous waste facility. There are also issues with poor power factors in CFLs - this topic is beyond what I can cover here - which can result in double the power demand depending on other loads on your circuits. Fortunately, and hopefully before we've already replaced existing lights with "long lasting" CFLs, new CFL designs will come to market with better light color, improved power factors and dimmer operation compatability.

Myth: "Red light running" cameras are an effective tool to reducing crashes caused by cars running red lights.
Truth: Red light cameras increase crashes and result in higher auto insurance premiums charged in the areas where they are installed. Like septic system versus sewers (see below), red light cameras are sold to the public as "improving safety". The real reason, surprisingly, is that they increase revenue not only to the city (RoboRevenue) but also to insurance companies who have been pushing for red light cameras. The data now show that red light cameras lead to an increase in overall crashes - and the insurers use that as an excuse to increase auto insurance premiums. The best way to reduce intersection crashes is to re-design the intersection; simple methods like adding one second to a "yellow light" phase can dramatically reduce red-light crashes.

Myth: Businesses hate government regulation.
Truth: Many businesses love government regulation and use regulation to their advantage while publicly complaining about regulations. (They only dislike regulations that help their competitors or harm their own business.) Two examples in the news. First, lighting manufacturers publicly complain that eliminating incandescent lights will raise the cost of lighting to consumers. Privately, they love this since they will sell higher priced products. Second, an executive at General Motors complained new government mileage requirements will raise the average car price by up to $7,000. Privately, they love this new opportunity to increase profits. Numerous industries employ lobbyists at the State and Federal level to pass regulations that - they hope - will benefit themselves while harming potential competition.

Numerous businesses and industries - from the accounting scandals of Kenneth Lay and Andy Fastow's Enron crimes to the collapse of MCI WorldCom and on and on - to today's banking crimes - these overpaid CEOs, by their own actions, are literally pleading for adult supervision. Effective businesses know how to turn externalities to their advantage, including regulation.

Myth: A drought in Australia, caused by global warming, is a significant cause of global rice shortages. It must be true because the NY Times wrote that.

Truth: Rice production in Australia normally totals 1.3 million tons. Total global rice production is 421 million tons. Therefore, Australia's contribution to the global total is 0.3%, but less during their drought year. Even though rice production is increasing by 1.8% this year, global demand is increasing faster - to 424 million tons. The main problem is that yield increased by about 2.5 to 3.5% per year in the 80's but fell to a 0.74% growth rate in the 90s while demand is increasing faster than production. Why the NY Times led with the anecdotal story out of Australia is mystifying since it is just one of many components to the problem, including that climate change has both good and bad effects on rice growing.

Myth: 95% of dieters who lose weight will gain it all back.
Truth: That claim comes from one study in the early 1950s involving just 100 subjects on one particular diet (reference) and may be insufficient for a precise statement about the likelihood of keeping weight off. Other studies have found that many people who lose weight do gain much of it back.

Myth: Obesity is a global epidemic.
Truth: The obesity epidemic mantra has been promoted, very effectively, by the International Association for the Study of Obesity (IASO). Their Taskforce defined the Body Mass Index (BMI) calculation which was then adopted by the World Health Organization (WHO) and is now the basis for defining who is overweight or obese. If your BMI is 26 or higher, you are overweight. The new definition, adopted in the 1990s, instantly redefined a lot of people as overweight. What is not disclosed is that the IASO is a very effective lobbying group funded almost entirely by the drug industry and "diet food" manufacturers. The sponsors are also listed in the IASO's most recent annual report, all of whom profit from the "war on obesity" by selling prescription diet drugs and diet food regimens. Muddling the issue further are recent studies, such as the one by Katherine Flegal of the CDC, that have found lower mortality amongst those who are somewhat overweight versus those who are not. More here. For another example of how the profit motive has led to incorrect public health policy, read this.

Myth: Southern California wild fires in 2007 were caused by global warming.
Truth: Some politicians and activists said wild land fires in Southern California in late summer of 2007 were caused by human-induced climate change. Months later we now know that actual causes of the fires were arson and power lines that blew down or arced during high winds especially where new home developments (and power lines) were added to high fire danger areas. These fires were caused by human activity but not by human-induced global warming. High "Santa Ana" winds are common every year in Southern California and the native plants have adapted to, in some cases, requiring periodic fire to propagate their seeds.

Myth: The United States faces a severe shortage of scientists and engineers.
Truth: Several recent reports including one from the Urban Institute have found that the U.S. produces up to three times more graduates in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) than it has annual job openings. According to a report in Science Careers (from the American Association for the Advancement of Science) alleged shortages are an enduring myth. Universities are exempt from the limit on H-1B visa hiring through a loophole negotiated as a way to get universities to support industry's desire to keep tech salaries low. Since 2001, real salaries in the IT sector have declined by 8% (after inflation), hardly indicating a terrible shortage. The median salary in IT dropped in the past year in non-inflation adjusted dollars. An excellent summary of the report and the claims of a shortage is in BusinessWeek.

Update September 2008: Of the top 100 places to "Launch a Career", how many are seeking graduates with computer science degrees? Just six plus one that wants "info tech".

A related myth is the alleged growth in IT jobs in the U.S. - the following chart (blue line) shows that Information Service employment dropped from 3.7 million jobs in 2000 to just under 3 million jobs in 2008:



Myth: Automobiles are "the largest producer of greenhouse gases in the United States".
Truth: Nature itself is the largest producer of "greenhouse" gases (says NASA) but if we restrict this to human-produced greenhouse gases, according to the EPA, 39% of human caused emissions in the U.S. are due to electricity generation, 27% are due to industrial operations (most of which is electricity generation) and 20% are due to the automobile category. Transportation, including trains, ships, airlines and heavy truck transport is about 30% of the total but autos, light trucks and SUVs are 66% of the transport sector, hence 20%. Raising efficiency of the auto category, assuming autos run on gas, from 24 to 35 mpg, as the government recently required, may cut that 20% contribution to 14% (assuming all other emissions remain constant).

Myth: "Human emissions of CO2 are the primary cause of melting Arctic ice".
Truth: CO2 might not be the problem here but other human impacts instead: NOAA and NASA have each released studies in recent years indicating that black carbon (aka soot) from field burning, diesel engines and other human activities, is falling on ice and snow and accelerating melting. The IPCC, however, operates on the assumption that CO2 from human activities is mostly the sole driver of climate change and apparently, Arctic ice melt. A great near real-time view of Arctic ice area and extent is here. As of December 2008, the Arctic ice area and extent are both near the 30-year normal range, which is a dramatic come back from recent extensive ice pack melts.

Myth: Prescription medications are effective at treating many health problems.
Truth: Recent reports have been published regarding the ineffectiveness of statins (and the high likelihood of serious side effects) and that many anti-depressant drugs may be mostly worthless. (A large review of studies indicates that Prozac and similar drugs may be almost entirely worthless.)

'One dirty little secret of modern medicine is that many drugs work only in a minority of people. "There's a tendency to assume drugs work really well, but people would be surprised by the actual magnitude of the benefits," says Dr. Steven Woloshin, associate professor of medicine at Dartmouth Medical School.'

How did this happen? Publication bias is part of the problem - half the studies show a benefit and get published. The other half show no benefits or risks but get buried and do not get published. A few years ago, the Wall Street Journal quoted a executive vice president at a pharmaceutical firm saying that about 70% of prescribed drugs essentially do not work. I asked people in the pharma business if that were true and they responded with (roughly) "That sounds about right". I do not know if this is good or bad - but its is unfortunate that most patients are not aware that they may see no benefits from prescribed medications - and may see actual harm, including harm that results in hospitalization. We spend many tens of billions of dollars every year on medications that frequently do not work - in part due to huge advertising campaigns by the pharma companies exaggerating the benefits of their drugs, such as occurred with Celebrex and Vioxx. Ask your doctor "What is the Number Needed to Treat (NNT) and the Number Needed to cause Harm (NNH)?" for your prescribed medications. An NNT of 30 means that for 30 people treated, one will benefit. A widely publicized study in 2008 concluded that essentially everyone should be prescribed statin drugs yet the NNT was 120. Meaning that for every 120 people who take a statin, just one would benefit. Other studies found that 15% of those taking these drugs suffered significant and often serious side effects.

Myth: Household septic tank and drain fields must be replaced with "sanitary sewer systems" to insure water quality.
Truth: The primary purpose of sewer systems is to enable a greater density of home developments versus septic drain fields. The water quality issue is usually a "red herring" raised to create political support since most people will be in favor of good water quality but not necessarily in favor of increased population and its effects: traffic jams, more noise, longer lines at stores, higher costs, increased pollution and over crowded school classrooms.

When homes have septic systems, the minimum lot size must have space for two septic drain fields - the original and a possible future replacement. Each drain field size is determined by the soil characteristics and the size of the home (how many people will be living there). Space is set aside for a second drain field in case the field fails. Sewer lines are brought into older neighborhoods to replace drain fields so the density of home developments can be increased. This is buried in my County's Master Plan but they publicly sold the project based on the need to protect environmental water quality.

We have watched developers tear down old homes on large lots and replace with as many as 5 new homes on tiny lots - beginning as soon as one day after the sewer projects were completed. Many of the new homes are 3,500 sq ft and larger on tiny little lots that replaced 1,000 square foot homes on 35,000 sq ft lots. Government employees and politicians like greater home density because it increases property tax revenue collections giving each bigger budgets to play with and buy future votes. The overall environmental impact of replacing small homes with enormous mansions is strongly negative.

A quick Google search found that sewer systems are installed around the country specifically for increasing tax revenues. Huge luxury homes are rarely an improvement to the environment.

Myth: The "Hockey Stick" graph accurately captures the rising global temperature due to human-induced climate change.
Truth: Ignoring that the iconic "Hockey Stick" is a Northern Hemisphere temperature reconstruction, the real story behind the stick is quite interesting and the truth behind the stick reflects badly on all scientists who quietly put up with science so bad that it insults all science.

Myth: Hybrid metro buses are great for the environment - saving gas and reducing pollution.
Truth: Perhaps some day but not yet. Hybrid buses emit the same level of particulate emissions as conventional diesel buses. Fuel consumption is supposed to be about 10% less than the diesel buses they replace with hopes this will eventually reach up to 50% reduction (diesel buses typically get 3 to 6 mpg with variations depending on hills, stops, passenger loads). Yet the largest hybrid bus system in the world has found that hybrids get worse gas mileage than diesel buses. (They do offer a benefit for bus systems and passengers when the buses must run in poorly ventilated tunnels since the bus can then run as an electric bus - but so could older dual mode buses that obtained electricity from overhead trolley lines.)

Hybrid buses cost about $500,000 each or about 67% more than diesel buses. Even with hoped for fuel savings, hybrid buses and their operation are significantly more expensive without yet delivering significant benefits. Hydrogen powered buses are far worse - costing about 30 times more to operate per mile than diesel buses. Transporting passengers by helicopter would be less expensive - ever so mindful of costs - not! - bankrupt California plans to expand the use of hydrogen fuel buses since the new buses also cost six times more than diesels let alone 30 times more to operate :-)

Myth: A Russian transport ship reached the North Pole without the aid of an ice breaker - the first time in history a ship did this without the aid of an ice breaker!
Truth: This is my all time favorite media myth. About 2 years ago, the NY Times ran a feature story about a cargo ship named the Akademik Federov reaching the North Pole without an ice breaker due to melting Arctic ice. The NY Times used this to create a speculative news story about how melting ice would open the Arctic to global commerce by ordinary cargo ships. But the entire story was based on a false premise: The Federov, like about 70 Russian cargo transport ships, is also an icebreaker. In fact, the Federov can break through ice packs better than the best U.S. ice breaker. I understand the NY Times has legions of fact checkers, but alas, they have not yet learned to use Google as the information was readily available via Google. I wrote to the NY Times corrections email address with a link to the ship manufacturer's specifications. The NY Times did not acknowledge my note and made no correction to their false report. Presumably, they did not wish to have facts get in the way of a great narrative. "Fact Free Reporting" is considered hip in journalism circles.


Myth: Broadband over Powerline or BPL will provide the "third leg" with DSL and cable modems for a vibrant, competitive market of high speed Internet access to homes. BPL is inexpensive and does not interfere with radio communications.
Truth: Some BPL technology is fairly effective at reducing interference. However, the FCC's approval of BPL technology has been called into question. In its rule making proceeding, the FCC cherry picked studies that supported its conclusions, hid data from the public, and ignored reports that there were problems with BPL.

Tthe U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has ruled that the FCC cherry picked studies and hid studies that did not go along with their pre-determined BPL outcome. The Court remanded the BPL regulatory proceedings back to the FCC to now reveal its full set of studies on the interference problems, to justify its choices of studies and technical parameters and to re-open comments on the matter. More here.

As of the summer of 2008, the largest BPL system in the U.S. is shutting down its Internet access service. In late 2008, the backers of the first BPL project in the U.S. are selling the system to the local town government, as the backers get out of the business.