Genetic testing has been overcome by companies selling hype. Even 23andMe, arguably the most prominent, was chastised by FDA for promising peace of mind when they couldn't do anything of the kind.

What about actual research involving the testing of human biospecimens? Should individual research results on a study-specific basis be done through an informed decision-making process? If so, how? And when? 

Seabirds love fish and fishing nets are a ready source of food. Peru's gillnet fleet comprises the largest component of that nation's small-scale fleet and is conservatively estimated to set 100,000 kilometers of net per year in which thousands of turtles and seabirds die as "bycatch" or unintentionally.

Five years ago, California set out to be a world leader in adopting ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets and created the world's fourth-largest carbon-trading program. Not bad for one state.

Except it isn't helping the state, it is subsidizing others. And some of the emissions targets are not emissions at all, they are instead epidemiological claims like small micron particulate matter (PM2.5), which have had zero acute deaths but were the target of EPA and California environmentalists despite a lack of evidence.

Worldwide poverty has dropped dramatically, we are in the Long Peace when it comes to war, the old cycles of famine boom and bust have leveled off, science has made it possible for everyone to live better for longer and spend less on basic necessities.

The world continues to improve. Why, then, do polls consistently show that people believe otherwise? The answer may lie in a phenomenon called "prevalence induced concept change."

Fear is a healthy response, kept intact over eons of evolution, but sometimes it can be irrational. A new brain circuit discovery may help make sense of the madness. The study details the role of dopamine in ensuring that rats stop being afraid when there isn't anything to be afraid of anymore. 

There is talk in America of adding even more nutrition information to food labels, but as long as entire industries are exempt from evidence-based claims, it won't do much good. It will still be woo central in the supplement, holistic, and weight-loss camps.

The European Association for the Study of Obesity investigated the legality of on-pack nutrition and health claims routinely found on commercially available meal replacement shakes for sale in the UK and found that over 75 percent are in violation of EU Nutrition and Health Claims regulations.