An article in the April 26, 2000, journal of the American Medical Association reported that in a recent study for more than 300 women, those who ate closest to the recommended number of servings of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, low-fat dairy, and lean meats and poultry had a 30 percent longer life span than women who did not meet these guidelines. It makes sense that this would be true and supports my belief that healthy eating is a big part of a total healthy living picture that supports longevity. However, it's also a good example of a focus on only one area of lifestyle factors that prolong life. Although the article didn't cite it, chances are that the women who ate the healthiest also exercised, didn't smoke, and used medication judiciously. In other words, it's unlikely the diet alone contributed to their longer life.

I once heard someone say, "Statistics are like bikinis; they reveal only part of the picture." The same is true with observational studies. They rarely isolate all the factors that can contribute to study results.

I'm an advocate of studies that don't isolate a tree from the forest. It's easy to isolate one factor and jump to a conclusion that may or may not be accurate. For example, a study that reviews the longevity of people who bungee jump for sport vs. people who don't might show that the 50 people who engaged in this risky behavior lived longer than 50 others who refused to take the plunge. They could use the information to encourage you to bungee jump when it's unlikely it prolongs life.

Next time you read about a "study"--especially one designed to sell you on a product or process to make your life better, or longer, look at the facts then put them in the context of the big picture. You might end up with a wiser perspective.