Breathing for Your Better Health

Does the story adequately quantify the benefits of the treatment/test/product/procedure?

Not Satisfactory

There is considerable debate about the health effects of breathing exercises or biofeedback devices that encourage slower breathing rates. The story failed to note that review articles have found that many studies on this topic are of poor quality and have produced inconsistent results. The story should have noted the lack of evidence that breathing exercises might benefit generally healthy people.

In addition, the story could have more clearly pointed out that most of the examples presented addressed only intermediate effects, such vagus nerve activity, not overall health or longevity. For example, the referenced study on a few students showed only that breathing rates slowed, not that there were any health benefits from classes or devices like the Spire.

Does the story seem to grasp the quality of the evidence?

Not Satisfactory

As mentioned above, the story mischaracterizes the evidence about breathing exercises by presenting claims of health benefits without noting widespread criticism of the poor quality and inconsistent results of research on the topic. The only specific studies mentioned in this story looked only at breathing rates. They did not measure any actual health effects. Readers of this story should have been told that systematic reviews of studies on breathing exercises have failed to show consistent benefits for healthy people.

Does the story commit disease-mongering?

Not Satisfactory

This story labels common breathing patterns as “dysfunctional” and suggests they represent a condition in need of treatment. “Screen apnea” is not a generally recognized condition. While sitting for long periods (in front of a computer screen or TV or steering wheel, etc.) is associated with health risks, the role of breathing patterns is not clearly understood. The story should not have presented claims of a link between computer use, breathing patterns, and health effects without noting the lack of evidence to support such claims. Indeed, almost all of the scientific publications supporting the premise of the Spire device (polyvagal theory) have been authored by a single researcher who is an advisor to the company.

Does the story use independent sources and identify conflicts of interest?

Not Satisfactory

While this story does identify which of the quoted experts stand to make money from products or classes, it should have let readers hear from more than just the boosters of breathing exercises. A quick look at the medical literature produces a long list of reviews that note the poor quality and inconsistent results of research on this topic. The story could have included comments from researchers on the gap between the rosy claims of promoters and what the available evidence actually shows.

Does the story compare the new approach with existing alternatives?

Not Satisfactory

To its credit, the story does point out that people can take classes as well as use a device that monitors breathing to change their breathing habits. However, since the story is about ways to reduce stress and improve health, we think it had an obligation to discuss other evidence-based approaches for reaching this goal, including regular physical activity, certain types of psychotherapy, or even self-taught breathing exercises that don’t require buying a device or paying for a class. And certainly the makers of the many competitors to the Spire device may well wonder why the article did not mention that other such devices are on the market.

Does the story establish the true novelty of the approach?

Not Satisfactory

The story does not establish novelty. As mentioned above, there are other devices on the market that provide feedback on breathing patterns. There is nothing in this story about whether the Spire device does anything new or different.