New York, NY (PRWEB) February 25, 2015

The Global Wellness Institute (GWI) in partnership with Scientific American Worldview recently held an invitation-only roundtable on the topic of The Science of Wellness: Hype or Hope? Leaders from the medical, science, business, technology, research, media, workplace wellness and hotel/spa worlds gathered on February 11 at the Everyday Health headquarters in Manhattan for a wide-ranging conversation on the many ways that science and evidence-based medicine are impacting the wellness industry, and how wellness (and the growing medical evidence for wellness approaches) is impacting people, traditional medicine, private companies and public policy.

The discussion, co-moderated by Jeremy Abbate, VP, Global Media Alliances, Scientific American; Publishing Director, Scientific American Worldview and Susie Ellis, president and CEO of the GWI, included executives and experts from American Public Media, Cornell and Rutgers Universities, Delos, Everyday Health, The International Heart and Lung Institute Center for Restorative Medicine, Optum, Paramedical Consultants, Inc. (PCI), Patients Beyond Borders, Pegasus Capital Advisors, Six Senses, SRI International and Viacom Media Networks.

The leaders assembled identified numerous best steps forward to build a healthier world: from the need for powerful public health marketing campaigns around obesity and sedentary lifestyles - to a much more intense focus on cognitive/behavioral psychology to identify a science of lifestyle change for a world getting fatter and sicker to a call for more (and more appropriately designed) clinical trials on wellness approaches.

A more detailed report on the recommendations emerging from this roundtable will soon be available at: http://www.globalwellnessinstitute.com/

Top Ten Recommendations - Experts gathered argued we need

Simple, Provocative Public Wellness Campaigns: Some of the biggest wellness successes of the last century have involved powerful marketing messages (like the anti-smoking, stop littering, or wear seatbelts campaigns of the 20th century or more recent ads visualizing how many packets of sugar reside in a can of soda). We need new health campaigns and public service announcements around weight loss/obesity and sedentary lifestyles that are simple, inspiring and are repeated over and over.

More Behavioral Sciences Research to Create a Science of Lifestyle Change: While medical research on the benefits of wellness approaches grabs headlines, the key to healthy populations is to begin to crack the code on helping people start, and sustain, lifestyle change. We know so little, and a more intense focus on, and new research in, the behavioral sciences and cognitive psychology (from brain plasticity to choice architecture) is critical if we ever want to create an evidence-based science of lifestyle change and willpower.

More, better-funded studies on wellness approaches: Clinical studies on wellness approaches represent the under-resourced David to Big Pharmas Goliath. Average R&D costs for a new drug have reached $2.9 billion,* while funds for wellness clinical trials are drastically less (often under $100,000) and the GWI estimates that (Stage 3) drug trials have around 100 times the participants: roughly 50 for a wellness study, vs. 4,000 for a drug trial. Without more, better-funded trials, highly respected medical organizations like Cochrane will continue to withhold positive recommendations in their meta-reviews on practices like meditation or yoga, even when theres positive, preliminary evidence.

A Better Understanding of and More Appropriately Designed - Wellness Studies: Clinical trials on wellness approaches often have unique qualities, and superimposing the double-blind model can be like fitting an apple into an orange. Placebo models dont work when participants know theyre experiencing things like meditation or exercise, and wellness approaches often involve practitioners, so cant be uniformly replicated (or regulated) like a pill. Short studies fail to capture the most meaningful outcomes for long-term, prevention-focused approaches, and all personalized medicines, like TCM and Ayurveda, defy the randomized trial model entirely. Another problem: most current studies on wellness approaches are performed on sick people (in the hospital setting), providing a limited view of their efficacy. Greater openness to analyzing (and valuing) outcomes from studies that cant fit perfectly into double blind, or even randomized, trial designs is needed.

Go here to see the original:
Global Wellness Institute and Scientific American Worldview Hold Roundtable on the Science of Wellness