Each year around the Super Bowl, those of us who make it our business to write about health start harping on the dangers of Super Bowl Sunday's buffet spread, excessive drinking and more. But how bad is all that food, actually? And is there really a spike in domestic violence reports on game day? Here are a few myths and facts about the Super Bowl and your health:
Overeating Does Damage: FACT(01 of04)
We'll be eating 30 million pounds of snacks, according to the Calorie Control Council. That's 11.2 million pounds of potato chips, 8.2 million pounds of tortilla chips, 4.3 million pounds of pretzels, 3.8 million pounds of popcorn and 2.5 million pounds of nuts. "Sure," you might say. "But there are so many fans, it can't be that much per person." But according to the council's research, that averages out to about 1,200 calories and 50 grams of fat per person. That's nearly a full day's worth of calories, based on the USDA's Dietary Guidelines for Americans - and 43 percent more fat than is recommended for an entire day (reminder: the Super Bowl lasts three hours).It's easy to dismiss all this over-snacking as a special occasion treat, but consider how many passes you've already given yourself: Thanksgiving, Christmas, Hannukah, New Years, etc. So try to take it easy on the wings. It can be hard to tell how much you're eating when it's the kind of all-day grazing encouraged at a party, so if you're unsure of what constitutes a serving, take our Super Bowl snack calorie quiz here. (credit:Alamy)
Fans Of The Losing Team Suffer More Heart Attacks: MYTH(02 of04)
Last year, you may have noticed headlines like "The Super Bowl can cause a heart attack." They were based on a study from the medical journal Clinical Cardiology that found a spike in overall heart attack mortality rates in Los Angeles County when the LA Raiders lost in 1980 -- and a dip in cardiac deaths when the Raiders won in 1984. Sounds like strong evidence that rooting for the losing team can be hazardous, doesn't it? But, as the Center for Media and Public Affairs's sister organization STATS reported, the study's design had a few fundamental flaws that make the cardiac death rates impossible to compare:
The authors compared 1980 with subsequent years (and similarly 1984 with subsequent years). Perhaps there are trends in the demographics or the health care that are driving changes over a period of years.What's more, the two comparison years had Super Bowls held during different months. STATS contributor Rebecca Goldin went on to explain: "The comparison days (January 15-19, and February 4-29, 1980 and comparable days in 1981, 1982, 1983) included many more February days than January days. If there are more deaths in January than in February, then the study would be biased to see a result of increasing deaths."While there haven't been more studies to further explore the link, this study proves insufficient to suggest a connection. Verdict: A heart attack resulting from some sports fan disappointment is about as far-fetched as it sounds. Of course, on the other hand, a good-quality observational study found that extreme overeating could quadruple heart attack risk. Something to keep in mind at the buffet table ... (credit:Alamy)
Domestic Violence Rises: MYTH(03 of04)
In 1993, in advance of the Super Bowl games held in Pasadena, Calif., several local women's advocacy organizations came forward with anecdotal evidence that domestic violence shelters and emergency rooms saw a surge of battered women on Super Bowl Sunday. Experts appeared on national television, citing research proving a link between the game and violence against women. But a closer look at the initial research revealed that there was no clear association.A 1993 Washington Post article by Ken Ringle revealed that the initial study's findings were completely different from what was reported. Ringle tracked down the researcher who completed the study, Janet Katz -- a professor of sociology and criminal justice at Old Dominion University -- who immediately refuted her study's interpretation in the media:
One of the most notable findings, she said, was that an increase of emergency room admissions "was not associated with the occurrence of football games in general, nor with watching a team lose." When they looked at win days alone, however, they found that the number of women admitted for gunshot wounds, stabbings, assaults, falls, lacerations and wounds from being hit by objects was slightly higher than average. But certainly not 40 percent. "These are interesting but very tentative findings, suggesting what violence there is from males after football may spring not from a feeling of defensive insecurity, which you'd associate with a loss, but from the sense of empowerment following a win. We found that significant. But it certainly doesn't support what those women are saying in Pasadena," Katz said.(credit:Alamy)
Traffic Fatalities Spike: FACT(04 of04)
For an event so focused around home gatherings and even family time, it's a bit surprising that driving under the influence is such a big problem. But according to an article in the New England Journal of Medicine, a combination of heightened intoxication, inattention and fatigue accounts for a 41 percent spike in the average number of car-related deaths following the Super Bowl's broadcast. Statisticians analyzed driving fatality data over 27 consecutive Super Bowls from 1975 to 2001. They found an average seven added deaths per Super Bowl Sunday when compared to averages from control Sundays. (credit:Alamy)