Hi everyone.

Welcome to today's lesson.

I'm Mrs. Horan, and together we are going to be exploring different kinds of evidence about healthy lifestyle.

We're gonna be developing some really useful skills today, one that are important not just for science, but all sorts of other things too.

Today's lesson is part of the keeping healthy unit.

The lesson is called Evidence about Healthy Lifestyle Due and Review, and we'll be thinking about how we can evaluate the different kinds of evidence available to us and use these to help us make informed choices about how we live.

The outcome for our lesson today is to evaluate a range of scientific reports about healthy and unhealthy lifestyles.

This lesson builds and what you already know about scientific inquiry and how different things can have an impact on our health and wellbeing.

It's part of our wider learning question.

How do living things stay healthy? Here are our keywords for today.

We have lifestyle, evidence, inquiry, reliable, and evaluate.

You've probably seen or heard all of these before, but don't worry if you haven't or if you're not sure what some of them mean, we'll talk about each one as we come to it in the lesson, the definitions of all these words are here for you to refer back to later on.

If you want to check anything or you need to remind yourself what one of them means.

Our lesson today is divided into two parts.

Let's get started with the first part.

Reliable sources of information.

Andeep, Laura and Jun have been learning about healthy lifestyles at school.

Andeep says, I learned that it is important to eat a healthy diet and stay physically active.

Laura says, I learned about the impact of smoking, alcohol and other drugs on our bodies.

Jun says, but how do we know healthy diets are good for our bodies and alcohol is bad? Now that is a really interesting question.

You might be thinking, you know, because your teacher has told you, or maybe your family or friends have told you, but how do they know? <v ->What do you think?</v> You might want to pause the video here to discuss this question with someone and share ideas.

Scientists collect evidence from enquiries that help us to understand more about how our bodies work.

There are two keywords in that sentence, so let's break it down a little.

Evidence is information or data, which helps us to prove that something is or isn't true.

Inquiries are investigations that scientists carry out to gather evidence and to find out more about things.

So we know that scientists gather evidence from their investigations and that can be used to help us understand how our bodies are affected by different things.

We can use this evidence to make conclusions about the impact of different things on our physical and mental health and make informed choices about our lifestyle.

A lifestyle is the way we choose to live.

For example, the foods we decide to eat, the amount of physical activity we get and how we spend our time.

Scientists carry out inquiries to observe the effects of different things on the human body.

These can be all sorts of things from the impact of healthy eating or different drugs to the amount of sleep or screen time we get.

They use their findings to draw conclusions and publish these along with their data so others can learn from their inquiries.

Publishing them means putting them into print on paper or online so that other people can see them.

Let's have a quick check for understanding to see how we're doing.

Can you work out what word is missing from this sentence? Scientists gather that can help us to make informed choices about our health by carrying out inquiries.

Did you say evidence? Scientists gather evidence that can help us to make informed choices about our health by carrying out inquiries.

When scientists results have been published their findings and conclusions are often used by others to create secondary sources of information.

These can include books, articles, blogs, videos and social media posts.

So the scientists findings are what we call primary sources of information.

And then other people take these and create a secondary source of information.

Some of these are written down like the ones in newspapers, magazines, or posts on the internet, and some of them are spoken like podcasts or videos.

Alex says, if information online and in print is all written using evidence from scientists inquiries, does this mean I can trust everything I read in a magazine, newspaper, or on the internet? That's a really good question.

What do you think? This is another good place to pause the video to have a bit of thinking and discussion time with the people around you.

So not all secondary sources are equally reliable.

Now, reliable is one of our keywords today, and it's a really important one.

Something reliable is something trustworthy, something that we can be certain is correct.

So to answer Alex's question, he shouldn't automatically trust every secondary source that he finds.

There are a few different reasons for this and we're gonna have a think about them today.

Some may have been written by someone who has misunderstood the information from the inquiry, meaning the secondary source is not factually correct.

Now here's a snippet from a secondary source in the purple box.

It's been written using some evidence found by scientists during an inquiry.

We'll take a look at it and I'd like you to think, what do you notice about this secondary source? It says, poisonous poultry.

Scientists have found that 5.

7% of raw chicken contains deadly salmonella bacteria.

This means chicken is not safe and we should stop eating it.

So what do you notice about this? There isn't a lot of text to read here, but there is quite a lot to think about, so you might want to pause the video again if you need some more thinking time.

Now here's what I noticed.

The sources, the inquiry was into raw chicken, not the cooked chicken that we eat.

The evidence suggests that we shouldn't eat raw chicken.

It doesn't tell us anything about cooked chicken.

The person who has created this secondary source perhaps didn't fully understand the evidence from the inquiry.

Although salmonella can cause food poisoning and make us unwell, it's not often deadly and the bacteria that cause it are killed when we cook chicken thoroughly.

Some sources may only have included parts of the information available from the inquiry, meaning it doesn't present the whole story.

We've got another secondary source here about energy drinks.

Let's look at this one and I'd like you to think again about what you notice about it.

It says, big boost for energy drinks.

Researchers have been investigating the short and long-term effect of consuming energy drinks.

Studies show that these drinks give the user increased focus, more energy and a better mood in the short term.

What do you notice about that secondary source? Again, you can pause the video here if you want a bit more thinking time and then come back when you're ready.

So this source doesn't explain what was discovered about the long-term effects of these drinks.

It tells us about the short-term effects, but it says that the long-term effects have also been investigated too, and it doesn't tell us anything about those effects.

It only gives us a partial picture of the evidence.

Let's have another check for understanding now.

Take a look at this statement and decide whether you think it's true or false.

All information published in books and online is reliable and factually accurate.

Is that true or false? That statement is false.

Now, can you justify your answer and explain why it's false? Is it false because A, only information published in print such as books, magazines, and newspapers is reliable? Or is it false, because B, sometimes information in secondary sources can be misleading, incorrect, or incomplete? What do you think? Great.

It is false, because sometimes information in secondary sources can be misleading, incorrect, or incomplete.

We can evaluate secondary sources of information to help us decide how reliable they are by looking at these factors.

Who wrote it, why was it written and what evidence was used? This helps us to decide whether we can trust the information in the source or not.

Let's have a go at evaluating some sources then and see which we think will be reliable.

We are going to take a look at two sources now, and I'd like you to think about which of them will be more reliable than the other one.

The topic of both sources is screen time and its impact on our mental health.

So our first source is an online post by a social media influencer and archaeologist, or we also have an article by a doctor and neuroscience expert.

Neuroscience is the science of the brain.

So which of these two sources do you think will be the most reliable for information about screen time and mental health? Andeep thinks the article will be more reliable because it was written by a doctor and neuroscience expert, whereas the online post was written by an expert in fossils.

I think I agree.

Do you? The archaeologist is probably very good at archaeology, but they're not likely to know and understand more about the brain than the doctor who is an expert in this field.

Let's try another set.

Which of these secondary sources do you think will be more reliable? The topic is vaping and its impact on our bodies.

Let's take a look at these sources.

So we have an article on the NHS website discussing the impact of vaping.

Or an article about vaping on an e-cigarette company's social media page.

Which do you think will be most reliable? Laura thinks that the article about vaping on an e-cigarette company's social media page will probably be less reliable because it has likely been written with the intention of making people want to buy e-cigarettes.

I think I agree.

If the article is on a webpage that sells e-cigarettes, it is very unlikely they will want to include anything that will make people not want to buy those products.

One more set of sources for us to evaluate here.

So which of these sources of evidence would be more reliable for an article about the impact of high sugar foods on human health? So we have first an inquiry where scientists looked at 50 other studies on the impact of sugar on health and summarised the results.

Or we have an inquiry where three scientists each ate sugary foods for three days, monitored their heart rate and reported how they felt at the end.

And this one is tricky because they were both inquiries carried out by scientists.

That doesn't give us any clues.

Which do you think will be more reliable? You can pause the video here again if you want a bit more thinking time for this one.

Jun thinks the inquiry that looked at 50 other studies will be more reliable because it draws on much more evidence than just the experiences of three people.

Did you think the same? Let's see how we're doing with another quick check for understanding.

What can we check to help us decide how reliable a secondary source of information is? Our options to choose from are A, the evidence used to write it.

B, the purpose it was written for.

C, the images included alongside it.

D, how complicated the language is, and E, who wrote it? Which ones do you think it is? There were three correct answers to this question.

Did you get A? The evidence used to write it.

B, the purpose it was written for and E, who wrote it? Time for a task.

Sofia has gathered six sources of information about different drinks and their effects on health.

Decide which three you think are likely to be the most reliable and explain your choices.

Sofia's sources are in some additional material that your teacher or whoever is helping you today can give you.

For each source you can see who wrote it, where it is published and what evidence was used.

Your job is to evaluate each one and decide on the three most reliable sources of information.

Pause the video here to carry out your task and come back when you've chosen your three sources from Sofia's selection.

Welcome back.

How did you find evaluating the sources? Did it seem challenging or did you find it quite easy to decide which would be more or less reliable? Sofia said, I think the three most useful and perhaps reliable sources will be sources two, five, and six.

These sources have all used a number of different sources of evidence.

These sources were also written by experts on this topic.

She saw that source one has only used information from a survey taken by people who probably really like soft drinks because it appeared on their social media page.

Source three only includes evidence from one person who only tried each drink once and observed their feelings.

Source four only includes evidence from a very old study and that only included four people.

Let's move on to the second part of our lesson today, collecting evidence about healthy lifestyles.

As we get older, we have more opportunities to make our own choices about our lifestyles.

By the time you reach adulthood, you will make all of your own decisions about what you eat and drink, how much you exercise and other lifestyle choices.

That's really exciting and I bet some of you can't wait to be able to make all your own choices.

But it comes with a lot of responsibility and it's important that you know all about the impact of the choices you could make so you know you're making the right lifestyle choices for you.

We can find out more about how different lifestyle choices affect our health by using evidence gathered by scientists from inquiries.

It's important to examine information from a range of reliable sources so that we can make well-informed choices.

Sofia wants to find out more about how different drinks could impact her health.

This will help her to make informed choices about her diet.

She's gathered some secondary sources of information about this topic.

Here is Sofia's first source.

Dehydration levels affects children's performance in school.

Let's see what this source tells us.

It's well known that being well-hydrated is great for our bodies, but does it affect our minds too? We looked at 14 different studies from across the world that gathered data on children's hydration levels and their scores in different kinds of tests and challenges.

The evidence clearly demonstrated that children who drank plenty of fluids as part of their everyday lives perform better in a range of areas.

Sofia's first source carries on in this slide.

It continues.

They found that staying well-hydrated helped to improve memory, attention and even the speed at which children were able to solve problems. The studies we looked at invested the volume drunk and how regularly, but not the type of drinks children consumed, for example, fruit juice, soft drinks, water, et cetera.

Based on evidence from this source.

What advice would you give to Sofia about making healthy choices? What do you think will be a good idea based on the evidence in the source we have just read together? You might want to pause the video here to have a think about this yourself or even take a look back and another read through the secondary source again before we take a look at some ideas from other children.

So Laura says, the evidence suggested that making sure you are well-hydrated will help you to do well at school.

I think you should make sure you are drinking plenty of fluids throughout the day.

Andeep says, it didn't have any information on what kind of drinks are best.

You should do some more research to find out about this.

And he's quite right, it only told us about the amount that you drink, not what you drink.

So we don't know about any difference between water, juice, soft drinks, coffee, tea, or milk based on just that source.

Sofia says, this sauce was very helpful, so I don't think I need to consider any other sources to help me make choices about how much I drink during the day.

Do you agree? We should always consider information from a range of different sources.

Sometimes different inquiries or sources come to different conclusions based on what was found out.

Have you ever done an investigation in class and ended up with different results to your friends? This can happen when scientists carry out inquiries.

Looking at a number of sources will allow you to consider as much evidence as possible and make up your own mind.

The more evidence you have, the more confident you can feel that you are making the right choices for you.

Looking at a range of different sources will also help you to spot any incorrect claims or errors that appear in a single source.

So for example, if you look at five different secondary sources and they all say the same thing except for one, it's likely that the one that is different is incorrect.

One more quick check for understanding now, before we have our final practise task of the day, take a look at this statement and decide whether you think it's true or false.

Sam read a reliable and informative article about the impact of screen time on attention span.

She should still look for information from other sources to find out more.

Do you think that is true or false? Great, that is true.

Now, can you justify your answer? Is it true because A, the more sources she reads, the better informed and better able the spot to false information Sam will be.

Or is it true, because B, the more sources she reads, the smarter and more healthy Sam will become.

So it is true because the more sources she reads, the better informed she will be and she'll be more likely to be able to spot any false information.

Your final task today is to examine Sofia's two other sources and use them to make some suggestions for a healthy lifestyle.

So your teacher or the adult who is helping you today will have the full secondary sources for you to read through carefully.

When you've read them, use the evidence to make some suggestions for Sofia about healthy choices.

Pause the video now to go and complete your task.

Come back when you're done.

Welcome back.

I wonder what suggestions you had for Sofia.

Jun said, I think Sofia should aim to drink around two litres of fluid every day.

Andeep said, I think she should make sure she gets extra water if she has been exercising a lot.

Laura said, I think she should mainly drink water.

A small amount of fruit juice or lemonade is okay too, but she should try to limit her intake of these because they can cause tooth decay.

All great suggestions for Sofia and for the rest of us.

I wonder, did you have similar suggestions? Did you have any other advice for Sofia? That brings us to the end of our lesson? It's been a really interesting one today, hasn't it? Let's recap on our key learning.

Scientists collect evidence from inquiries that helps us to make informed choices about healthy lifestyle.

It's important to examine information from a range of reliable sources to help us make our own choices.

We can determine the reliability of a source by looking at who wrote it, but what purpose, and using what evidence.

Thank you so much for joining me today to really think deeply about how different sources of information can be more or less reliable than others, and the ways we can evaluate these sources to help us decide which ones are most trustworthy.

I'll see you again next time.