Japan is aging faster than any other nation. By the end of this decade, there will be three retirees for every child under 15 and before long, one in six people will be over 80. Its population will soon be falling by nearly a million people every year and some people predict that, some time in the next century, the last Japanese person will die. Other countries are encouraging immigration to deal with their demographic woes. But not Japan, which is using different ways to reduce pressure put on health care and social services.

The Toto-made toilet, common in Japanese hotels, can push up to help the elderly. Now Toto is working with Daiwa House, Japan’s largest house builder, to equip toilets for retirees. These have medical sensors that measure blood sugar levels, the blood pressure and body fat of the user. The data is emailed to the local GP through a built-in internet device (装置). So make sure you eat your greens and stay regular, or the doctor will be in touch.

The over-75s account for more than a quarter of the deaths in car accidents on Japanese roads. Toyota is working with Professor Kawashima, who developed brain training games for Nintendo, to create intelligent cars that monitor brain activity in the elderly. Other technologies could also work to keep elderly drivers cautious.

Japan has twice as many pets as it has children. But real animals are difficult to look after as their owners age. Paro is a furry white baby seal robot which responds to petting by moving its tail and opening and closing its eyes. It shows emotions such as surprise, happiness and anger, and has sold well in nursing homes where it is reported to stimulate (刺激) responses among those with dementia (痴呆).

Japan’s Institute of Physical and Chemical Research has developed Riba, a nursing care robot that can lift the elderly out of bed.

For several decades, there has been an extensive and organized campaign intended to generate distrust in science, funded by regulated industries and libertarian think tanks (自由主义智囊团) whose interests and beliefs are threatened by the findings of modern science. In response, scientists have tended to stress the success of science. After all, scientists have been right about most things, from the structure of the universe to the relativity of time and space.

Quoting successes isn’t wrong, but for many people it’s not persuasive. What is typically declared to be the scientific method — develop a supposition, then design an experiment to test it — isn’t what scientists actually do. Science is active so that new methods get invented and old ones get abandoned. The scientific method doesn’t always work. False theories can produce true results, so even if an experiment works, it doesn’t prove that the theory it was designed to test is true.

If there is no identifiable scientific method, then what is the guarantee for trust in science?

The answer is the methods by which those claims are evaluated. A scientific claim is never accepted as true until it has gone through a long process of examination by fellow scientists. Until this point, scientific feedback is typically fairly friendly. But the next step is different: once the paper is ready, it is presented to a scientific journal, where things get a whole lot tougher. Editors deliberately send scientific papers to people who are not friends or colleagues of the authors, and the job of the reviewer is to find errors or other inadequacies. We call this process “peer review” because the reviewers are scientific peers but they act in the role of a superior who has both the right and the obligation to find fault. It is only after the reviewers and the editor are satisfied that any problems have been fixed that the paper is accepted for publication and enters the body of “science.”

Does this process ever go wrong? Of course. Scientists are human. But if we look carefully at historical cases where science went wrong, typically there was no agreement reached by all. Some people argue that we should not trust science because scientists are “always changing their minds.” While examples of truly settled science being overturned are far fewer than is sometimes claimed, they do exist. But the beauty of this scientific process is that it explains what might otherwise appear paradoxical (矛盾的): that science produces both novelty (新颖性) and stability. New observations, ideas, interpretations introduce novelty: trans-formative questioning leads to collective decisions and the stability of scientific knowledge. Scientists do change their minds in the face of new evidence, but this is a strength of science, not a weakness.

Many of us spend part of each day surrounded by strangers, whether on our daily commute (上下班往返), or sitting in park or cafe. But most of them remain just that-strangers. However, new evidence has shown that plucking up (鼓起) the courage to strike up conversation might be good for our health.

Nicholas Epley from the University of Chicago and Juliana Schroeder from the University of California are behavioural scientists. They wanted to know whether solitude is a more positive experience than interacting with strangers, or if people misunderstand the consequences of distant social connections. They found that many people feel uncomfortable and frightened talking to others and their research suggested that when we make an initial conversation “we consistently underestimate (低估) how much a new person likes us.” It seems we think that all the things could go wrong and why someone wouldn’t want to talk with us.

Their research involved an experiment with a group of Chicago commuters and found that “every participant in our experiment who actually tried to talk to a stranger found the person sitting next to them was happy to chat.” From this and other research, the conclusion is that connecting with strangers is surprisingly pleasant and it has a positive impact on our wellbeing. It’s true that talking can make you feel happier and happiness can lead to better mental health.

However, if you’re’ an introvert (性格内向者), the thought of speaking to someone new might make you anxious. But the American research found “both extroverts (性格外向者) and introverts are happier when they are asked to behave in an extroverted manner.” So maybe, if you’re a loner, it’s time to come out of your shell and make some small talk with a stranger-it could be the beginning of a new friendship.