5 . In Denmark, bicycling is one of the primary forms of transportation. In sunshine, rain and snow, you will see cyclists on their way to work, to the grocery store, or to social events. The bike is a Dane’s best friend.

Danish cycling culture is as old as the bicycle itself. Bikes were first introduced to the country in the 1880s, and during the 1920s and 1930s, the bicycle became a widespread symbol of equality and freedom. People of all social classes began biking side by side — in the cities on their way to work and in the countryside on their days off.

The increased economy development of the late 1950s saw some Danes replacing bikes with motorcycles and automobiles. Just like their colleagues around the world, Danish urban planners believed the future belonged to cars, trucks, and ever-wider highways. In the early 1970s, however, the Mideast oil crisis terminated that development. “Car Free Sundays” were introduced in Copenhagen, and movements demanding Copenhagen to become car-free took place. Over time, concerns about air pollution, climate change, and the need for people to get enough exercise have helped bicycles make a big comeback. Denmark’s heavy taxes on petrol and automobiles are a factor, too.

Today, cycling is an inseparable part of Danish culture. Newcomers who do not know how to cycle are encouraged to learn as soon as they arrive. Danish children usually learn to bike before they begin school at the age of six — and often much earlier. In school, children learn about traffic rules, road safety, and the importance of wearing a helmet as well as good cycling habits. Another choice for families with children is the cargo bike — a sort of oversized tricycle with a large wooden box on the front. It’s estimated that a quarter of all Copenhagen families with two or more children own one of these cargo bikes for transporting kids, groceries, and other necessities. Danish cargo bikes have also won design awards and become a Danish export success.

Commuting by bike is the fastest, easiest and most environmentally friendly way to get around the cities of Denmark. And the numbers speak for themselves: Residents who cycle in Copenhagen request 1.1 million fewer sick days. Cyclists reduce CO2 emissions by 20,000 tonnes a year on average.

6 . We sometimes think that everything was much better and easier in the past. It’s one of the tricks our minds play on us, especially when we arc in low spirits.

Actually, it’s unlikely that things were objectively better in the past. This form of thinking is called rosy retrospection,which is a well-studied cognitive bias. It happens because when we think about the past, we are more likely to focus on positive generalities than annoying details.

If you think back to a holiday with your family five years ago, you’re likely to recall the beautiful views rather than the uncomfortable bed. In other words,the negative details disappear from our memory over time while the positive ones remain.

Rosy retrospection can influence how we make decisions, and it’s one of the reasons why we easily return into problematic relationships. The longer it is since we experienced the negative influence of a relationship, the more likely we are to let the good memories outweigh the bad memories and to perhaps forgive unforgivable behavior. It’s always a good idea to review our nostalgic (怀旧的) feelings with a healthy degree of doubt.

But rosy retrospection does serve an important purpose. It keeps us in a positive state of mind in the present and is important to our psychological wellbeing. In fact, people who tend to remember negative experiences more than positive ones are likely to exhibit psychological disorders. Research generally suggests that our happiest days are still to come. And even if they’re not, it’s still important to believe that they are. Don’t shy away from looking upon the past with a certain degree of nostalgia. But, for the same reason, don’t use the past as an excuse to be unhappy in the present.

8 . In recent years, labels have increasingly been used by the food industry. Whether “non-GMO (转基因)” or “zero trans fat” ,“no added hormones” or “sugar-free”, consumers are demanding more information about what’s in their food.

A report by Nielsen found that 39 percent of consumers would switch from the brands they currently buy to others that provide clearer, more accurate product information. Food manufacturers are using the new labels to meet consumers’ demand, with an eye towards giving their products a leg up over the competition, and their bottom lines a boost as well.

On its face, the new marketing strategy makes sense. But these so-called “absence claims” labels are harmful both to the consumers who purchase the products and the industry that supplies them. For example, Hunt’s put a “non-GMO” label on its tomatoes a few years ago — despite the fact that, at the time, there was no such thing as a GMO tomato on the market. Over the long term, this strategy will have the opposite effect: by creating fear, we run the risk of damaging consumers' trust.

Eventually, it becomes a question in consumers' minds: Should I have ever been eating these foods in the first place? By purchasing and consuming these types of products, have I already done some kind of harm to me?

For food manufacturers, it will damage consumers’ trust, which in turn would lower sales for the whole food industry. And this isn’t just supposition. A recent study by a group of academics at the University of Delaware found that “absence claims” labels can stigmatize (污名化) food produced with conventional processes even when there is no scientific evidence that they cause harm.

In addition to the likely negative long-term impact on sales, it sends a message that innovations in farming and food processing are unwelcome, eventually leading to less efficiency, fewer choices for consumers, and, ultimately, more costly food products. Therefore, it’s clear that food manufacturers must be careful when using “absence claims” as a marketing strategy. If we allow this kind of label fear-mongering to continue, the losers will be all of us.