This is, sadly, extremely true and even more sadly, very often used. 5 times more likely to die from x, sounds impressive, risk increase from 0.001 to 0.005 percent does not. Newspapers want to ... sell newspapers, and sounding dramatic is part of it. If every person capable of reading "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre did so, this would be a better world. It's by the way the best I've seen to give the amateur an understanding of statistics, studies, being critical, manipulation by media, et cetera... (while being entertaining and an easy read, a frequent present of mine to other people).
"Depends on what you mean by rational. I don’t like that word. You could use other words like “value-congruent,” which fit in with what people feel is the appropriate value. Those are the decisions they will make and not regret in the future."
"Value-congruent", nice one. "Rational" is indeed one of those empty words that is thrown around.
One thing I also find incredibly important: People have to understand science is a METHOD, not an AUTHORITY. Because people don't listen to authority, but in many cases they can't argue much with reason. This is incredibly important, a lot of the anti-science sentiment stems from viewing science as an authority, and this is extremely stupid.