Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Interrogation Techniques

Aired May 05, 2004 - 14:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: The shocking pictures from Abu Ghraib Prison provide a vivid example of how not to interrogate prisoners of war. International law prohibits force, mental torture, threats, insults or inhumane treatment. So what does that leave? Let's ask CNN military intelligence analyst Ken Robinson. He's has done a lot of interrogating himself.
First of all, you were saying a difference between an enemy prisoner of war and terrorist detainees. Big difference here.

KEN ROBINSON, CNN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: One of the main differences is is that the doctrine and the training and the tactics and procedures that the United States military has trained for for the last 30 years have been enemy prisoner of war operations.

And what we are having here are we're having capture of terrorists, detention of terrorists and then the interrogation of terrorists to prevent future terrorist operations. That's a different technique because they're not the same class as a soldier from the Republican Guard or an army unit who was taken in combat when they moved forward into Baghdad. It's a different distinction.

PHILLIPS: So do you have the right legally as a soldier to treat a terrorist detainee differently from an enemy prisoner of war? Can you be rougher with a terrorist detainee?

ROBINSON: No, you can't be rougher with one. The military still follows the law of land warfare, they follow the Geneva Convention and they follow their own common sense which clearly didn't happen in this case.

But the legal status of these individuals and the rapid nature of -- the aggressive nature in which they're trying to extract information from them may explain the behavior of some who were trying to set conditions which would make them break and make them be willing to cooperate and talk to interrogators.

That's just hypothetical. We're trying to understand how something like this could break down so fast. That's just one distinction that's different from the last 100 years of fighting nation states where we're now fighting terrorists who are attacking us within the confines of Iraq.

PHILLIPS: And that's a question that remains. Were these MPs being probed to prep these detainees to be interrogated the next day. That's the question at hand still? ROBINSON: Yes, that's what's being investigated. It hasn't been substantiated yet. We'll have to wait for a court-martial to find that out as they play out their defense for their own behavior, which appears to be defenseless.

PHILLIPS: You are former military. You have strict guidelines on how you could interrogate. Let's talk about some interrogation techniques. There are 18 techniques that we wanted to talk about, but we narrowed it down. Let's first of all talk about the direct technique.

ROBINSON: The direct approach is historically the most effective approach. Did you do it? Are you guilty? Where are you going to attack next? Most soldiers in most wars this century respond to the direct approach.

Now, this is, again, speaking of soldiers. This isn't speaking of maybe foreign terrorist fighters who have been trained in resistance, if we're talking about al Qaeda. Or whether we're talking about these guys who come across the border from Syria, from Iran. They're a different cut of cloth.

PHILLIPS: At least a soldier has a sense of truth and honor versus a terrorist who is basically a huge coward.

ROBINSON: And a soldier has protections. He understands his status. These guys don't understand their status. I don't even think in some cases that until the Supreme Court makes some decisions, anyone's really going to understand what the ultimate status of some of these people in detention is.

The United States is now faced with a problem. There's a huge population of these people being held that if anyone examines their behavior reasonably they never want to let them see the light of freedom again because they'll go right back to attacking Americans and Westerners.

PHILLIPS: Technique No. 2, the fear up technique.

ROBINSON: The fear up technique is a very aggressive technique that's used right after a prisoner is taken. He has the shock of capture. And it tries to accentuate that shock of capture when he's psychological vulnerable.

They use a lot of violent behavior, but they don't touch. They're not allowed to place their hands on the prisoner. MPs are supposed to be observing to make sure that interrogators don't go over those lines.

What they try to do is instill fear in the heart. And, again, this generally works well on a young soldier, young prisoner or someone who is naive.

PHILLIPS: Technique No. 3. Pride and ego. This is what we saw in those pictures. ROBINSON: This works well with folks who haven't had a voice before. In repressed societies where you play to the individual or his pride, and try to build him up to make him feel that he has a lot of knowledge to share. And you try to appeal to the fact that he'll be helping his comrades by sharing that knowledge, to put an end to the conflict or resolution to his own status as a prisoner.

PHILLIPS: I was thinking of ego in tearing at their pride, tearing at their ego as in undressing them and taking these picture, humiliating them.

ROBINSON: No, that's a completely different issue. No, this is taking advantage of the person's pride or their ego and finding a way to use it because the ultimate objective in all of these interrogation techniques is perishable information that they may have about the next attack, the next place where there's an IED bomb planned, the next nest of terrorists.

PHILLIPS: We know all. Tell us about this technique.

ROBINSON: We know all is the one your boss uses for you in contract negotiations.

PHILLIPS: "Kyra, I know everything about you. Don't even think about getting more from me."

ROBINSON: Right. "I already know everything. I just want you to validate it for me. Go ahead, let's start at the top. What did you say about me this morning?"

And that same approach, however, is very effective. people can be intimidated by it.

PHILLIPS: All right, establish your identity.

ROBINSON: Establish your identity is a great approach. It is you are not Kyra Phillips. You're a wanted female terrorist from Bighter-Meinhoff (ph). We know that and we know you're complicit in about 14 murders and you're facing the death penalty.

And so you prove to us that you are not who you say you are now. That causes cognitive dissonance on the part of the prisoner. Then they start divulging information willingly. And then they're able to steer the conversation in the interrogation to where they need to to try to find out of prevent the next dangerous thing.

PHILLIPS: That's pretty scary when I think what you could find out about people, Ken.

Finally friend and foe.

ROBINSON: Friend and foe, viewers may remember that as "Mutt and Jeff," good cop, bad cop. It's where one comes in and is very aggressive with you. And another interrogator is the one who is kind, he gives you those nonverbals. He listens carefully. And you identify with that person out of safety situation where you're fear. Because fear is an important part of interrogation.

A real important point that we've got to make for the interrogations that are going on is they can't throw the baby out with the bathwater on this. As they sit down, these interrogators cannot be encumbered to be able to do what they are doing to keep these soldiers alive. They just have to find a way so that this monstrous act that occurred can never happen again.

PHILLIPS: What's the famous quote. The most dangerous animal is man?

ROBINSON: Yes.

PHILLIPS: Ken Robinson, thanks so much.

Well top guns in the Bush administration up to and including the president are blanketing the airwaves with regret and resolve about those graphic photos we've been talking about of abuse at Abu Ghraib Prison in Baghdad. Mr. Bush gave lengthy interviews today to two Arab language TV services. And we get the details form CNN White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux -- Suzanne.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Kyra, the bottom line, the message here from the Bush administration from those two interviews was first the president said that the abuse that he saw was abhorrent. He believed that it was just the work of a few. And that those who were guilty would be held accountable.

This is all part of a larger public relations campaign to counter those images that have been on television throughout the world. It is all about high level damage control.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: First, people in Iraq must understand that I view those practices as abhorrent. They must also understand what took place in that prison does not represent America that I know.

This is a serious matter. It's a matter that reflects badly on my country. Our citizens in America are appalled by what they saw, just like people in the Middle East are appalled. We share the same deep concerns.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: Kyra, there are two unanswered important questions that came out of the White House briefing moments ago with Scott McClellan. First of all, we learned that the president just found out about those photos when they aired on television, that he did not get a heads up on that, despite the fact that there were a number of high level Pentagon officials who did know about it, who were negotiating with CBS over the release. Even had a damage control assessment of what to do after they were released.

We asked whether or not the president was disturbed by this. McClellan would only say that his focus is on the abuse that happened and how to make sure that never happens again.

The other unanswered question is when was the president notified that there were allegations of abuse going on inside of the prisons? McClellan would only say that the secretary did alert him of that at some point after they knew about it, but we don't get a good sense of that timetable -- Kyra.

PHILLIPS: We've heard the generals apologize. Why haven't we heard President Bush apologize?

MALVEAUX: That's a very good question. McClellan said -- and he actually apologized several times saying I am very sorry, the White House is very sorry. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice says she is sorry. We are speaking for the president, is what he said.

But he felt that it was good enough that the president went far enough to say that this is unacceptable, this behavior and we'll do everything to make sure that it doesn't happen again. But it did fall short of an apology from the president's lips.

PHILLIPS: Suzanne Malveaux, live from the White House, thanks.

LIVE FROM... wants to save your heart from year marriage. Take the marriage stress test with us. Grab a pen, grab a pencil. Get ready. Don't be shy. We promise your spouse will not see the answers unless you interrogate us. Could make you healthier.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: Checking health headlines this Cinco de Mayo, spare the rod and spare yourself from headaches later on. A new study shows that some toddlers who are spanked too often develop behavioral problems when they reach school age. But it seems to be more common with non-Hispanic white kids.

High fat boost? A study suggests that limiting your fat intake may have a negative impact on your heart. Researchers found that adults on a very low fat diet saw their good cholesterol levels drop. The reverse happened when participants boosted their fat consumption. HDL protects against heart disease.

So is marriage a loving institution or a lifetime sentence? One study links high marital stress to a thickening of the heart wall, while another shows a link between stress in the marriage to chronic pain. Annmarie Cano is an assistant professor of clinical psychology in Detroit, Michigan. She's the author of the chronic pain study that we talked about. Good to see you.

ANNMARIE CANO, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY: Thank you.

PHILLIPS: Let's talk about stress hormones and how they weaken the immune system. And I guess in what you find in your research, a lot of newlyweds don't realize this is happening.

CANO: Right. Because usually they're so happy that they're married that they don't pay attention to some of the designs that they might be having health problems associated with constant or chronic arguments.

PHILLIPS: So a low stress marriage. Is there such a thing?

CANO: Well, probably not. A little stress can be good, but it is how you handle the stress and how you talk about it with your spouse that can be very beneficial. If you don't talk about it at all, that can be a problem for the couple.

PHILLIPS: And I asked you more specifically when we talked about that. So let's get a little more in depth. It seems obvious to a lot of people, but let's get a little more in depth. You say marriage is supposed to be a comfort zone. So do we create that? No.1, we've got to be blunt with our spouse, no matter what, right?

CANO: Right. We do have to talk about our feelings when we're having some sadness or if we're disappointed in something. It is best to talk about it openly and to be specific about what that problem is rather than burying it and then becoming resentful over time.

PHILLIPS: And what do you mean be specific?

CANO: For instance, if the spouse did not put away laundry or something the other day and you're a little angry about it, it is best to talk about it right at that time and to mention it that the laundry should be put away or you thought that was something they were going to take care of instead of later on maybe two weeks from now all of a sudden bringing it up. The spouse can't remember what you did and that can be a problem.

PHILLIPS: Don't let things stew. People say, oh, shelf it. Come back to it. If you are about to blow up and sock it to him then you should shelf it. But don't let things build up.

CANO: Right. If you do need a time-out and if an argument gets a little out of hand, it is good to take a time-out where you break for a few minutes, then come back when you are both feeling calm.

PHILLIPS: Time-out? I feel like I'm back in kindergarten.

CANO: Right.

PHILLIPS: You said in studying pain that you have to go beyond your patient. You actually go into the family dynamic. You go into the marriage. You look at how this patient has been brought up, right?

CANO: Right, right. And it is important because usually we think of the pain only affecting the patient. But oftentimes it means that the spouse can't do certain activities with the patient that they used to be able to do. It changes the way the patient might interact with family members and with children. And so there are big changes within the family that need to be considered.

PHILLIPS: All right. Let's ask our viewers now to grab a pen, grab a pencil, sit next to your spouse. Maybe you don't want to sit next to your spouse.

This is the test. Very easy. Four questions. I did it with my husband. It was quite humorous.

Here's the first one. How often do you discuss or consider separation or divorce? Almost all the time to never. And I told you the results of this. And we'll talk about it. For us, believe it or not, it was six. We've never talked about separation or divorce.

The second, how often do you or your partner leave the house after a fight? We decided rarely because my husband has attempted to, but he tells me I block the door. So is five pretty good?

CANO: It is good.

PHILLIPS: OK. No. 3 -- I hope our viewers are doing well.

How often do you and your partner get on each other's nerves. We both said rarely. I don't know. It could be occasionally. It depends on the circumstance.

And finally do your kiss your partner, your mate? Everyday, almost everyday, occasionally, rarely, never. Thank goodness we both said every day.

So did we come out OK on this?

CANO: You get an A on your relationship report card.

PHILLIPS: All right. That's good to hear.

Now, let me ask you. We've only been married a short time. So length of marriage, age of the couple. Does that make a difference?

CANO: We do see changes over time where in the beginning stages of a relationship people are very happy. Sometimes there's a dip in satisfaction right when kids are born until they graduate. But usually it's fine over time.

And some young couples have been married for just a couple years and are very dissatisfied. And they might not make it. So we really can't look at it in terms of marriage duration. But instead where are you right now in your relationship?

PHILLIPS: And this is something very easy to tackle, if you just both sit down and think about it logically, right? I mean, stressed out marriages don't have to end in divorce.

CANO: Right, right. It does take work. Probably the key is figuring out when things are starting to go wrong and choosing to do something about it right away rather than ignoring any signs that you have.

PHILLIPS: So does the man acknowledge the pain in a woman or the woman acknowledge the chronic pain in a man? Who does a better job? CANO: Well, women do a better job at sensing how much pain their husbands are feeling. In my research I found that there's more of a discrepancy when the woman is the patient. When she's married, the husband and she are way off in terms of rating how much pain the woman is feeling.

PHILLIPS: I forgot to ask you. Are you married?

CANO: Oh, yes, I am.

PHILLIPS: She's losing her (UNINTELLIGIBLE). I can tell you're a very happy person. Your husband is a very lucky man, Annmarie.

CANO: He is.

PHILLIPS: There you go. Have self-confidence in that marriage. That takes away the stress. The woman is always right.

Annmarie, thank you for your time today.

CANO: Thank you.

PHILLIPS: Straight ahead, he's an animal lover, good son, even kind of huggable. He's also in the record books. Get a peek into the life of the world's tallest man. Actually we have a guy that be able to beat that. We'll tell you about him.

Happy days are here again for employees of certain companies. Find out about the hot, new perks you should be getting. More live from what after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: "News Around the World" begins with a wager and a brewski and some fleet footed fleece. That's how sheep racing started in England. The annual race now using a horseshoe shaped course. The jockeys aren't real, though. But they are real wool. This year's winner Big Boy. His prize? Extra helpings at the food trough.

He's not the NBA, but he could be. Leonid Stadnik is the world's tallest man -- except my floor direction, Jason, who runs a close second. He's 8'4" tall and still growing. That growth spurt started after a brain operation stimulated a pituitary gland.

The dimensions have created health problems, which have forced him to give up his veterinary practice in the Ukraine. This gentle giant says he just wants to stop growing.

London has itself a chocoholic. A woman with an insatiable appetite for Mars bars stunned the folks at Woolworth's buying every Mars bar they had. More than 10,000 of them. The cost was nearly $3,900.

(MARKET UPDATE)

PHILLIPS: Next hour, that nasty worm got you down? Let our tech guru Dan Sieberg pick you up a bit. Some hints on saving your computer. And a few digs at the kids who make up these annoyances.

Beyond the large bucket. Meet the competitive eater who crunched his way out of the dunking booth type thingy that was full of fiber. LIVE FROM... wants extra butter.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com


Aired May 5, 2004 - 14:30   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: The shocking pictures from Abu Ghraib Prison provide a vivid example of how not to interrogate prisoners of war. International law prohibits force, mental torture, threats, insults or inhumane treatment. So what does that leave? Let's ask CNN military intelligence analyst Ken Robinson. He's has done a lot of interrogating himself.
First of all, you were saying a difference between an enemy prisoner of war and terrorist detainees. Big difference here.

KEN ROBINSON, CNN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: One of the main differences is is that the doctrine and the training and the tactics and procedures that the United States military has trained for for the last 30 years have been enemy prisoner of war operations.

And what we are having here are we're having capture of terrorists, detention of terrorists and then the interrogation of terrorists to prevent future terrorist operations. That's a different technique because they're not the same class as a soldier from the Republican Guard or an army unit who was taken in combat when they moved forward into Baghdad. It's a different distinction.

PHILLIPS: So do you have the right legally as a soldier to treat a terrorist detainee differently from an enemy prisoner of war? Can you be rougher with a terrorist detainee?

ROBINSON: No, you can't be rougher with one. The military still follows the law of land warfare, they follow the Geneva Convention and they follow their own common sense which clearly didn't happen in this case.

But the legal status of these individuals and the rapid nature of -- the aggressive nature in which they're trying to extract information from them may explain the behavior of some who were trying to set conditions which would make them break and make them be willing to cooperate and talk to interrogators.

That's just hypothetical. We're trying to understand how something like this could break down so fast. That's just one distinction that's different from the last 100 years of fighting nation states where we're now fighting terrorists who are attacking us within the confines of Iraq.

PHILLIPS: And that's a question that remains. Were these MPs being probed to prep these detainees to be interrogated the next day. That's the question at hand still? ROBINSON: Yes, that's what's being investigated. It hasn't been substantiated yet. We'll have to wait for a court-martial to find that out as they play out their defense for their own behavior, which appears to be defenseless.

PHILLIPS: You are former military. You have strict guidelines on how you could interrogate. Let's talk about some interrogation techniques. There are 18 techniques that we wanted to talk about, but we narrowed it down. Let's first of all talk about the direct technique.

ROBINSON: The direct approach is historically the most effective approach. Did you do it? Are you guilty? Where are you going to attack next? Most soldiers in most wars this century respond to the direct approach.

Now, this is, again, speaking of soldiers. This isn't speaking of maybe foreign terrorist fighters who have been trained in resistance, if we're talking about al Qaeda. Or whether we're talking about these guys who come across the border from Syria, from Iran. They're a different cut of cloth.

PHILLIPS: At least a soldier has a sense of truth and honor versus a terrorist who is basically a huge coward.

ROBINSON: And a soldier has protections. He understands his status. These guys don't understand their status. I don't even think in some cases that until the Supreme Court makes some decisions, anyone's really going to understand what the ultimate status of some of these people in detention is.

The United States is now faced with a problem. There's a huge population of these people being held that if anyone examines their behavior reasonably they never want to let them see the light of freedom again because they'll go right back to attacking Americans and Westerners.

PHILLIPS: Technique No. 2, the fear up technique.

ROBINSON: The fear up technique is a very aggressive technique that's used right after a prisoner is taken. He has the shock of capture. And it tries to accentuate that shock of capture when he's psychological vulnerable.

They use a lot of violent behavior, but they don't touch. They're not allowed to place their hands on the prisoner. MPs are supposed to be observing to make sure that interrogators don't go over those lines.

What they try to do is instill fear in the heart. And, again, this generally works well on a young soldier, young prisoner or someone who is naive.

PHILLIPS: Technique No. 3. Pride and ego. This is what we saw in those pictures. ROBINSON: This works well with folks who haven't had a voice before. In repressed societies where you play to the individual or his pride, and try to build him up to make him feel that he has a lot of knowledge to share. And you try to appeal to the fact that he'll be helping his comrades by sharing that knowledge, to put an end to the conflict or resolution to his own status as a prisoner.

PHILLIPS: I was thinking of ego in tearing at their pride, tearing at their ego as in undressing them and taking these picture, humiliating them.

ROBINSON: No, that's a completely different issue. No, this is taking advantage of the person's pride or their ego and finding a way to use it because the ultimate objective in all of these interrogation techniques is perishable information that they may have about the next attack, the next place where there's an IED bomb planned, the next nest of terrorists.

PHILLIPS: We know all. Tell us about this technique.

ROBINSON: We know all is the one your boss uses for you in contract negotiations.

PHILLIPS: "Kyra, I know everything about you. Don't even think about getting more from me."

ROBINSON: Right. "I already know everything. I just want you to validate it for me. Go ahead, let's start at the top. What did you say about me this morning?"

And that same approach, however, is very effective. people can be intimidated by it.

PHILLIPS: All right, establish your identity.

ROBINSON: Establish your identity is a great approach. It is you are not Kyra Phillips. You're a wanted female terrorist from Bighter-Meinhoff (ph). We know that and we know you're complicit in about 14 murders and you're facing the death penalty.

And so you prove to us that you are not who you say you are now. That causes cognitive dissonance on the part of the prisoner. Then they start divulging information willingly. And then they're able to steer the conversation in the interrogation to where they need to to try to find out of prevent the next dangerous thing.

PHILLIPS: That's pretty scary when I think what you could find out about people, Ken.

Finally friend and foe.

ROBINSON: Friend and foe, viewers may remember that as "Mutt and Jeff," good cop, bad cop. It's where one comes in and is very aggressive with you. And another interrogator is the one who is kind, he gives you those nonverbals. He listens carefully. And you identify with that person out of safety situation where you're fear. Because fear is an important part of interrogation.

A real important point that we've got to make for the interrogations that are going on is they can't throw the baby out with the bathwater on this. As they sit down, these interrogators cannot be encumbered to be able to do what they are doing to keep these soldiers alive. They just have to find a way so that this monstrous act that occurred can never happen again.

PHILLIPS: What's the famous quote. The most dangerous animal is man?

ROBINSON: Yes.

PHILLIPS: Ken Robinson, thanks so much.

Well top guns in the Bush administration up to and including the president are blanketing the airwaves with regret and resolve about those graphic photos we've been talking about of abuse at Abu Ghraib Prison in Baghdad. Mr. Bush gave lengthy interviews today to two Arab language TV services. And we get the details form CNN White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux -- Suzanne.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Kyra, the bottom line, the message here from the Bush administration from those two interviews was first the president said that the abuse that he saw was abhorrent. He believed that it was just the work of a few. And that those who were guilty would be held accountable.

This is all part of a larger public relations campaign to counter those images that have been on television throughout the world. It is all about high level damage control.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: First, people in Iraq must understand that I view those practices as abhorrent. They must also understand what took place in that prison does not represent America that I know.

This is a serious matter. It's a matter that reflects badly on my country. Our citizens in America are appalled by what they saw, just like people in the Middle East are appalled. We share the same deep concerns.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: Kyra, there are two unanswered important questions that came out of the White House briefing moments ago with Scott McClellan. First of all, we learned that the president just found out about those photos when they aired on television, that he did not get a heads up on that, despite the fact that there were a number of high level Pentagon officials who did know about it, who were negotiating with CBS over the release. Even had a damage control assessment of what to do after they were released.

We asked whether or not the president was disturbed by this. McClellan would only say that his focus is on the abuse that happened and how to make sure that never happens again.

The other unanswered question is when was the president notified that there were allegations of abuse going on inside of the prisons? McClellan would only say that the secretary did alert him of that at some point after they knew about it, but we don't get a good sense of that timetable -- Kyra.

PHILLIPS: We've heard the generals apologize. Why haven't we heard President Bush apologize?

MALVEAUX: That's a very good question. McClellan said -- and he actually apologized several times saying I am very sorry, the White House is very sorry. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice says she is sorry. We are speaking for the president, is what he said.

But he felt that it was good enough that the president went far enough to say that this is unacceptable, this behavior and we'll do everything to make sure that it doesn't happen again. But it did fall short of an apology from the president's lips.

PHILLIPS: Suzanne Malveaux, live from the White House, thanks.

LIVE FROM... wants to save your heart from year marriage. Take the marriage stress test with us. Grab a pen, grab a pencil. Get ready. Don't be shy. We promise your spouse will not see the answers unless you interrogate us. Could make you healthier.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: Checking health headlines this Cinco de Mayo, spare the rod and spare yourself from headaches later on. A new study shows that some toddlers who are spanked too often develop behavioral problems when they reach school age. But it seems to be more common with non-Hispanic white kids.

High fat boost? A study suggests that limiting your fat intake may have a negative impact on your heart. Researchers found that adults on a very low fat diet saw their good cholesterol levels drop. The reverse happened when participants boosted their fat consumption. HDL protects against heart disease.

So is marriage a loving institution or a lifetime sentence? One study links high marital stress to a thickening of the heart wall, while another shows a link between stress in the marriage to chronic pain. Annmarie Cano is an assistant professor of clinical psychology in Detroit, Michigan. She's the author of the chronic pain study that we talked about. Good to see you.

ANNMARIE CANO, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY: Thank you.

PHILLIPS: Let's talk about stress hormones and how they weaken the immune system. And I guess in what you find in your research, a lot of newlyweds don't realize this is happening.

CANO: Right. Because usually they're so happy that they're married that they don't pay attention to some of the designs that they might be having health problems associated with constant or chronic arguments.

PHILLIPS: So a low stress marriage. Is there such a thing?

CANO: Well, probably not. A little stress can be good, but it is how you handle the stress and how you talk about it with your spouse that can be very beneficial. If you don't talk about it at all, that can be a problem for the couple.

PHILLIPS: And I asked you more specifically when we talked about that. So let's get a little more in depth. It seems obvious to a lot of people, but let's get a little more in depth. You say marriage is supposed to be a comfort zone. So do we create that? No.1, we've got to be blunt with our spouse, no matter what, right?

CANO: Right. We do have to talk about our feelings when we're having some sadness or if we're disappointed in something. It is best to talk about it openly and to be specific about what that problem is rather than burying it and then becoming resentful over time.

PHILLIPS: And what do you mean be specific?

CANO: For instance, if the spouse did not put away laundry or something the other day and you're a little angry about it, it is best to talk about it right at that time and to mention it that the laundry should be put away or you thought that was something they were going to take care of instead of later on maybe two weeks from now all of a sudden bringing it up. The spouse can't remember what you did and that can be a problem.

PHILLIPS: Don't let things stew. People say, oh, shelf it. Come back to it. If you are about to blow up and sock it to him then you should shelf it. But don't let things build up.

CANO: Right. If you do need a time-out and if an argument gets a little out of hand, it is good to take a time-out where you break for a few minutes, then come back when you are both feeling calm.

PHILLIPS: Time-out? I feel like I'm back in kindergarten.

CANO: Right.

PHILLIPS: You said in studying pain that you have to go beyond your patient. You actually go into the family dynamic. You go into the marriage. You look at how this patient has been brought up, right?

CANO: Right, right. And it is important because usually we think of the pain only affecting the patient. But oftentimes it means that the spouse can't do certain activities with the patient that they used to be able to do. It changes the way the patient might interact with family members and with children. And so there are big changes within the family that need to be considered.

PHILLIPS: All right. Let's ask our viewers now to grab a pen, grab a pencil, sit next to your spouse. Maybe you don't want to sit next to your spouse.

This is the test. Very easy. Four questions. I did it with my husband. It was quite humorous.

Here's the first one. How often do you discuss or consider separation or divorce? Almost all the time to never. And I told you the results of this. And we'll talk about it. For us, believe it or not, it was six. We've never talked about separation or divorce.

The second, how often do you or your partner leave the house after a fight? We decided rarely because my husband has attempted to, but he tells me I block the door. So is five pretty good?

CANO: It is good.

PHILLIPS: OK. No. 3 -- I hope our viewers are doing well.

How often do you and your partner get on each other's nerves. We both said rarely. I don't know. It could be occasionally. It depends on the circumstance.

And finally do your kiss your partner, your mate? Everyday, almost everyday, occasionally, rarely, never. Thank goodness we both said every day.

So did we come out OK on this?

CANO: You get an A on your relationship report card.

PHILLIPS: All right. That's good to hear.

Now, let me ask you. We've only been married a short time. So length of marriage, age of the couple. Does that make a difference?

CANO: We do see changes over time where in the beginning stages of a relationship people are very happy. Sometimes there's a dip in satisfaction right when kids are born until they graduate. But usually it's fine over time.

And some young couples have been married for just a couple years and are very dissatisfied. And they might not make it. So we really can't look at it in terms of marriage duration. But instead where are you right now in your relationship?

PHILLIPS: And this is something very easy to tackle, if you just both sit down and think about it logically, right? I mean, stressed out marriages don't have to end in divorce.

CANO: Right, right. It does take work. Probably the key is figuring out when things are starting to go wrong and choosing to do something about it right away rather than ignoring any signs that you have.

PHILLIPS: So does the man acknowledge the pain in a woman or the woman acknowledge the chronic pain in a man? Who does a better job? CANO: Well, women do a better job at sensing how much pain their husbands are feeling. In my research I found that there's more of a discrepancy when the woman is the patient. When she's married, the husband and she are way off in terms of rating how much pain the woman is feeling.

PHILLIPS: I forgot to ask you. Are you married?

CANO: Oh, yes, I am.

PHILLIPS: She's losing her (UNINTELLIGIBLE). I can tell you're a very happy person. Your husband is a very lucky man, Annmarie.

CANO: He is.

PHILLIPS: There you go. Have self-confidence in that marriage. That takes away the stress. The woman is always right.

Annmarie, thank you for your time today.

CANO: Thank you.

PHILLIPS: Straight ahead, he's an animal lover, good son, even kind of huggable. He's also in the record books. Get a peek into the life of the world's tallest man. Actually we have a guy that be able to beat that. We'll tell you about him.

Happy days are here again for employees of certain companies. Find out about the hot, new perks you should be getting. More live from what after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: "News Around the World" begins with a wager and a brewski and some fleet footed fleece. That's how sheep racing started in England. The annual race now using a horseshoe shaped course. The jockeys aren't real, though. But they are real wool. This year's winner Big Boy. His prize? Extra helpings at the food trough.

He's not the NBA, but he could be. Leonid Stadnik is the world's tallest man -- except my floor direction, Jason, who runs a close second. He's 8'4" tall and still growing. That growth spurt started after a brain operation stimulated a pituitary gland.

The dimensions have created health problems, which have forced him to give up his veterinary practice in the Ukraine. This gentle giant says he just wants to stop growing.

London has itself a chocoholic. A woman with an insatiable appetite for Mars bars stunned the folks at Woolworth's buying every Mars bar they had. More than 10,000 of them. The cost was nearly $3,900.

(MARKET UPDATE)

PHILLIPS: Next hour, that nasty worm got you down? Let our tech guru Dan Sieberg pick you up a bit. Some hints on saving your computer. And a few digs at the kids who make up these annoyances.

Beyond the large bucket. Meet the competitive eater who crunched his way out of the dunking booth type thingy that was full of fiber. LIVE FROM... wants extra butter.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com