Posted by Gary Schwitzer in Business of health, Health care/research ethics
See Natasha Singer’s New York Times piece and/or just listen to the following audio clips of phone calls from a federal investigation, with testing company representatives telling “consumers” some egregious and unsubstantiated things about what the company tests can show and what the results mean. This is some pretty troubling stuff. Read Singer’s piece for more details on the feds’ investigation.
Treatment for advanced ovarian tumors may lengthen survival, but questions still remain, despite the story’s emphasis on “promising” and “new hope.”
As with the HealthDay story on this research that we reviewed, readers of this story get a good dose of caveats and cautions along with the suggestions that electrical brain stimulation might someday “have implications” for treatment of Alzheimer’s disease.
The readers of this story and the other one we reviewed by Reuters are likely to understand that electrical brain stimulation could have some memory effects, but it’s a long way from becoming a treatment for Alzheimer’s disease.
We will not display your name or e-mail address on the site, nor will we share youre-mail address with any third parties.
For site updates and news from Gary, find us on Twitter:
HealthNewsReview: @HealthNewsRevu
Gary Schwitzer: @garyschwitzer
Copyright © 2012 Health News Review
Add Comment
Disclaimer: I welcome comments but will delete those with any kind of product pitch, profanity, personal attacks or those from anyone who doesn’t list what appears to be an actual e-mail address. I will also end any thread of comments that are repetitive. Because I moderate comments, I can’t keep reacting to repeatedly inaccurate or unsubstantiated claims. We don't give medical advice so we won't respond to questions asking for it.