Any time medical experts spout the routine lifestyle advice, reporters should press them to explain what is really likely to change for people.
While the release provides good supporting data, readers should remember that the study was not blinded or placebo controlled which introduces some limitations.
But more needed to be said about the potential harms of the treatments–which carry risks–as well as their general availability and cost.
More discussion on the potential cost savings would have rounded this release out nicely.
The story is exceptionally concise — a news brief rather than a feature — but does a good job of describing the study and placing it in the context of the “opioid crisis” in the U.S.
Yet it didn’t give enough details on how cervical cancer rates compared among groups.
Short on details, long on promise for an alleged ‘breakthrough’ minimally invasive surgery for enlarged prostates.
The release does not address cost or potential harms, and does not make clear how this study builds on or differs from previous research.