Weekly e-mail digests available at: https://www.healthnewsreview.org/get_e-mail_updates.php
New York Times, 5-star score
Doubts on Ovarian Cancer Relapse Test
Good job describing the current study and how it relates to current clinical thinking. Adds to the “more is not always better” knowledgebase that is growing in health care.
ABC World News with Charles Gibson, 0-star score
Personalized Cancer Care
This story is a marketing coup for a hospital, but its relevance to most cancer patients is unclear. This story failed on costs and on context, cheerleading for an approach that lacks evidence.
ABC’s Good Morning America, 2-star score
Cutting the fat–without incisions: New weight-loss surgery
Breathless enthusiasm – not backed by facts about new incision-free approach to weight loss surgery. Story calls it “remarkable” and “exciting” but that results aren’t as good as gastric bypass.
ABC World News with Charles Gibson, 2-star score
Diabetes Test: Simple Diagnosis
ABC missed the whole point of the news – calling an old test “new” but that it’s “already widely available.” It never explained what it’s used for now and what the change would be. Weak. Unhelpful.
Washington Post, 5-star score
Peanuts, Anyone? Researchers Expose Kids to Risky Foods In Order to Cure Them
Nice job on a story about desensitization for milk and peanut allergies. Emphasized that the work has been done in small studies so far, and that it’s far from ready for widespread use.
CBS The Early Show, 1-star score
Erasing Age Lines: New Wrinkle in Anti-Aging Devices
Gertrude Stein said of Oakland, “when you get there, there isn’t any there there.” With its lack of useful information about a wrinkles laser, the same could be said of this story that isn’t a story.
USA Today, 2-star score
Here’s a twist to managing back pain: Push your muscles
Story didn’t emphasize the findings haven’t been peer-reviewed, didn’t explain absolute benefit to patients, and didn’t include independent perspectives.
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
Monday at #ADA2021, an infectious disease epidemiologist, a journalist, and a researcher shared perspectives on communication of risk in the era of COVID-19: http://ow.ly/ROfR30rMeE7 @AstleyCM @garyschwitzer @berthahidalgo @ADA_DiabetesPro
Shoutouts to @susan_bewley @drkevinknopf @MichaelBaum11 in this call for more than fawning coverage from press releases for these kinds of stories.
Also, linked history inside goes back 5 years just on Grail apparently trying to become Holy Grail. https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer/status/1408849696416841731
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Comments are closed.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like