I’ve written about Dr. Nancy Snyderman’s form of health journalism many times.
But on Daily Kos today, JD Wolverton posts an open letter to Snyderman about what he calls her “fluffy health care news show.”
In it he writes:
I’m disappointed with your take on health care reform and suppose you have come to your biases from your experiences as a physician. You need to look at health care from the perspective of someone earning the median income in the U.S. today, about $50,223 per year. …
You don’t quote peer reviewed sources for your opinions. You don’t back up your assertions. Being an MD doesn’t excuse you from citing sources….
Do us a favor. Do a real health care oriented show that does more than fluff pieces. …
Honestly assess health care rationing in the U.S. Plenty of people talk about how health care rationing in the U.S. is done by insurance company bureaucrats and our ability to pay for our care – you should join us.
Say that there are long waiting periods for care in the U.S. – that disabled people who qualify for SSDI then have to wait 2 years (usually uninsured) before they can get onto Medicare. That’s a heck of a waiting period, don’t you think.
Do better. You don’t have to be a wonk. Just be more honest than you are now.
(Hat tip to Pia Christensen.)
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
The tale of two “negative” studies. Or, how spin is applied to make research findings look more impressive. A must read. https://johnmandrola.substack.com/p/the-tale-of-two-negative-studies
The @nytimes chose to interview one of the editors of the @AnnalsofIM (publisher of this paper) who "gushed with extraordinary glee: It’s huge! There are very few things that reduce your mortality by 30%."
Turns out coffee is not one of those few things despite all that glee. https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer/status/1533202075928215558
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.
McCawEntertainment
July 27, 2009 at 11:11 amHow badly is she in the pockets of Big Drug Co. and large hospitals? I think you hit the nail on the head to think like a MD who sees patients who make less than $50,000.00 a year. If she’s a lobbyist, she’s not right for the show. If you’re going to do a 5-day-week health news show (unnecessary for anything other than an 8AM Sunday show), you need someone down… to… Earth!
She’s constantly cutting off people mid-sentence, which makes her fluffy show unwatchable, IMHO.
I want her disclose how much stock she has in the company that makes Tamiflu. She’s on a scare campaign.
isles
July 27, 2009 at 11:22 amI actually think Dr. Snyderman is a good, scientifically-minded doctor doing her best to deliver reliable health information within the constraints of TV news. I’m sure if it were up to her there’d be less fluff, but then she’d never get on the air. At least she’s not in love with woo like a lot of TV docs.
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