An example of what appears to be happening more often – perhaps with the hyperlocal emphasis of many news organizations.
The Indianapolis Star reports on a story it claims could “revolutionize cardiac care” and “could save thousands of lives.”
But for the new use in question, the procedure has only been done in animals. Even the promoter says human testing is a year away.
The story contained no discussion of evidence, of costs, of harms. Only anecdotes. There was an incomplete discussion of alternative options for the problem in question.
A reality check on a story like this: If the research came out of Ann Arbor or Columbus instead of Indianapolis, do you really think it would get this kind of play by the Indy paper?
Would it have been covered at all?
If not, why not? And then why is it worthy of such hyperlocal hyperbole just because it did involve an Indianapolis physician?