CBS 60 Minutes once again devoted a big chunk of prime time last night to an unproven idea – which is fine, if you’re going to devote your show to such explorations of basic science all the time. But they don’t. And it shows.
The subject was the pie-plates-and-radiowaves cancer experiment of inventor John Kanzius – which CBS has now profiled three different times – in April 2008, in July 2008, and now on October 18, 2009.
Correspondent Lesley Stahl exhibited some of the same breathless awe that she showed in previous segments, saying at one point, “we don’t want to be in a position to hype this.”
Too late, Lesley, you already have – with three segments in 18 months for something that isn’t even in human trials.
I can only wonder what all the other cancer researchers watching think when they see such cheerleading for such little evidence.
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
We’ve written about the hype of liquid biopsies for years (see link in comment below). And now this…. https://www.statnews.com/2022/01/12/medicare-shouldnt-cover-liquid-biopsies-early-cancer-detection/
Case counts still matter. “(There) are stories that may not be told adequately if only hospitalizations and deaths are emphasized.” @garyschwitzer interviewed by @dbauder of @AP. https://apnews.com/article/omicron-changing-news-outlets-covid-data-da9272f7c4c8a109c3bfb56bed9e9c76
My friend Gary @garyschwitzer wrote to his city council representative in a Minnesota town about a Viva Las Vegas event scheduled for January.
The response he got seems to perfectly capture where we are now.
https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2021/12/2021-ends-with-covid-craziness-in-sports-and-politics/
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.
James Lum
March 5, 2012 at 8:41 pmI had lung cancer. It was discovered when it was the size of a large walnut in my upper left lung and did not look like it had spread yet. I was being scheduled for the standard operation; ie., open the chest, remove a lung lobe, remove lymph nodes, and then undergo chemo for months. I asked my oncologist if there was anything else…and there was; Radio Frequency Ablation (RFA). Operation success was ~76%, RFA was ~74%, survival after 5 years. RFA was for patients that were too weak to survive an operation. I opted for RFA. Basically, the surgeon makes a 1/4 inch incision, inserts a probe into the tumor, and cooks it. The patient can go home that afternoon. Scans showed no more signs of cancer and its been 3+ years.
I have seen other cancer patients that have and are undergoing chemo and it is brutal. Chemo is basically a poison.
John Kanzius has/had the right idea. Once they find the right drug that carries the metallic particles to the tumor and wherever it has metastasized from smallest to largest size, the radio waves will kill it with heat. No more need for chemo. More than one drug company will not be happy.
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