We’ve told you before that we appreciate the no-nonsense approach of the Washington Post “Quick Study” column. This week they published another – on the recent study of tai chi for fibromyalgia.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090305147.html
It concludes:
CAVEATS Data were based on the participants’ ratings of their pain and their answers to questionnaires. The number of participants was small, and the study did not assess long-term effectiveness. The results may have been influenced by participants’ beliefs and expectations, although the researchers said they tried to de-emphasize tai chi by telling participants that the study would test the effects of two types of exercise programs, one combined with education.
Oh, if only we could get that kind of short, evidence-based scrutiny in all of our health news stories!
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