A paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences describes a technique to grow hairs on human skin grafted onto mice.
New hair follicles appeared on 5 of 7 transplants attempted. The longest duration of any graft in the study was 6 weeks; so no long-term followup.
That’s right. 5 successful attempts. Yet this dominated the news.
CBS and NBC made room for reporting on the study in a 22-minute newscast – a newscast that could have spent more time on the Affordable Care Act, on other aspects of the economy, on another school shooting, on global tensions, etc.
CBS anchor Scott Pelley led off, “It’s a safe bet that whatever else we’ve reported tonight, this will be the story that people will be talking about — a new treatment for baldness, in men and women.” Maybe only if you treat it that way, Scott.
On its website, NBC News called it a breakthrough. On the air, NBC teased it “Cure For Baldness?”
The Wall Street Journal called it “New Hope for Baldness.” Hope was mentioned prominently by the Los Angeles Times, HealthDay News, CNN.com, and many others.
The New York Times had no independent perspective in its piece, headlined “New Technique Holds Promise for Hair Growth.”
Fox News let the researcher get away with this concluding quote:
“Is that a cure for baldness? Technically, I guess it is.”
Again, no independent perspective.
The NPR Shots blog injected some sanity with its story, “Scientists Grow New Hair In A Lab, But Don’t Rush To Buy A Comb.” Excerpt:
“But don’t get too excited. A magic cure for baldness isn’t around the corner. The experimental approach is quite limited and years from reaching the clinic — for many reasons.
The scientists have grown the hair only on a tiny patch of human skin grafted onto the back of a mouse. And as wispy locks go, the strands are pretty pathetic. Some hairs were white, and some didn’t even make their way out of the skin.”
And here’s what you might get if you looked for independent perspectives. NPR reported:
“You can ask anyone how long it will take something in the future to happen, and the answer will always be three to five years,” says , a dermatologist at Johns Hopkins University who wasn’t involved in the study.
“Any time you grow cells in the laboratory and inject them back inside people, there’s a chance the cells could overgrow,” Garza tells Shots. That means the cells could form tumors or even some cancers. Plus, a technique like this, Garza speculates, would be much more expensive than regular hair transplantation.
————————
Follow us on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer
https://twitter.com/healthnewsrevu
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