Note to our followers: Our nearly 13-year run of daily publication of new content on HealthNewsReview.org comes to a close at the end of 2018. Publisher Gary Schwitzer and other contributors may post new articles periodically. But all of the 6,000+ articles we have published contain lessons to help you improve your critical thinking about health care interventions. And those will be still be alive on the site for a couple of years.

On our 12th anniversary, we introduce a new series: patient harm from misleading media

Gary Schwitzer is the founder and publisher of HealthNewsReview.org.  He has pursued stories about patient harm from misleading media messages since the mid-1980s when he produced a CNN special, “Hope or Hype.”

patient harm from misleading media messages

Click to see the full series

April 17, 2018 is our 12th anniversary of daily publishing.  From the time we launched HealthNewsReview.org 12 years ago, we have been concerned about the very real harm that can be done to some patients from misleading media messages. Our project is perhaps the only one in the U.S. that provides the general public the tools to protect themselves from misinformation.  By demonstrating how we evaluate evidence as we critically analyze news stories and PR news releases, we show citizens how they can hone their own critical thinking.

We use a broad definition of “media messages” when we look at the potential for harm from misleading information. In that definition we include news stories, advertising and/or marketing campaigns, public relations efforts, messages disseminated by conflicted patient advocacy groups, popular books, magazines, talk shows, journal publishing practices – any broadly distributed medium or format that can reach large portions of the population.  The harm occurs when people believe and act on what they read or hear in imbalanced, inaccurate, incomplete and misleading information.

We applaud other publishers’ efforts in the patient safety realm, most notably ProPublica’s initiative called The Voices of Patient Harm.

Share your story

Media messages can cause real harm to real people. On our series page, see more stories like Helen Haskell’s and share your own.

Our staff is much smaller and our focus will be narrower – not on patient harm from health care interventions, but patient harm that occurred because of misinformation in some of the ways described above.

In our occasional series that we will work on for the rest of 2018, you will learn from a variety of patient stories.

In the past, we already told some stories that fit into this category.  Some of them were recorded in podcasts.

I want to emphasize that I don’t think that any of these episodes of media-induced harm are intentional.  Unintentional though the harm may be, it is, nonetheless, very real.

We invite our readers to send us your stories if they fit the description above.

You can leave a comment after this blog post, or send an email to feedback@healthnewsreview.org.  Please provide as much information as you can, and, if you’re willing, provide a phone number in case we want to call you to get more background.

The full series on patient harm from misleading media.

You might also like

Comments (1)

We Welcome Comments. But please note: We will delete comments left by anyone who doesn’t leave an actual first and last name and an actual email address.

We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified facts, product pitches, or profanity. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. Comments should primarily discuss the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages about health and medicine. This is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science. Nor is it a forum to share your personal story about a disease or treatment -- your comment must relate to media messages about health care. If your comment doesn't adhere to these policies, we won't post it. Questions? Please see more on our comments policy.

Addi Faerber

April 18, 2018 at 1:19 pm

I want to discuss your point, “I want to emphasize that I don’t think that any of these episodes of media-induced harm are intentional. Unintentional though the harm may be, it is, nonetheless, very real.” ??? I am beginning to rethink “intentional” in this context. These are really predictable surprises.