Christie Aschwanden
In our podcast series, we’re giving you a chance to hear directly from newsmakers, and from some who maybe should be in the news but aren’t. But we also want to occasionally feature some news reporters.
Today we profile Christie Aschwanden, the lead writer for science at FiveThirtyEight and a health columnist for The Washington Post. She’s also a frequent contributor to The New York Times, a contributing editor for Runner’s World and a contributing writer for Bicycling. Her work appears in dozens of publications, including Discover, Slate, Proto, Consumer Reports, New Scientist, More, Men’s Journal, NPR.org, Smithsonian and O, the Oprah Magazine. She blogs about science at Last Word On Nothing and she’s the former managing editor of The Open Notebook. Her Last Word On Nothing post about science denialism at Susan G. Komen for the Cure won the National Association of Science Writers’ 2013 Science in Society Award for Commentary/Opinion, and she was a National Magazine Award finalist in 2011. She uses Twitter as @CragCrest.
She is one of the most insightful, analytical health care journalists in the business today. Listen and learn in this podcast:
Christie Aschwanden’s personal website, with links to lots of her good work.
Mother Jones: What if everything your doctor told you about breast cancer was wrong? (See the ugliness in many of the ~200 comments left online)
The Washington Post: I’m just saying no to mammography: Why the numbers are in my favor
Popular Science: Cancer Screening Can Do More Harm Than Good
The Last Word on Nothing blog: Breast cancer’s latest saga: misfearing and misplaced goalposts
Proto magazine: No Easy Answers (on ductal carcinoma in situ)
The Washington Post: Why you may want to avoid a dementia test
More magazine: Are You Getting Too Much Medical Care?
Pacific Standard magazine: Convincing the Public to Accept New Medical Guidelines
The Washington Post: Platelet-rich plasma treatment is popular for sports injuries, whether it works or not
FiveThirtyEight.com: You can’t trust what you read about nutrition
Her own favorite – on FiveThirtyEight.com: Science Isn’t Broken: It’s just a hell of a lot harder than we give it credit for
Thanks to The National Institute for Health Care Management Foundation for providing us with a grant to produce these podcasts.
Credit: podcast editor Cristeta Boarini
Music used in this episode:
Please note: if you have listened to any of our podcasts and like what you’ve heard, we’d appreciate it if you’d leave a Review and a Rating on the iTunes webpage where our podcasts can be found: https://itun.es/i6S86Qw. (You need to click on the “View in iTunes” button on the left of that page, then find the Ratings and Reviews tab.)
You can now subscribe to our podcasts on that iTunes page or via this RSS feed: http://feeds.soundcloud.com/users/soundcloud:users:167780656/sounds.rss
All episodes of our podcasts are archived on this page on HealthNewsReview.org.
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.
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.