How many people read a headline, "Impotence Drugs May Aid Brain Tumor Treatment" and immediately think it’s only in mice? We bet not many. But that’s what they got with this story. How many people read a news story and expect there to be some original, independent reporting? Probably a lot and they’d be disappointed in this story.
It’s not a trivial matter when news stories jerk around people with brain tumors raising false hopes over mouse research.
No discussion of the cost of sildenafil, vardenafil or herceptin in the treatment of these brain tumors.
The story explained:
But it didn’t explain how many mice were tested. And it didn’t give any absolute numbers of how long survival was increased. Did "increased by 20 percent" mean 20 minutes? 2 days? And no matter what the answer, how might that translate to people? And large is that leap? The story was frustratingly silent on these questions.
No discussion of any even theoretical harms of using any of these drugs to treat brain tumors.
Unbelievably, there was not one word about the limitations in applying findings about the blood-brain barrier in mice to the same situation in people. Also no discussion about how extensive was the research in mice – how many mice?
No independent expert source was quoted.
No discussion of any other research in treating these tumors so how this mouse research fits into the context of other research in this field is completely unaddressed.
Not applicable. The availability of the drugs is not in question.
No discussion of any other research in treating these tumors so the true novelty of the approach is unclear.
The story got its only quote from a news release. Presumably that’s where all the other information came from as well.
Systematic, Criteria-Driven
I miss @HealthNewsRevu popping up in my feed. Loved seeing this one today.
https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2021/06/zombie-health-care-news/
#healthcare #journalism #ethics #conflictofinterest
Puleeeeease... this 'game changer' weight loss drug causes more nausea and vomiting than a placebo. Some game, some change. My friend Gary would spank you for using the eighth word medical reporters should never, ever use. @garyschwitzer @thackerpd
https://www.healthnewsreview.org/toolkit/just-journalists-writing-tips-case-studies/7-words-and-more-you-shouldnt-use-in-medical-news/ https://twitter.com/OttawaCitizen/status/1361426796126830597
A scary @statnews Op-Ed warns that govt attempts to rein in Pharma may cut off access to "life-changing" drugs.
It takes @garyschwitzer to let us know: the author spent 10 years as Pfizer's public-policy chief. https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer/status/1360325022578053123
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.
You might also like