NOTE TO READERS: When this project lost substantial funding at the end of 2018, I lost the ability to continue publishing criteria-driven news story reviews and PR news release reviews - once the bread-and-butter of the site going back to 2006. The 3,200 archived reviews, while still educational, are getting old and difficult for me to technically maintain on the back end of the website. So I am announcing that I plan to remove these reviews from the site by April 1, 2021. The blog and the toolkit - two of the most popular features on the site - will remain. If you wish to peruse the reviews before they disappear, please do so by the end of March 2021. After that date you may still be able to access them via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine -
Read Original Story

Extracting the facts about pomegranate pills


5 Star

Extracting the facts about pomegranate pills

Our Review Summary

This was not one of the LA Times’ Healthy Skeptic columns, but it may as well have been.  As that column often does, this story dampened the hype surrounding claims for pomegrante juice and pills.

We especially appreciate the point-by-point analysis of evidence that the story undertook.


Why This Matters

A cardiologist quoted in the story said, “If people want to take them, that’s fine, but it’s not based on any scientificallly valid information….There’s no definitive clinical trial demonstrating a beneficial effect of pomegranate fruit, juice or pills in people.”


Does the story adequately discuss the costs of the intervention?


The story includes the cost of pomegranate pills.

Does the story adequately quantify the benefits of the treatment/test/product/procedure?


The story included critical analysis of claims of benefit, including the overview quote:  “There’s no definitive clinical trial demonstrating a beneficial effect of pomegranate fruit, juice or pills in people.”

Does the story adequately explain/quantify the harms of the intervention?

Not Satisfactory

There are potential harms of the supplement including drug interactions with several common medications including antidepressants as listed in Medlineplus. A description of these potential harms can be found at:
So there are not only questions about benefits, there are very real harms to consider as well.

Does the story seem to grasp the quality of the evidence?


Excellent point-by-point evaluation of the evidence for claims made about purported benefits for the heart and for the prostate.

Does the story commit disease-mongering?


No disease-mongering here.

Does the story use independent sources and identify conflicts of interest?


Good sourcing with independent experts and identification of company funding for one researcher.

Does the story compare the new approach with existing alternatives?


The ending quote delivers an appropriate contextual wrapup:  “If they’re part of an overall healthy diet, I don’t object,” (Dr. John Gordon Harold, cardiologist says), but I’m not sure the ends justify the means.”

The story could have reminded readers that there is evidence for how to reduce risk of heart disease, such as smoking cessation and exercise. Also, there are a variety of therapies for erectile dysfunction.

Does the story establish the availability of the treatment/test/product/procedure?


The availability of pomegranate-containing fruit and pills is clear in the story.

Does the story establish the true novelty of the approach?

Not Applicable

Not applicable.  No claims of novelty were made.

Does the story appear to rely solely or largely on a news release?


Independent reporting throughout.

Total Score: 8 of 9 Satisfactory


Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.