Beyond the polished floors of medical clinics, the unassuming roll of duct tape enjoys a gritty reputation for mastering countless tribulations of daily life, from rotted radiator hoses and sprung suitcases to broken barbecues and split rake handles. Is it possible that duct tape could also cure one of medicine’s intractable problems—the harmless, common wart? Well, maybe—and maybe not. This nifty AP story ably describes the medical threat posed by warts (“harmless, stubborn bumps” that eventually go away on their own), explains the scientific methods used to test the theory that duct tape cures warts, quantifies the research results, and outlines several other treatment options. The article also provides a glimmer of hope for duct tape devotees who might be sorry to see this unassuming therapy headed for the dust bin. The researchers used a rubberless, transparent tape foresworn by aficionados. Conceivably, the classic, silver standard tape used in previous attempts at duct tape therapy might do the trick. Or, as The Duct Tape Guys sagely observe on their distinctive website, "If duct tape isn't the answer, then you must be asking the wrong question!" (http://www.ducttapeguys.com/)
The article doesn’t comment on costs. Though most readers will know that if duct tape were effective it would cost only pennies, few are likely to know the cost of the various medical therapies – from over-the-counter ointments to lasers and injections.
The article notes that the researchers looked at a single outcome—the disappearance of the wart—and that one in five patients in each group had a successful outcome.
According to the published study, duct tape is a virtually harmless treatment, but can cause minor irritations (numbness and bleeding in two of the 90 subjects enrolled in the study). The AP story neglects to mention this.
The article nicely explains the workings of a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial in which one group received treatment with moleskin alone and the other group received moleskin plus duct tape; neither doctors nor patients knew which treatment they received.
The news story puts warts in their proper context—saying they are “harmless, stubborn bumps” that will eventually go away on their own without any treatment at all.
The article quotes the lead author of the study and the chair of the dermatology department at an academic medical center with no relationship to the study.
The news story ably summarizes a broad range of other medical therapies that attempt to eliminate warts, from over-the-counter ointments to lasers and injections.
Duct tape is as American as apple pie, and if readers want to buy some they will know where to find it.
The news story explains that duct tape has fascinated previous researchers, and “earned a place in the medicine cabinet in 2002.”
No obvious use of text from a press release.
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.