This is a brief, balanced broadcast about a heavily marketed diet drug and the idiosyncratic enthusiasm of its users, who either do not understand the drug’s uncomfortable side effects or, in their zeal to lose weight, are willing to sacrifice comfort for a slimmer waistline. The story covers the basics reasonably well, and includes strong sources representing a variety of views. Viewers will come away better informed about the drug’s common side effect, “extreme” gastrointestinal distress. But they won’t know enough about the size of the drug’s potential benefits to weigh the trade-off. According to the drug’s manufacturer, Alli can increase by 50% the amount of weight a person might lose through dietary changes and exercise alone. How many pounds is that? If the history of weight loss studies is any indication, the drug might simply nibble at the margins.
The story implies that the drug may be expensive, but doesn’t actually tell the viewer what it costs.
According to the drug’s manufacturer, Alli can increase by 50% the amount of weight a person might lose through the combination of a good diet and exercise. How many pounds is that? The history of weight loss studies suggests it might not be much. The number is key, since gastrointestinal distress may be worth the trouble for a heap of pounds, but not if the drug simply nibbles at the margins.
The story mentions arguably the most notable and inconvenient side effect of the diet drug Alli—gastrointestinal distress—and gives it the prominence it warrants.
The broadcast’s summary of the evidence is a paraphrase of a manufacturing claim: “The manufacturer says Alli can help people who are already dieting and exercising lose up to fifty percent more weight if taken in combination with a proper diet.” What does the evidence say, and what form does the evidence take? We don’t know.
This story cites CDC statistics stating that two-thirds of Americans are overweight. Despite the source, the broadcast avoids discussing “overweight” as an epidemic or disease.
The story uses many sources representing a variety of views.
The new medication is not compared or contrasted in any detail to existing methods for weight loss, including diet, exercise, surgery, or other medications.
The broadcast explains that the new diet drug Alli is available over the counter.
The broadcast leads with the drug’s novelty. It is the first weight loss drug sold over-the-counter, and people are snatching it off drugstore shelves “today.”
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.
You might also like