20 troublesome trends
From: Zee (zwalanga_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 12/30/04
- Next message: anon: "Re: Complementary and Alternative Medicine is Mainstream"
- Previous message: Say not the Struggle nought Availeth: "Re: Complementary and Alternative Medicine is Mainstream"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 30 Dec 2004 10:28:46 -0800
How can we improve medical reporting? Let me count the ways
By ANDRE PICARD
Thursday, December 30, 2004 - Page A17
http://tinyurl.com/5wpmd
This is a time of year for resolution and reflection. It's a fitting
time to turn the tables and, instead of casting a critical eye on a
specific aspects of the health system, to look at how well (or poorly)
the media report on health news.
In a recent edition of the British Medical Journal, Gary Schwitzer, a
former medical correspondent at CNN and now a professor of journalism
at the University of Minnesota, presented his "10 troublesome trends
in TV health news."
While the list is too narrowly focused on TV, it serves as a good
jumping-off point.
Mr. Schwitzer makes the important point that most people today get
their health information from the media, and from TV in particular.
This puts heavy responsibility on journalists. But, in his estimation,
health reporting has many shortcomings, which he summarized like this:
1) Too brief to matter. The brevity of stories -- they rarely exceed
one minute on TV or 500 words in print -- means they lack context and
significant details.
2) No full-time health journalists. Networks such as CBC and CTV and
newspapers such as The Globe and Mail have full-time beat reporters,
but they are the exceptions. Most media outlets operate on the
wrong-headed assumption that any reporter can jump effortlessly from
covering city hall to the intricacies of cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors.
3) No data to back up sensational claims. Far too many unproven -- and
at times frankly ridiculous -- claims get aired or printed without
even the most cursory examination of data.
4) Hyperbole. Each day there are reports of miracle drugs and
treatments that are, at best, incremental improvements.
5) Commercialism. At times the "news" is thinly veiled promotional
material.
6) Single sources. Health stories with a single source are
commonplace. They lack balance.
7) Baseless predictions from basic science. Far too many studies
conducted in test tubes or on mice are touted as potential treatments
in people. If only it were so simple.
8) FDA approval treated as an accomplished fact. Consumers are often
left with the impression that experimental treatments and drugs in
early phases of research will be on the market imminently, as if
testing and regulatory approval were mere formalities.
9) Little coverage of health policy. Trivialities like cosmetic
medicine (Botox and the like) get more coverage than critical issues
like access to care and defining what is in the medicare "basket of
services."
10) No time for enterprise. Much health reporting is little more than
regurgitation of news releases, medical journal studies and press
conferences. There is little investment in in-depth or investigative
journalism.
Mr. Schwitzer's list is a good one, but it is incomplete. Here are 10
more troublesome trends:
1) Story selection. Cute trumps meaningful. Quirky or pathos-laden
stories, such as the separation of conjoined twins, tend to get more
extensive coverage than those with broad policy implications, such as
research questioning the value of breast self-examination.
2) Black and white. Health stories tend to be black or white. Vioxx
bad; Aspirin good. Trans fats bad; omega-3s good. But in science and
health research there are a lot of greys; there are rarely absolutes.
3) Jingoism. The media give disproportionate attention to home-grown
research, regardless of the importance or relevance of findings.
4) Short-sightedness. There is virtually no coverage of the greatest
threats to health on the planet: poverty, disfranchisement, and lack
of access to clean water, adequate nutrition and basic sanitation.
5) Too little training. Much research published in medical journals is
of dizzying complexity and its jargon is quasi-impenetrable.
Journalists need to understand statistics and technical language to
decipher it, but media outlets are reluctant to invest in training.
6) Technology-obsessed. There is a widespread assumption in health
stories that newer is better, and that the solution to many problems
is found in better drugs and fancier equipment.
Again, the reality is that addressing basic determinants of health --
income, housing and the like -- carries far more impact.
7) Is it really a cure? The word "cure" is bandied about
irresponsibly. There are many ways of treating and managing disease,
but virtually no cures. And "curing" a rat of cancer is a far cry from
curing it in a human.
8) A sense of proportion. SARS killed 44 people in Canada. Influenza
and pneumonia kill close to 5,000 annually. Health issues that affect
the economy and the lives of well-to-do Westerners are blown out of
proportion, compared to issues that affect broad swaths of the
population.
9) Lack of skepticism. One of the most important traits for
journalists is a well-honed sense of doubt, about everything. When
skepticism makes way for cheerleading, the result is poor health
reporting.
10) Kowtowing. There is a lot of uncritical reporting of the views of
those in positions of power -- physicians, professors, medical
associations, pharmaceutical company executives -- without questioning
their self-interest. This sucking up (for lack of a better term) does
a great disservice to health consumers.
Good health reporting should provide a straightforward, comprehensible
summary of health issues. It has to be more than regurgitation. It
needs to be balanced and provide context to information-hungry
consumers.
Good health reporting should rarely be sensational, but always
skeptical.
And there should be a lot more of it.
Until the media improve the quality of their work, their criticism of
other players in the health system can hardly be taken seriously.
- Next message: anon: "Re: Complementary and Alternative Medicine is Mainstream"
- Previous message: Say not the Struggle nought Availeth: "Re: Complementary and Alternative Medicine is Mainstream"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
