Informed

Recognising good science in the media

We know from the “1% or Less” campaign in the US [1], which encouraged people to switch to low-fat milk, that the media can play an important role in public health. But it seems that every week there is a new story about what increases or decreases cancer risk and this has led to public cynicism.

A YouGov survey commissioned by WCRF UK in April 2009 [2] found that 52 per cent of people think scientists are always changing their minds about cancer, despite the fact that the advice on cancer prevention has actually not changed much in the last 10 years. Also, 46 per cent said they generally do not trust news stories about what increases or decreases cancer risk.

Richard Evans, Head of Communications at WCRF UK, said: “We think this is because the results of small studies are given too much prominence in the media, making them sound like a scientific breakthrough when they are nothing of the kind. This is why we encourage scientists who issue press releases to be explicit about how significant their findings are, even if this is likely to reduce the media impact.”

What can you advise patients?

It is important that health professionals do not pass on to patients cancer prevention advice they have seen in the media unless they are confident in the science behind it. If a new study is published, it is worth asking questions such as whether the results are laboratory-based or from population studies; how many people took part in the study; how long it was before follow up; and whether there were confounding factors.

The safest way is to see how WCRF UK, the government or other respected bodies such as NHS choices [3], respond to it. If they do not change their advice on the basis of it, then it is probably not worth telling patients about the results.

To improve the relationship between media and scientists, WCRF UK has recently delivered a talk on reporting science in the media at the WCRF-funded course in Nutritional Epidemiology held in collaboration with Imperial College in London.

References

1. Reger B et al Am J Prev Med 2000; 18:271-5
2. YouGov survey of 2,404 people, carried out between April 20 and April 22, 2009
3. www.nhs.uk/news