By Dr. Kate Scannell, Syndicated Columnist
First Published in Print: 05/10/2013
The news in the Cincinnati Enquirer sounded dreadful. Someone who'd been suffering from "pulmonary peritonitis" had "died suddenly of pleurisy of the brain." Equally distressing, the Chicago Record-Herald reported that a man, following six gunshots and defying anatomy, died from "shock and lumbar pneumonia."And sadly (or at least I think so), according to an Erie, Pa., newspaper, three surgeons opined that a man "would always be a sufferer from chromatic epilepsy."
These and other examples of "misinforming and even ludicrous" medical journalism were colorfully recounted fully 100 years ago in the April 19, 1913, edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Clearly, the physician-editorialist was annoyed by such careless health reporting. And when it came to inaccurate or misleading news that could actually harm people, he was outright incensed. He railed against "sensational newspaper articles concerning cancer and tuberculosis cures, some of which at least soon prove to be the rankest fakes."
It's always interesting -- although often unsettling -- to look back at physicians' critical writings about media coverage of science and public health. It's interesting partly because so many of those criticisms remain unchanged well beyond a century later. And it's often unsettling because ... well, so many of those criticisms remain unchanged over so long a time. Read More
First Published in Print: 05/10/2013
The news in the Cincinnati Enquirer sounded dreadful. Someone who'd been suffering from "pulmonary peritonitis" had "died suddenly of pleurisy of the brain." Equally distressing, the Chicago Record-Herald reported that a man, following six gunshots and defying anatomy, died from "shock and lumbar pneumonia."And sadly (or at least I think so), according to an Erie, Pa., newspaper, three surgeons opined that a man "would always be a sufferer from chromatic epilepsy."
These and other examples of "misinforming and even ludicrous" medical journalism were colorfully recounted fully 100 years ago in the April 19, 1913, edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Clearly, the physician-editorialist was annoyed by such careless health reporting. And when it came to inaccurate or misleading news that could actually harm people, he was outright incensed. He railed against "sensational newspaper articles concerning cancer and tuberculosis cures, some of which at least soon prove to be the rankest fakes."
It's always interesting -- although often unsettling -- to look back at physicians' critical writings about media coverage of science and public health. It's interesting partly because so many of those criticisms remain unchanged well beyond a century later. And it's often unsettling because ... well, so many of those criticisms remain unchanged over so long a time. Read More