Newsnight asked. I have replied.
To your specific questions: 'Do these reports do any good or are they counter-productive? If two-thirds of all cancers have nothing to do with lifestyle, is it wrong to give the impression that we can control the disease?
Constant, evolving research and hence further understanding of anything to do with something as impactful on the human condition as cancer is both vital and helpful.
However, rushing out every small step on the way, almost as raw data, to a news media that only understands and hence wants tomorrow's headline, is indeed counter-productive.
The moment I watched BBC Breakfast News and was greeted with 'red meat, even in small doses, can be...' I switched off. I am an omnivore living in a supermarket society in 2007 where meat is legal to produce and widely promoted. This information served no purpose as presented. Other than perhaps making me more likely to dismiss the next, possibly more worthy attempt at shaping our lifestyles as yet more spin being turned into hype.
And as for 'impressions' of 'control'. As with any science, when it can be done and is verifiable, then share it. The media culture of rushing out the next 'might one day', half-considered and always open to rebuttal, simply weakens the credibility of those doing the work and, if that's possible, the media acting as the conduit for such pointless messages.
BBC - Be thin to cut cancer, study says
Guardian - Stay trim and stop eating bacon, cancer report declares
No comments:
Post a Comment
I believe in freedom of speech. But I also don't like bullies on blogs, even verbal ones, as they can drive away those with something valid to say... or offer.
Subjective is fine, but well argued and substantiated is even better. Calm and polite tops. Anything that crosses my personal line will not go up. There may be reasons given, but not guaranteed.
I'm not too keen on 'Anon' as a handle (and the content usually explains why), so if that's what you opt for it may not make it. Sorry.