Literature DB >> 12800894

Hype in health reporting: "checkbook science" buys distortion of medical news.

Diana Zuckerman1.   

Abstract

The greatest danger to public health might be "checkbook science": research intended not to expand knowledge or to benefit humanity but to sell products. Much of the media coverage of health news stories is based on public relations efforts on behalf of the companies that sell the products, including pharmaceutical companies, diet clinics, or doctors selling new techniques. The author presents three case studies of how companies selling medical products effectively but invisibly shaped recent news coverage of medical products: fen-phen diet pills, breast implants, and hormone replacement therapy. All involve subtle strategies whereby physicians and other experts paid by corporate interests are influential because they are perceived to be objective medical experts. Articles in prestigious medical journals are sometimes ghostwritten by individuals paid by companies or are based on biased analyses or interpretations shaped by corporate interests. Nonprofit organizations that tout the benefits of specific medical products also may be part of the public relations efforts of the companies making the product. Meanwhile, important newsworthy studies are ignored by the mass media when corporate interests do not publicize or pitch the results to influential reporters and producers.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12800894     DOI: 10.2190/PMM9-DPUT-HN3Y-LMJQ

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Health Serv        ISSN: 0020-7314            Impact factor:   1.663


  4 in total

Review 1.  The brain, the science and the media. The legal, corporate, social and security implications of neuroimaging and the impact of media coverage.

Authors:  Garret O'Connell; Janet De Wilde; Jane Haley; Kirsten Shuler; Burkhard Schafer; Peter Sandercock; Joanna M Wardlaw
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2011-07-01       Impact factor: 8.807

2.  Contemporary neuroscience in the media.

Authors:  Eric Racine; Sarah Waldman; Jarett Rosenberg; Judy Illes
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2010-06-04       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  The commercialisation of medical and scientific reporting.

Authors:  Timothy Caulfield
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 11.069

4.  Cancer News Coverage in Korean Newspapers: An Analytic Study in Terms of Cancer Awareness.

Authors:  Hye Sook Min; E Hwa Yun; Jinsil Park; Young Ae Kim
Journal:  J Prev Med Public Health       Date:  2020-02-13
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.