There has been a media explosion in recent years that has changed the way we receive information. From the internet, to mail, to billboards and TV, people are being hit from every angle by ads. Several of the billion dollar industries – the diet and pharmaceutical – are known for working every avenue possible to get their products into our hands. But who really pays the price?
There is an array of “Web sites, TV medical reports, magazine and newspaper stories heralding one breakthrough after another,” Newsweek writers Barbara Kantrowitz and Claudia Kalb said. They add that the number of pages devoted to health and medical science in news magazines has quadrupled since 1980. Journalists are seeking “juicy” headlines and readers have become ravenous for quick fixes for everything from cancer to dietary fat. Unfortunately, scientific studies are complex and their full interpretations cannot be captured in a brief description, although this is the how most Americans receive the news.
Reading beyond the headlines
A recent case in point is the barrage of misleading headlines about a 15-year study conducted by the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) on the relationship between breast cancer and low-fat diets. The major newspaper headlines and news coverage led readers and listeners to believe that there are no benefits to a low-fat diet. In fact, the study was nuanced in its design and in its results, and the message that was lost behind the headlines was that researchers hoped women would not jump to a false conclusion and increase their fat intake as a result of the study.
The pharmaceutical media machine
New heights in the interest and reporting of health and dietary issues represent an economic opportunity that is not lost on the pharmaceutical industry. It spent $3.7 billion on magazine and TV advertising last year alone. In addition to mounting major advertising campaigns, “following the money” reveals that pharmaceutical companies often underwrite research and employ physician “experts” to report on scientific developments as a means of promoting their products.
“When corporate sponsors fund research, it's more likely to show beneficial effects," says Dr. Richard Deyo, Professor of Medicine at the University of Washington in Seattle. Because the funding corporations have a stake in the outcome, studies yielding negative results often go unpublished. The situation is compounded because, as Dr. Elias Zerhouni, director of the National Institutes of Health says, "The media reports all studies as if they have the same degree of certainty. There's no real label of quality."
Anyone who wants to be truly informed needs to learn to read beyond the headlines, "follow the money", and separate advertising from independent research. The knowledge gained will be worth the effort.