Coffee’s
bad news awakens desire for better reporting
Katie
Plourd
I was sitting at my dining room table last week enjoying my morning coffee-fix
and breezing through the Los Angeles Times when a headline from a new health
study caught my attention. I suddenly put down my daily cup of joe. “Genetics
Found to Have a Hand in Coffee Risk,” the headline read.
The article explained a recent study published in the Journal of the American
Medical Association found people with a certain gene mutation, which metabolized
caffeine slower than normal, were more prone to heart disease upon consuming
two cups of coffee a day. The gene is also not commercially testable.
Less than two months before I watched a CNN report that said coffee not only
wasn’t bad for you, but it increased alertness and made people think
clearly. Now I hear coffee drinkers could be risking their health every day
and there is no way to know what’s right.
The rest of the article and the actual findings according to the American Medical
Association’s (AMA) Web site shed light on the results. Doctors said
the findings should not cause coffee drinkers to abandon their trusty baristas
at Starbucks. According to the AMA, the participants studied were Costa Ricans
who already had an acute form of heart disease present.
I raised my mug even though others who were likely to read headlines such as “Coffee
may brew heart attacks” in Newsday and “Drinking regular coffee
may be linked to heart attack, study says” in the Toledo Blade may have
done otherwise.
What this leads me to is the role the media plays in reporting health and science.
This industry that provides most of the public with information on health has
changed dramatically in the past 20 years, a phenomenon that should not be
ignored.
It is an issue of grave importance to college students who live a hectic, busy
life. Many students don’t have time to scour medical journals or visit
their physician whenever they come across a health related question. Therefore,
we turn to the media and gain insight from the health pages of Cosmopolitan
and Maxim and heed the words of CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta.
I’ll admit I’m guilty of two out of the three of those. But what
other choice is there?
The media is so oversaturated with information that it makes it almost impossible
to weed out what is fact and fiction, especially when it comes to health issues.
One of the main reasons the change has occurred is because of the influence
of public relations and the media spotlight on scientific research.
According to an in depth look at the issue in Newsweek magazine, the science
and health industry has officially stepped into the light.
Research used to be in the dark, or at least hidden in the shadows. Scientists
were shy to expose their research. Medical journals would publish findings
to the medical community, who would in turn discuss results within the industry
and among colleagues, and eventually decide how to implement the knowledge
drawn from studies in to their clinical practices.
With people wanting to find a quick fix to all their ailments the media jumps
on studies that are revealed, yet the health industry shares the blame. Millions
of dollars are spent on media, communications and publicity departments within
medical associations.
The New England Medical Association that funded the recent studies finding
low-fat diets to not significantly reduce certain cancers spends $1 million
a year on such programs. These programs churn out press releases and pre-packaged
video interviews the media eats up faster than a dieter eats a cheeseburger
after he reads low-fat diets are phony.
Talking points and sound bites are literally detrimental to our health, especially
when health is the topic. But what is the public to do? Is it really our job
to research every medical study we hear about? Should we read the statistics,
break down the numbers, analyze the uncontrolled variables and factor in the
placebo effect of these studies?
The answer is no. It is not the job of the public. It is the job of journalists
and health professionals, but more so journalists.
Perhaps instead of racing to print the headline that grabs those diet-savvy
newspaper readers’ attention and targets their need to keep off the pounds,
the media should actually look into the research. Look at which drug companies
funded the study and, just as one does before receiving a substantial medical
treatment, get a second opinion. Maybe even a third.
I understand competition in journalism makes the media eager to be the first
to break a story and get someone to read the paper, but the health of the public
the media intends to serve is not worth the risk.
Until I can get past the talking points and whirlwind of information, I’ll
drink my coffee to that.
Katie Plourd is a senior journalism major and the managing editor of the
Online Forty-Niner.
|
