Standing up for science in public
Reporting of scientific research is sometimes exaggerated or at worse inaccurate. Researchers need to change this and have the power to do so. So states the August Editorial in Nature Immunology (10, 795; 2009). Although attention-grabbing headlines might increase subscriptions or traffic to newspaper websites, such reporting is irresponsible to the public and to science in general. Even if the article itself is more balanced, many readers never get much beyond the headlines, which include: "Man flu is not a myth; "Burger fellas firing blanks"; red wine is a "cancer-busting antioxidant"; and a 47-million-year-old fossil of a lemur-like animal is a "missing link" in human evolution. Although the Editorial gives some pessimisitic examples of science journalism, it also reports some better news of initiatives to which scientists can contribute. "Several websites that critique the scientific press have started to evolve. In the UK, the National Health Service provides an unbiased and evidence-based analysis of health stories that hit the media. HealthNewsReview.org is a website dedicated to improving the accuracy of news stories about medical treatments, tests, products and procedures. The Yale Environment 360 website provides unbiased opinions from scientists and journalists on issues such as climate change. These are just a handful of examples." In addition, organizations such as the Voice of Young Science network are providing advice for researchers on how to stand up for science in public and correct misinformation in the mass media.
