American Council on Science and Health American Council on Science and Health
About
ACSH
¥ Contact
ACSH
¥ Support
ACSH
¥ My
ACSH
¥ Advanced
Search
 
ACSH.org   Home   . .   Health Issues   . .   News Center   . .   Publications   . .   Events   . .   FactsAndFears   .  

Health Facts And Fears

Archives >

Printer Format icon Printer Format
E-mail Information icon E-mail Information
July 15, 2005

Don't Believe Everything You Read -- Even in Medical Journals

By Mara Burney

When reading the medical news, you might want to start asking for a second opinion.  A report in this week's Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) found that it is not unusual for medical studies to contradict one another: 16% of highly-cited original clinical studies were contradicted by subsequent ones, and another 16% were shown by later trials to have overstated results.  The JAMA findings are significant because the author reviewed high-impact medical journals such as the New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, and The Lancet, and each article reviewed had been cited at least 1,000 times.  That translates into a lot of medical misinformation!

Anyone who follows the news is inundated daily with information about new health scares and new miracle cures, but often these reports are later refuted.  For example, a Swedish study in 2002 suggested that acrylamide, a substance created by the breakdown of carbohydrates at high temperatures, causes cancer.  The study made quite a splash; people were advised to avoid popular foods such as potato chips and coffee, and editorialists and activists alike called for a ban.  But recently a second Swedish study has announced that there is no connection between acrylamide in food and cancer after all.  (Interestingly, the second study is receiving much less media attention.)

This, of course, does not mean that medical studies are of no value or that health reports are always wrong.  It simply serves as a caution that science is fluid, not static or absolute.  Study design, sample size, and whether a study is prospective or retrospective in nature will all affect the outcome of a trial.  Scientists require more than one study, regardless of how large or well designed that one may be, before they accept a result -- and so should you.  Every time that you see a headline claiming that X causes cancer or that Y prevents it, proceed with caution.  A little skepticism may be just what the doctor ordered.

Sources:

Ioannidis, J.P.A.  Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical journals.  Journal of the American Medical Association, 294: 218-228.

"Acrylamide 'does not increase the risk of cancer'."  The Local (Sweden) July 14, 2005.

See also: ACSH's booklet Good Stories, Bad Science: A Guide for Journalists to the Health Claims of "Consumer Activist" Groups.

 
Mara Burney is a research intern at the American Council on Science and Health.


Drawing of Todd Seavey


About the Editor:
Todd Seavey

is Director of Publications at ACSH and edits FactsAndFears.  His opinions are not necessarily ACSH's.

He can be reached at seavey [at] acsh.org.

Subscribe to ACSH.org RSS  FactsAndFears posts on YOUR site
Search Archives Icon for Search
Search

Icon for Browse Archives Browse Archives

Sign In Icon for Sign In

Username:

Password:

Sign In Now >>

Forget your password?

Register

Why register with ACSH?
You'll be able to:
¥ Post comments to articles
¥ Subscribe to e-bulletin
¥ Receive immediate or scheduled updates


Register Now >>

¥ (from ACSH) theScooponSmoking.org
¥ aBetterEarth.org
¥ AgBioWorld
¥ American Justice Partnership
¥ Anti-Quackery and Science Blog
¥ Anti-Quackery Ring
¥ BiomonitoringInfo.org
¥ Blogborygmi.com (Nick Gene & co.)
¥ CalorieLab
¥ The Cancer Blog
¥ CAST on transgenic animals
¥ Catallarchy (econ, etc.)
¥ Competitive Enterprise Institute
¥ Consumer Guide to Bariatric Surgery
¥ ConsumerFreedom.com
¥ Debunkers.org
¥ Diet-Blog.com
¥ Dynamist/Virginia Postrel
¥ Fishscam
¥ Freakonomics
¥ GruntDoc
¥ Health Beat (medical news/research)
¥ Health Business Blog
¥ Health Intelligence Network blog
¥ In the Pipeline (drugs per Derek Lowe)
¥ Infography on Medical Care: Quacks, Quackery
¥ Institute of Ideas
¥ JunkScience.com (Steve Milloy)
¥ MedMusings
¥ National Council Against Health Fraud
¥ Overlawyered.com
¥ ParkinsonsHealth
¥ Quackbusters
¥ Quackfiles
¥ Quackfiles.blogspot.com
¥ Quackwatch
¥ James Randi, ultimate skeptic
¥ Rangel, M.D.
¥ Reason (including Seavey pieces)
¥ SAGEcrossroads.net (aging)
¥ Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine
¥ Science Media Centre
¥ Sense About Science
¥ Skeptic Magazine
¥ Skeptic Ring
¥ Skeptical Inquirer/CSICOP
¥ Spiked-Online
¥ TCS Daily (Europe)
¥ TCS Daily (U.S.)
¥ 3 Billion and Counting (malaria docu. w/Ross)
¥ Tobacco Survivors United
¥ TobaccoAnalysis blog
¥ Urban Legends per Snopes
¥ US News Best Health Heart Center
¥ US News Lung Cancer Center
¥ Volokh.com (blog on law, econ, polisci)
¥ Washington Legal Foundation
¥ WhyBiotech (Council for Biotechnology Info.)
¥ WhyQuit.com (case studies, message boards, etc.)
¥ Dr. Carl Winter (health song-parodies)
¥ aWorldConnected.org (benefits of globalization)


TO VIEW AND MAKE COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLES ABOVE (OR OTHERS), "SIGN IN" AT THE RIGHT MARGIN.

AMERICAN COUNCIL ON SCIENCE AND HEALTH  |  1995 BROADWAY, 2ND FLOOR, NEW YORK, NY 10023-5860
TELEPHONE: (212) 362-7044  |  FAX: (212) 362-4919  |  E-MAIL: GEN. ORGANIZATION MAILBOX: acsh (at) acsh.org; IND. STAFFER: [last name or last name followed by first initial]@acsh.org 

Copyright © 1997-2004 American Council on Science and Health  |  Privacy Policy  |  All Rights Reserved
.

Founded in 1978, ACSH is a consumer advocacy organization directed and advised by over 350 physicians, scientists and policy advisors. ACSH promotes the use of sound, peer-reviewed science in the formation of a full  spectrum of  public health policies, including those related to food, pharmaceuticals, environmental chemicals, lifestyle factors, consumer products and terrorism preparedness and response.