Bad science reporting

One of the reasons I can get so hot under the collar about issues related to obesity and dieting is that the media coverage of the so-called "Obesity Epidemic" tends to be so one-sided and sensationalistic.

Of course, the news media tends to be somewhat sensationalistic about all of its health-related reporting. Two of my biggest pet peeves with news reporting on health is that a) it focuses on the new and exciting without putting the new discovery in perspective and without providing the context of previous studies and b) it tends to oversimplify and dumb down the science for the "average" reader.

For every headline that screams about how fat Americans are getting, and how many people are dying, DYING!!! from being smothered in fat, I'd like to see some balanced coverage of the other side of the issue. Not too long ago, I saw a fairly balanced and not-dumbed-down article that said a recent study had shown that while exercise improved measures of heart health in women regardless of weight loss, there was less convincing evidence that exercise without weight loss helped with diabetes control. Now, I've seen other reports to the contrary, that exercise, independent of weight loss, DOES help people with their blood sugar and insulin issues, so it would have been nice to see that context added. But at least the article treated the idea that you can be fat AND fit seriously, unlike a lot of the other media coverage you see out there with dire warnings about the dangers of obesity and "overweight."

rikhei just posted a link to a new column about "Bad Science" and they talk a little bit about contradictory health findings in the media. I hope the column tackles some of the bad science reporting on food and health issues on a regular basis.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/