satu lipponen
TRANSCRIPT
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
Interpretation– the hardestthing to do
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Why I chose this topic?
News agendaWeb 24/No specialtiesFast reactionsSeveral channelsAt the very core of professionalismEvery journalist should know their basic science
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Structure
1) Example of a research and its interpretation– CT scan
2) Other examples of the difficulty of interpretation of statistics– Brain tumours, prostate cancer, breast cancer
3) Journalistic habits sometimes blur interpretation– Wrong narratives– Faulty reasoning and exaggeration
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Some frames for this presentation
I am responsible for communications at the Cancer Society of Finland, one of the biggest public health organisations in FinlandWe provide information to patients, public, journalists, experts, decision-makers, those to be screened, health promotionmessages to specific groupsSyöpä-Cancer Magazine 6 times a year in 2 languages, circulation about 140 000 copies – managing editorFocus Tutkimus – editor-in-chiefCancer.fi with around 80 000 individual visitors per monthScience journalism: Cancer Foundation and the Finnish CancerRegistry
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Science journalism is now topical
President of the Finnish Association of Science Journalists and Editors (1st term, elected annually)President of the 8th World Conference of Science Journalists, Helsinki 24-26 June, 2013
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Case 1: CT scans and risk of cancer
Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood could triple the risk of leukaemia and brain cancerAlthough CT scans are very useful clinically, potential cancerrisks exist from associated ionising radiation, in particular for children who are more radiosensitive than adults. Researchersaimed to assess the excess risk of leukaemia and brain tumoursafter CT scans in a cohort of children and young adults. Published online in Lancet Oncology 7 June
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Researchers conclude:
Use of CT scans in children to deliver cumulative doses of about50 mGy might almost triple the risk of leukaemia and doses of about 60 mGy might triple the risk of brain cancer. Because these cancers are relatively rare, the cumulative absolute risks are small: in the 10 years after the first scan for patients younger than 10 years, one excess case of leukaemia and one excess case of brain tumour per 10 000 head CT scans is estimated to occur. Nevertheless, although clinical benefits should outweigh the small absolute risks, radiation doses from CT scans ought to be kept as low as possible and alternative procedures, which do not involve ionising radiation, should be considered if appropriate.
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Is this news?
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Is this news – science journalism?
Yes, it is a new findingConfirms earlier findingsClinical treatments in childhood should be considered carefullyLong term effects of treatments are importantHow can people assess the meaning of this in their own life?Likely to influence on medical practices/ pros and cons of CTDoes it make parents suspicious for necessary scans?Is there extra worry/ the scale is small?In Finland this did not make big newsWhy?
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
There is a lot medical research available
Prominent science and medical publishers have efficient pressservices – a lot of informationMedical science is especially dominated by publications – butnews agenda is mainly about politics, sports, finances and entertainment – rarely sciencePharmaceutical industry - professionals in communicationEven if you are excited, your boss is notHow meaningful this news is to the public?”Significant that 50 mGy might almost triple the risk of leukaemiaand doses of about 60 mGy might triple the risk of brain cancer”, risks are higher than expected
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Why are there more cancer cases?
More brain tumoursMore breast cancers after 1987 in FinlandMore prostate cancer?Why some cancers are declining?
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Better machines, aging populations
This propably explains why there are more tumoursPeople live longerBut what about other reasons?Politics of medicineWho is setting the agenda of mediaThere is also lobbying – commercial interests combine withadvocacy groupsCancer screenings are good example
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
PSA tests and prostate cancer
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Screening and breast cancer
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
Journalistic traps
Wrong narrativesIn the UK BBC reported 9 June about a woman who wasterminally ill and treated herself with vitamin C therapy, reflexology, aromatherapy and acupuncture, alongside furtherchemotherapyNow several well known people are supporting her on the battlethat doctors are wrong
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
11.6.2012Satu Lipponen
More about this theme/contacts
Satu Lipponen, toim. Syöpä, media & julkisuus (Helsinki 2010)Tupakkayhtiöt –elokuvien kummit (Helsinki 2008)
www.cancer.fi>järjestö>julkaisut>raportit
[email protected]@Lipponen5
Thank you!