Originally published February 26 2006
Stem cell data scandal teaches journalists a lesson
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
Elizabeth Kaledin, Medical issues correspondent for CBS New,s said she will now read journal articles with more skepticism. It is becoming clear to many that well-respected journals offer peer reviews, not iron-clad truth.
And then of course you learn that the Red dye #40 in that candy you love so much is probably going to kill you.
Indeed, scientific journals provide a constant stream of story topics for science and medical reporters, which is why recent revelations that South Korean scientist Dr. Hwang Woo Suk falsified data in research published in the journal Science has yielded strong reactions not just in the scientific community, but closer considerations of how such reports are used by the journalists who rely on them.
In The New York Times today, Julie Bosman examines how print reporters are approaching the articles in scientific journals following the revelations that Hwang falsified data that showed he had created stem cells from a cloned human embryo.
For the most part, Bosman finds, the scandal has not led to less reliance upon such journal articles, but more skepticism in reporting on them, which in itself offers a conundrum for reporters.
Correspondent Elizabeth Kaledin, who covers medical issues for CBS News, told me in an e-mail that, like most medical and science reporters, her reporting relies "heavily" on research from scientific journals.
"Most big, breaking discoveries and studies are first published in the journals precisely because it gives them a certain level of professional credibility," she said.
When producing stories on information from journal articles, which are generally provided to reporters in advance of their publication, Kaledin says that she goes to "big names in the field who can put the article in perspective and tell us ...
Especially in an incredibly specialized -- I might even say, secretive -- field like stem cell research, we are at the mercy of other scientists looking at the data.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml