One of the most lamentable aspects of science reporting in the popular press is, no doubt, the headlines. As we often have occasion to note, the value or complexity of new scientific research is frequently reduced to an attention-grabbing but inaccurate headline by the time it goes to press. Perhaps the worst of these reductio ad absurdum headlines is the alarmist genre: These tend to take research results that either pertain to a very small and specialized sector of the population or were drawn from a subject group too small to be reliable, then twist them into a five-alarm scare. At worst, the public is sent into a tizzy and actually adjusts their behavior in a harmful way. At best, the public ignores yet another dubious headline and the scientific establishment loses credibility. Neither is ideal.
And so, since it's Friday, we give you ¦
Headlines That Should Be Ashamed of Themselves
"FDA: Teething Pain Remedies Dangerous"
This one, sadly, comes from the usually reliable MedPage Today. (Although, to be fair, Florida's Brevard Times does much worse, declaring "Over-the-Counter Medications Can Kill Babies.") The source of the headline is an FDA warning about common local anesthetics, like Anbesol or Orajel, that are used to soothe the painful gums of teething infants. The concern is that the benzocaine in these products can result in a condition called methemoglobinemia, which leads to oxygen deprivation and in extreme cases death.
Sounds scary, right? It is, and parents should be aware of it. But considering that a total of 19 cases in children were reported in the past six years, does it really merit the Angel of Death headline?
"For Some, Exercise May Increase Heart Risk"
In this case, the Times headline (above) is probably the mildest. The award for worst rendition should probably go to San Diego's Union-Tribune, which asks its readers: "Does Exercise Raise Heart Risk in Healthy People?" (Runner-up is the Sydney Morning Herald, which snarks, "For Those Looking for an Excuse to Avoid Exercise, Here's One.")
The source of the headlines is a study just published in PLoS One, drawing upon data from six exercise studies involving nearly 1,700 people. Upon analysis, the researchers found that roughly 10 percent of these people engaging in rigorous exercise actually showed a worsening in at least one of the measures thought to be related to heart disease: blood pressure, insulin levels, HDL cholesterol, or triglycerides.
But is this really a reason to be sedentary? Hardly. As ACSH's Dr. Gilbert Ross points out, the study measured biomarkers associated with heart disease, but it made no effort to discern actual health outcomes. There are no data about whether any of that 10 percent actually ended up with any heart trouble from their forays into cardiovascular fitness. Furthermore, Dr. Ross points out that the evidence for linking triglyceride and insulin levels to heart disease remains far from well established.
And what else did the headline ignore? 10 percent of those in the study had a higher-than-expected improvement on at least one measure of heart health. Others' risk factor measurements improved anywhere from 20 percent to 50 percent.
So, really, your odds are still better if you do go for that jog.
