Findings Reported in Scholarly Journals Are Invitations to Debate, Not Settled and Received Wisdom

We can never forget that the imprimatur of a prestigious medical
journal does not exempt any article within from the rigorous scrutiny that
serious science deserves.

Of course, we should listen carefully when findings are reported
in JAMA or Lancet or the American Journal of Nursing or any other top-shelf
publication. But these publications are not sacred texts. Indeed, the
appearance of an article in a prestigious journal is an invitation for other
scientists to critically engage with the reported research and findings.

This blog post by epidemiologist Phil Alcabes – focusing on a
reported connection between HIV risk and hormonal contraceptive use – is an
excellent example of a scientist showing how the widely publicized findings reported  in a prestigious journal can be significantly more complex and problematic than the headline treatment they may have received in media accounts.

My main point? Public literacy about science health and medicine
will require a wider understanding of the scientific enterprise itself, including
the means by which research is conducted, conclusions reached, and findings published.

The wider public simply has to get a better understanding of the
fact that the publication of even the most authoritative findings does not
signal the end of debate.   Journal articles in all disciplines are contributions
to long, ongoing conversations. They are invitations to engage and question and
to continue to struggle toward truth.

Journals should be seen as sites of rigorous argument in a vital
public sphere, not as vehicles to transmit “signed, sealed, and delivered” wisdom.

College Instructor Tells Stutterer Not to Speak in Class. I’m Serious.

Those of us who hunger for more complex, helpful, and nuanced coverage of  health issues might want to take a look at a story in today’s New York Times by  Richard Perez-Pena. The story is about the atrocious treatment received by a student with a stuttering problem at a college in New Jersey.

The story itself is a remarkable and painful account of just how much one thoughtless institution can botch what should have been the routine accommodation provided  to a student with a disability. Having been a higher education administrator,  eminently capable of my own occasional botch, I promise you that the treatment of one Philip Garber Jr. at The County College of Morris rises to a  mega-botch surpassing very few epic mistakes that I can recall.

Beyond the specific story, though, is what this reveals  about the importance of maintaining relationships with reporters whose beats  might not have any  obvious connection to health.  Richard recently took on the higher education beat for The Times.  Yet this was the vantage point from which he  chose to write an uncommonly thoughtful story about a health/wellness issue  that can only benefit from more visibility and public awareness.

Richard is not new to health issues. A  remarkable, continuing series he did on diabetes was one of the best I have  ever seen in any medium.

My point is that there is probably no news beat that is not a potentially fruitful domain for a provocative and informative story about  health-related issues.

The Misuse of ADHD as a Metaphor

You might want to check out this very thoughtful article in today’s New York Times about ADHD. Dr Klass tries to cut through all the overuse and misuse of the term “ADHD” and focus on what we do and do not  know about the science.

Article’s money point: The use of ADHD as a metaphor for the general problems of focus in a multi-tasking,  digital age even further obscures the actual disorder and the science.

I also admit a bias for any article about almost any subject that includes the sentence: “There is much we don’t know.” 

There are moments when I think that the task of communicating clear, useful information about health issues will require that all participants in the process — communicators, scientists, health care professionals, and audience – be able to openly and fully acknowledge what is not known about a topic.

Unfortunately, this simple admission turns out not to be so simple in professional cultures built on foundations  of what is known, what can be known, or what will be known.

Wisdom might require that we more fully embrace and understand the meaning of the null finding, the dead end, the confounding intervening variable, the contradiction, the messy nuance, and even what might — for a moment – seem to be complete hopelessness. 

To acknowledge being lost is not to settle for a permanent wilderness. It is the necessary,  honest confrontation with the world that begins an authentic, unflinching  journey  to truth.

Phil Alcabes on Health, Behavior, and Risk: A Blog Not to Miss

If you somehow have missed Phil Alcabes’s blog  that so carefully and elegantly challenges all sorts of myths and assumptions about health, behavior, and risk, check it out. 

I strongly recommend two superb recent posts on autism and the recent controversy over possibly unethical research on the homeless done by the Bloomberg administration.

Culture, Shame, and Men’s Health: Steven’s Excellent Urological Adventure

This is my latest post on the blog of the Center for Health, Media, and Policy at Hunter College of the City University of New York.

I had a prostate biopsy.

I am OK. No evidence of anything abnormal. Great news, to be sure.

My reactions and attitudes were  another story.

New Member of Congress Not So Happy With His Own New Health Plan

I am not sure I could have made this up.

ProPublica Takes on Dialysis

Pro Publica, the extraordinary non-profit investigative journalism organization, tackles dialysis with in-depth research and solid reporting.