Of eleven they have dealt with, seven were published by the Mail or Mail on Sunday.
Robbins notes:
Bad science reporting isn't just an irritant to nerdy pedants like me, it's something that risks people's health and undermines their ability to make informed choices. The PCC's recent statement suggests that they understand this, which makes it all the more frustrating that their rulings on the stories above - merely the tip of the bad science iceberg - were so weak.
Sure, boxes were ticked and compliance requirements were met. One story was taken down and several had amendments added to them at a later date, but by then the damage had been done. Thousands of people who read these articles may now have unwarranted doubts about the cervical cancer vaccine, or be afraid to touch a child with haemophilia, and that is serious damage that can't easily be undone.
Posts
Another Daily Mail health related doozy. This time involving two supposedly different photos of a girl before and after eating fruit for a few weeks when in fact it's just two identical photos that have been photoshopped:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2111663/Fruit-veg-makes-sexier-say-scientists.html