2. Why I chose this topic?
News agenda
Web 24/
No specialties
Fast reactions
Several channels
At the very core of professionalism
Every journalist should know their basic science
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
3. 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
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
4. Some frames for this presentation
I am responsible for communications at the Cancer Society of
Finland, one of the biggest public health organisations in Finland
We provide information to patients, public, journalists, experts,
decision-makers, those to be screened, health promotion
messages to specific groups
Syöpä-Cancer Magazine 6 times a year in 2 languages,
circulation about 140 000 copies – managing editor
Focus Tutkimus – editor-in-chief
Cancer.fi with around 80 000 individual visitors per month
Science journalism: Cancer Foundation and the Finnish Cancer
Registry
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
5. 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
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
6. Case 1: CT scans and risk of cancer
Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood could triple the
risk of leukaemia and brain cancer
Although CT scans are very useful clinically, potential cancer
risks exist from associated ionising radiation, in particular for
children who are more radiosensitive than adults. Researchers
aimed to assess the excess risk of leukaemia and brain tumours
after CT scans in a cohort of children and young adults.
Published online in Lancet Oncology 7 June
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
8. Researchers conclude:
Use of CT scans in children to deliver cumulative doses of about
50 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.
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
10. Is this news – science journalism?
Yes, it is a new finding
Confirms earlier findings
Clinical treatments in childhood should be considered carefully
Long term effects of treatments are important
How can people assess the meaning of this in their own life?
Likely to influence on medical practices/ pros and cons of CT
Does it make parents suspicious for necessary scans?
Is there extra worry/ the scale is small?
In Finland this did not make big news
Why?
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
11. There is a lot medical research available
Prominent science and medical publishers have efficient press
services – a lot of information
Medical science is especially dominated by publications – but
news agenda is mainly about politics, sports, finances and
entertainment – rarely science
Pharmaceutical industry - professionals in communication
Even if you are excited, your boss is not
How meaningful this news is to the public?
”Significant that 50 mGy might almost triple the risk of leukaemia
and doses of about 60 mGy might triple the risk of brain cancer”,
risks are higher than expected
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
12. Why are there more cancer cases?
More brain tumours
More breast cancers after 1987 in Finland
More prostate cancer?
Why some cancers are declining?
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
14. Better machines, aging populations
This propably explains why there are more tumours
People live longer
But what about other reasons?
Politics of medicine
Who is setting the agenda of media
There is also lobbying – commercial interests combine with
advocacy groups
Cancer screenings are good example
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
15. PSA tests and prostate cancer
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
17. Journalistic traps
Wrong narratives
In the UK BBC reported 9 June about a woman who was
terminally ill and treated herself with vitamin C therapy,
reflexology, aromatherapy and acupuncture, alongside further
chemotherapy
Now several well known people are supporting her on the battle
that doctors are wrong
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
22. More about this theme/contacts
Satu Lipponen, toim. Syöpä,
media & julkisuus (Helsinki
2010)
Tupakkayhtiöt –elokuvien
kummit (Helsinki 2008)
www.cancer.fi
>järjestö>julkaisut>raportit
satu.lipponen@cancer.fi
@Lipponen5
Thank you!
Satu Lipponen 11.6.2012
