is the doctor in?

arrgh!

doing balanced science journalism is frustrating.

ok

i’m doing a piece on painkillers, and recent research that has found a way to block pain, just as well as narcotics, but through calcium channel blockers, not opioid (narcotic-based) drugs.

a local bio-tech company has a drug in development that blocks pain, but without the addiction problems of narcotics.

so i’ve explained the science in the piece and have quotes from the main scientist involved with the project.

now i’m at the end and want to do the whole “what does this mean” part.

the obvious impact is that medical narcotics in the treatment of chronic pain will become obsolete...

the problem now is finding someone with a PhD or and MD that will discuss that...

it’s a no-brainer really...

drugs that are as powerful as narcotics but not addictive...
hell yeah they’ll change how chronic pain is treated!

but no local MD’s that deal with chronic pain that i’ve tried to talk to will return my calls, or my emails, or actually talk to me about it when i get them on the phone.

I could go back to people in the company, i’m sure they’ll have good quotes...but then it’s all a bunch of people that are connected to the drug singing it’s praises...which of course is not surprising and readers would and should get a little sceptical of a piece that is as one sourced as that.

i hear all the time about how bad science/health reporting is, and i’m one of the loudest complainers...

but how can journalists be expected to give a well balanced presentation of science when the only scientists and doctors that are willing to talk about the issues are the ones who directly profit from the media exposure??

so i’ve given up on getting local MD’s to talk about it...

now i’ll just have to hope that there is an academic somewhere that knows about the research and still doesn’t have stock in the company already...

Replies
D
31 May 06

*shrug* Not that suprising J. Most of them probably don't want to stick their necks out, since it would reflect badly on them to be associated with something like this even in a peripheral way if it were to go bad. Add in the entrenched interests within the medical and pharmaceutical industries (yes, I said medical industry, not profession) and there isn't much in the way of motivating factors to cooperate with journalists or encourage a) better reporting of medical and pharma issues or b) more public interest/examination of their sectors.

Too bad you're having such trouble with it though. Have you considered trying some of the hospital/health region communications types or support groups, rather than the MDs?

jroy
31 May 06

i'm trying the MD's directly because my experience is that even with all the hassel it's STILL easier than trying to go through the "communication types"...

support groups are usually a good way through though...

Thank you, but commenting has expired.