|
||||
|
Was just reading this article on the Sunday Times last weekend (July 27th 2008, Lifestyle page 9, "Cleaning Out Medical Myths"), and it struck me how the idea of having medical writers, ie. journalists who have no medical training and who write purely based on what they read, may not be the best idea for communicating medical/health knowledge to the masses. I had the thought that perhaps medical writers are under too much time constraint to think through and consider what they are writing.
Take for example this: "(On drinking eight glasses of water a day) I had long believed that eight glasses of plain water or caffeine-free beverages a day were important to keep the body hydrated and to prevent constipation... Researchers have been unable to find scientific support for it." I thought it was a given that this so-called medical myth was an approximation and a guideline for hydration throughout the day. The amount of water a person needs a day varies, depending on the weight of the person, the activities he/she takes part in that day, and so on. It is foolish to expect 8 glasses of water to fulfill anyone's hydration needs on any given day, in any given condition. Thus the writer's statement is rather absurd. Furthermore, i find that her statements border on irresponsibility. Picture a naggy mother and her stubborn child. Upon reading this article, the child may take it as evidence to rebut his mother and refuse the suggestion to drink more water - which is of course bad for the child. Another example: "(on swimming after eating) My parents repeatedly warned us to wait an hour after a meal... But experts find no harm in a gentle plunge or casual play in the water soon after eating." Besides the fact that "gentle plunge" and "casual play" are subjective, many people tend to skim through papers (especially the Straits Times) nowadays. Saying that swimming soon after eating is alright, and that the hour's wait is unnecessary, is rather irresponsible in my opinion. Certainly the waiting does no harm and helps your stomach to settle down before you go and play in the water, especially after a heavy meal. So i wonder... do medical writers actually consider what they are writing? or are they only focused on reporting the "truth", as reported by medical experts? As we all know, science is an inaccurate art (yes that was deliberate), and truth today can be revoked tomorrow. Just take for example the (pretty) recent discovery of trans fat. Years ago saturated fat was the bugbear of the f&b sector, and now no one even mentions it anymore. What happened? it's actually not as bad for you as they thought? Or did they find something worse? That's science for you. So... i sincerely hope that journalists do actually think through their articles, and that my musings over this issue were wholly inaccurate. It's all about taking pride in your work, imo. |
|
|||