Abstract: Deciphering a medical article in a nonmedical newspaper: the ten commandments of mistrust
– The article begins by asserting that the prevalence of pathology that deals is largely undervalued...
– It seems to overestimate the seriousness of the problem for public health.
– It reports current research or projects, that is logic in journals but incongruous in a general media in the absence
of spin-off practice.
– It grossly overusing the myth of progress.
– It boasts of the EBM while mentioning one or more patient testimonials...
– It claims ostensibly compassion and altruism of the medical writer, flamboyant altruism always proportional
to the cost of the underlying treatment...
– It highlights the obligation to act (disordered activism).
– It promotes a reduction in the lethality of a disease by failing to mention his mortality (distortion of purpose).
– It mediates exclusively a “key” issue of reductionism for a pathology in which the plurality of causes is certain.
– It uses the health administration and its recommendations as the EBM is using: it is removed when it is
producing, in the hiding place when it is not.
Heads I win, tails you lose!