Category: Your Health Matters

(5 stars)
Apt quote from the story:

(0 stars)
Direct from a news release, re-written (not very much) by a wire service, picked up by a client, in one ear, out the other.

(2 stars)
The standards for health news in a major metropolitan daily should be no lower just because the news is in a suburban section. This story was disappointing at almost all levels.

(5 stars)
Another nice job by the paper’s Healthy Skeptic column, citing good sources, although perhaps a little light on the evidence.

(3 stars)
A generally well done story that included ample caveats about this preliminary research.

(5 stars)
Good story pointing out that we have incomplete evidence about the health effects of vitamin D supplementation, and we are uncertain whom should be tested, and how much people should take. Even the experts are at odds about it.

(5 stars)
This is a solid review of a study examiningthigh-bone fractures in women with osteoporosis taking bisphosphonate drugs.

(2 stars)
Despite the headline’s claim that this laser may work for cataracts, the story never explained that this was an experiment on just 9 human organ donor lenses and not an actual clinical treatment.

(3 stars)
Should we be calling something a after evidence from tests on three tumor samples?

(3 stars)
Tumor samples taken from three people with melanoma were tested.?

(5 stars)
Five-star effort: A main story and a sidebar that deliver facts, cautious optimism, and balancing issues of costs and potential harms.

(3 stars)
Stretch marks are described in this story as a That’s disease-mongering – and the story feels like advertising.