Opinion - Readers' Editor : Online & Off line   

Beyond the briefings — check and review

It is very disheartening that a newspaper of such high reputation has fallen prey to misinformation.

With the details published in The Hindu, many people will rush for treatment because of the general perception that The Hindu will not publish any details without verification.

The report gives an erroneous impression about the disease causation and its incidence.

Reactions like these from readers reinforce the principle that care and caution need to be exercised in presenting any report relating to medical issues. Despite the bar, under medical ethics, on self-projection and self-aggrandisement, medical practioners are always keen to be in the news pages with claims and theories. These do make interesting reading, no doubt, but the "general perception" mentioned at the beginning makes it imperative that all the points are cross-checked, verified and authenticated before they are presented to the readers.

I have developed the habit of harking back to the old practices in

The Hindu (slipping into anecdotage?). Here is one such: the rule was that any news agency report on a new drug or treatment should be checked with an expert before publication. There was one such claim and I called up Dr. B. Ramamurthi, the eminent neurosurgeon. There was the characteristic booming laugh at the other end, followed by the remark: you are giving me three-year old news!

I was reminded of this when I read the letter from Dr. V. Rangarajan, Honorary Branch Secretary, Indian Dental Association, Chennai. A report on October 30, 2006, in the Chennai city edition said lingual brackets that remain invisible, and had become popular in the West, were now available at a private dental clinic in Chennai. Its orthodontist had recently been trained in the technique. Another new technique the clinic had introduced, the report said, was the bio-medical prosthesis system for denture implantation.

In a rejoinder, Dr. Rangarajan said the "new" lingual brackets had been available since the 1970s, and because of the disadvantages, it had not become popular. This course of treatment also took three years to complete, three times the time for the normal method. The bio-functional prosthesis system was being used by dentists in Chennai for over three years, he said.

This observation from a professional body had validity. But N.S. Venkataraman, Chennai, seemed to be unaware of the background of the PNR Society for Relief and Rehabilitation of the Disabled; it was to hold its 16th Osteoarthritis camp in Chennai, at which knee braces were provided to the affected for Rs. 1,000. Had The Hindu made any study and survey before publishing this news (the report appeared in MetroPlus on December 2, 2006), he asked. In this case, the PNR Society, Bhavnagar, is well known for its services to the disabled and the knee braces is one of its special products. But the caution voiced by the reader is justified.

The need for cross-checking and verification of claims and assertions becomes apparent from another reaction.

A Palakkad report (Kerala edition, October 25, 2006) said sickle cell anaemia was wreaking havoc in the tribal belt of Attappady. It was not a new problem but had peaked recently because of a lack of food and the use of liquor and ganja. There had been two deaths and six persons were in a serious condition. The cause of the disease was yet to be identified, and it could be malnutrition over a period. An All-India Institute of Medical Sciences survey in 1999 found that 10 per cent of the 25,447 tribals in Attappady had the disease. The story, the reporter later said, was based on discussions with two doctors working among the tribals.

Dr. Alexander Mathew of Kaloor, Kochi, found the report wrong. Sickle cell anaemia, he said, was an autosomal genetic disorder of the haemoglobin molecule. This was known for more than 50 years. Bone marrow transplantation was the only certain cure. Secondary effects of severe anaemia could be ameliorated by medical help and better nutrition. The short-term solution was creating awareness and in the long term, creating opportunities for the people outside their limited world and reducing inbreeding. He also questioned the statistical details of the sample survey.

Similar dependence on official briefings and not going beyond them was seen in a Delhi report on new polio cases; this resulted in adverse comments from a specialist. The October 25, 2006 report on four new polio cases in Delhi said the capital remained a high risk zone because of a wild virus and a "rogue neighbour" in U.P. Despite the "Polio Plus" campaign for immunisation, U.P. was a major source of the virus, the report said.

Neither wild virus, nor rogue State, but polio drops without potency was the real cause of the resurgence, said Dr. P. Selvaraj, Chennai, a retired consultant paediatrician who has travelled all over the country. The drops were not stored as per norms; many did not know they should be stored at zero or below zero degree Celsius; there was no supervision of cold chain maintenance. For the reporter that should have been an area for study and analysis, instead of quoting Delhi health authorities.

Even when an expert is the source of a story, the report has to go beyond what he or she says to be really beneficial to the reader. A Kozhikode report on hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD) is a case in point. It relied on the findings of a senior paediatrician published in an international journal to say there was increasing incidence of the disease, which was causing concern. But the story raised many questions: What are the precautions the public should take; what is the mode of treatment; how is the Government responding; what is the justification for saying it could become an epidemic? "Epidemic" is not a casual word; there are norms for such classification. The public, instead of being informed, may feel scared by inadequate details.

With the amazing range of information available on the Net, cross-checking facts becomes easy. The impact medical stories have on readers makes such validation mandatory. Double-checking with other doctors is another safety precaution. Specialisation for the writers, instead of treating health as an additional beat, also has to be considered. Where claims and technical details are involved, peer review of an article may be needed.

To get back to the beginning, what is involved is credibility.

readerseditor@thehindu.co.in

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Criminals in combat fatigues
Denying the right to choose
India and the challenge of global warming
Lessons for the Congress in Maharashtra
India must have a proactive agenda in Iran
Gravy train of big business must hit the buffers
Orange snow in Russia
Shocking
Mumbai civic polls
Beyond the briefings — check and review

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu