How to make the press report good science

There’s an interesting discussion on Ben Goldacre’s Bad Science site about the way in which the media regularly publishes scare stories, but never prints the evidence that shows the stories were bollocks. The article talks about a favourite scare - mercury fillings in your teeth rot your brain, or something - which has been thoroughly debunked; the debunking hasn’t been reported.

Bad Science reader Tristan has a genius suggestion:

I think positive science stories should be turned into conflict ones. For example, the mercury fillings one could have got much more press if the authors of the research had offered to head butt anyone who still said mercury fillings were dangerous.

Agree? Disagree? Then by all means leave a comment, although please note that spammers will be shot. If you subscribe to the feed you can get future articles delivered to your feed reader.