Comparison of good and bad reporting on leukemia gene therapy

Gary Schwitzer, whose Health News Review should be your first stop for evaluating health and medicine journalism, has a quick line up of the good and the ugly in the coverage of the recent leukemia gene therapy study. Notice I didn't say "cure for cancer." Notably, neither did the good reporting that Schwitzer highlighted on his blog. More to come...

Maggie Koerth-Baker is the science editor at BoingBoing.net. She writes a monthly column for The New York Times Magazine and is the author of Before the Lights Go Out, a book about electricity, infrastructure, and the future of energy. You can find Maggie on Twitter and Facebook.

Maggie goes places and talks to people. Find out where she'll be speaking next.

MORE: breakthroughs • cancer • evidence-based everything • health • hype • medical science • News • Science

More at Boing Boing

Ants and Stars: Bruce Sterling and Jasmina Tesanovic visit the Sardinia Radio Telescope in Italy

The Snowden Principle

jguarShark

So far I haven’t seen it referenced anywhere as a “cure for cancer,” but I suppose I might just be lucking out by frequenting reputable news sites :)
- http://twitter.com/samari711 samari711
  
  Clearly you don’t read slashdot, where the summary was “Cancer cured by HIV”
  - jguarShark
    
    Nope.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Lewis-Medlock-Rated-R/1382301031 Lewis Medlock-Rated R

can someone post the link to the “cancer cured!!!” headline tumblr site? if there isnt one, can someone make one?