Science is often poorly communicated. Researchers can fight back

Quick Read

On the morning of April 17th, 2019, fear of bacon filled the media. David Shaw comments on shortcomings in science journalism as demonstrated by new findings about bacon and cancer risk

Quick Read

In 2010, Dr. Pamela Munster mailed her saliva to 23andMe, a relatively new DNA testing company, and later opted in for a BRCA test. As an oncologist, she knew a mutation of this gene would put her at high risk for breast and ovarian cancer. She was relieved by the negative result

Quick Read

Voice-recognition system promises to automate data entry during office visits. While alluring to doctors, the technology poses thorny questions, including whether patients will be comfortable inviting a third-party company with a camera and microphone into a conversation with their doctor

Quick Read

Machine-learning techniques used by thousands of scientists to analyse data are producing results that are misleading and often completely wrong.
Dr Genevera Allen from Rice University in Houston said that the increased use of such systems was contributing to a “crisis in science”

Quick Read

Experts are calling on company to counter closed groups where members can post misinformation without challenge

Quick Read

So it happened again. An underreported story about a half-baked advance in cancer medicine caught fire and scorched its way through social media, onto network TV, and into the minds of millions of people

Quick Read

A $5,571 bill to sit in a waiting room, $238 eyedrops, and a $60 ibuprofen tell the story of how emergency room visits are squeezing patients

Quick Read