Can you spot the problem with these headlines? (Level 1) - Jeff Leek and Lucy McGowan
-
0:12 - 0:14"New drug may cure cancer."
-
0:14 - 0:17"Aspirin may reduce risk of
heart attacks." -
0:17 - 0:19"Eating breakfast can help
you lose weight." -
0:19 - 0:22Health headlines like these
flood the news, -
0:22 - 0:25often contradicting each other.
-
0:29 - 0:32So how can you figure out what’s a
genuine health concern -
0:32 - 0:34or a truly promising remedy,
-
0:34 - 0:36and what’s less conclusive?
-
0:36 - 0:37In medicine,
-
0:37 - 0:40there’s often a disconnect between
news headlines -
0:40 - 0:42and the scientific research they cover.
-
0:42 - 0:45That’s because a headline is designed
to catch attention— -
0:45 - 0:48it’s most effective when
it makes a big claim. -
0:48 - 0:50By contrast,
-
0:50 - 0:52many scientific studies produce
meaningful results -
0:52 - 0:56when they focus on a narrow,
specific question. -
0:56 - 0:58The best way to bridge this gap
-
0:58 - 1:02is to look at the original research
behind a headline. -
1:02 - 1:05We’ve come up with a simplified
research scenario -
1:05 - 1:09for each of these three headlines
to test your skills. -
1:09 - 1:12Keep watching for the explanation
of the first study; -
1:12 - 1:15then pause at the headline
to figure out the flaw. -
1:15 - 1:19Assume all the information you need
to spot the flaw is included. -
1:19 - 1:22Let’s start with this hypothetical
scenario: -
1:22 - 1:25a study using mice to test
a new cancer drug. -
1:25 - 1:27The study includes two groups of mice,
-
1:27 - 1:31one treated with the drug,
the other with a placebo. -
1:31 - 1:32At the end of the trial,
-
1:32 - 1:34the mice that receive the drug are cured,
-
1:34 - 1:38while those that received
the placebo are not. -
1:38 - 1:40Can you spot the problem
with this headline: -
1:40 - 1:44"Study shows new drug
could cure cancer" -
1:44 - 1:47Since the subjects of the study were mice,
-
1:47 - 1:51we can’t draw conclusions about
human disease based on this research. -
1:51 - 1:56In real life, early research on new drugs
and therapies is not conducted on humans. -
1:56 - 1:58If the early results are promising,
-
1:58 - 2:03clinical trials follow to determine
if they hold up in humans. -
2:03 - 2:04Now that you’ve warmed up,
-
2:04 - 2:06let’s try a trickier example:
-
2:06 - 2:10a study about the impact of aspirin
on heart attack risk. -
2:10 - 2:15The study randomly divides a pool
of men into two groups. -
2:15 - 2:17The members of one group
take aspirin daily, -
2:17 - 2:20while the others take a daily placebo.
-
2:20 - 2:21By the end of the trial,
-
2:21 - 2:24the control group suffered significantly
more heart attacks -
2:24 - 2:26than the group that took aspirin.
-
2:26 - 2:30Based on this situation, what’s wrong
with the headline: -
2:30 - 2:33"Aspirin may reduce risk of heart attacks"
-
2:33 - 2:38In this case, the study shows evidence
that aspirin reduces heart attacks in men, -
2:38 - 2:40because all the participants were men.
-
2:40 - 2:44But the conclusion “aspirin reduces risk
of heart attacks” is too broad; -
2:44 - 2:48we can’t assume that results found in
men would also apply to women. -
2:48 - 2:53Studies often limit participants based on
geographic location, age, gender, -
2:53 - 2:55or many other factors.
-
2:55 - 2:57Before these findings can be generalized,
-
2:57 - 3:01similar studies need to be run
on other groups. -
3:01 - 3:03If a headline makes a general claim,
-
3:03 - 3:08it should draw its evidence from a diverse
body of research, not one study. -
3:08 - 3:11Can you take your skills from the first
two questions to the next level? -
3:11 - 3:16Try this example about the impact
of eating breakfast on weight loss. -
3:16 - 3:20Researchers recruit a group of people
who had always skipped breakfast -
3:20 - 3:23and ask them to start
eating breakfast everyday. -
3:23 - 3:27The participants include men and women
of a range of ages and backgrounds. -
3:27 - 3:29Over a year-long period,
-
3:29 - 3:32participants lose an average
of five pounds. -
3:32 - 3:34So what’s wrong with the headline:
-
3:34 - 3:37"Eating breakfast can help
you lose weight" -
3:37 - 3:41The people in the study started eating
breakfast and lost weight— -
3:41 - 3:45but we don’t know that they lost weight
because they started eating breakfast; -
3:45 - 3:47perhaps having their weight tracked
-
3:47 - 3:50inspired them to change their eating
habits in other ways. -
3:50 - 3:54To rule out the possibility that
some other factor caused weight loss, -
3:54 - 3:56we would need to compare
these participants -
3:56 - 3:59to a group who didn’t eat breakfast
before the study -
3:59 - 4:01and continued to skip it during the study.
-
4:01 - 4:05A headline certainly shouldn’t claim the
results of this research -
4:05 - 4:07are generally applicable.
-
4:07 - 4:10And if the study itself made such
a claim without a comparison group, -
4:10 - 4:13then you should question its credibility.
-
4:13 - 4:15Now that you’ve battle-tested your skills
-
4:15 - 4:17on these hypothetical studies
and headlines, -
4:17 - 4:20you can test them on real-world news.
-
4:20 - 4:23Even when full papers aren’t available
without a fee, -
4:23 - 4:27you can often find summaries of
experimental design and results -
4:27 - 4:29in freely available abstracts,
-
4:29 - 4:31or even within the text
of a news article. -
4:31 - 4:33Individual studies have results
-
4:33 - 4:37that don’t necessarily correspond
to a grabby headline. -
4:37 - 4:39Big conclusions for human health issues
-
4:39 - 4:42require lots of evidence accumulated
over time. -
4:42 - 4:43But in the meantime,
-
4:43 - 4:48we can keep on top of the science,
by reading past the headlines.
- Title:
- Can you spot the problem with these headlines? (Level 1) - Jeff Leek and Lucy McGowan
- Speaker:
- Jeff Leek and Lucy McGowan
- Description:
-
View full lesson: https://ed.ted.com/lessons/can-you-spot-the-problem-with-these-headlines-level-1-jeff-leek-and-lucy-mcgowan
In medicine, there's often a disconnect between news headlines and the scientific research they cover. While headlines are designed to catch attention, many studies produce meaningful results when they focus on a narrow, specific question. So how can you figure out what's a genuine health concern and what's less conclusive? Jeff Leek and Lucy McGowan explain how to read past the headline.
Lesson by Jeff Leek and Lucy McGowan, directed by Zedem Media.
- Video Language:
- English
- Team:
- closed TED
- Project:
- TED-Ed
- Duration:
- 04:49
lauren mcalpine edited English subtitles for Can you spot the problem with these headlines? (Level 1) | ||
lauren mcalpine approved English subtitles for Can you spot the problem with these headlines? (Level 1) | ||
lauren mcalpine accepted English subtitles for Can you spot the problem with these headlines? (Level 1) | ||
lauren mcalpine edited English subtitles for Can you spot the problem with these headlines? (Level 1) | ||
Tara Ahmadinejad edited English subtitles for Can you spot the problem with these headlines? (Level 1) | ||
Tara Ahmadinejad edited English subtitles for Can you spot the problem with these headlines? (Level 1) |