This is a classic example of the reality distortion field that efficiently separates science journalism from science.
The article title: "A virus that kills cancer: the cure that's waiting in the cold".
The researcher's explanation: "Our results are only in the lab so far, not in humans, and many treatments that work in the lab can turn out to be not so effective in humans."
To the uninitiated, "only in the lab" means in vitro (from the Latin "in glass", meaning in a test tube or Petri dish), not in any living creature, and certainly not a human being.
This means that the "virus that kills cancer" hasn't ever been called on to kill cancer in a person suffering from cancer. Just saying.
There is nothing so tempting to an unscrupulous science journalist as marrying the words "cancer" and "cure" in an article title. To do this, they often turn their back on reality, as in this case.
The research may deserve support, but sleazy journalism like this can only hinder the work, and science.
Comments
This is a classic example of the reality distortion field that efficiently separates science journalism from science.
The article title: "A virus that kills cancer: the cure that's waiting in the cold".
The researcher's explanation: "Our results are only in the lab so far, not in humans, and many treatments that work in the lab can turn out to be not so effective in humans."
To the uninitiated, "only in the lab" means in vitro (from the Latin "in glass", meaning in a test tube or Petri dish), not in any living creature, and certainly not a human being.
This means that the "virus that kills cancer" hasn't ever been called on to kill cancer in a person suffering from cancer. Just saying.
There is nothing so tempting to an unscrupulous science journalist as marrying the words "cancer" and "cure" in an article title. To do this, they often turn their back on reality, as in this case.
The research may deserve support, but sleazy journalism like this can only hinder the work, and science.