Following a particularly badly written piece in the Daily Mail the other day I found myself moaning to anyone who would listen about the quality of medical journalism. It's not the first time. Indeed, I seem to be almost physically incapable of reading one report or another without sighing and rolling my eyes. Sometimes my irritation is well founded, whilst at others I fear it's as much me bristling at a perceived "attack" as it is righteous commentary.
In reality, I appreciate that medical journalism is a particularly difficult job. The pressure to produce compelling copy in short timescales can't be easy, and translating complicated concepts into material that can be understood by practically anyone is always challenging. So instead of complaining, I thought I would instead produce a handy guide for any journalist attempting to cover medical stories.