Sir

In his Words essay “Good news is no news” (Nature 413, 113; 2001), John Emsley suggests that scientists who want their work featured in the media should learn how to package their discoveries by finding the right "hooks" for the public.

Scientists have various reasons for wanting to make headlines. Informing the public about the state of a scientific field or of a discovery; attracting funds to hospitals and universities; advertising companies with which they are involved; or (all-too-common) self-aggrandizement — these are all valid reasons for talking about science. But they all should have the same common denominator: the truth.

Unfortunately, the media often embellish, sensationalize and exaggerate reality, which creates false illusions. I would advise caution in encouraging such behaviour. The danger is that a journalistic mentality could infiltrate even the scientific literature, as even prestigious journals can be guilty of publishing splashy and 'sexy' studies that are not scientifically sound.

My personal experience with the 'tabloidization' of scientific information began when I moved to Manhattan, and discovered some of the best Italian restaurants in the world. What does this have to do with science and media? A lot for me, as I have made friends with many Italian restaurateurs. Frequently, in the past few years, I have been approached by an Antonio, Giovanni or Marcello with “Have you seen it in the news?”. “No, what?” I answer. “An Italian doctor has discovered a cure for cancer (or this or that),” is the reply.

It was in 1998 that I first learned that Luigi Di Bella, an 85-year-old practitioner in a small Italian town, had discovered a miraculous cure for cancer (see Nature 391, 217; 1998). The media had blown this up so much that the Italian parliament was forced to approve a clinical trial (see Nature 392, 421, 1998) to test the 'cure': a cocktail of somatostatin and vitamins. After months of testing, there was no evidence that it worked (see Nature 394, 514; 1998). Hundreds of patients may have suffered through not getting better treatment.

'Breakthroughs' are regularly announced by the most prestigious Italian newspapers, magazines and television channels. And many times, after yet another explosive report of a remarkable discovery, I have had to disillusion my restaurateur friends about the prospect of eternal youth and similar preposterous claims.

The tabloidesque Italian media have provided us with many entertaining evenings in New York City. Yet I am left with a bad taste in my mouth despite the excellent dinners I have enjoyed, as I am afraid that the Antonios, Giovannis and Marcellos, unable to distinguish which scientific information is correct and which isn't, will end up regarding all of it with scepticism. Is it really worth attracting a larger audience on one occasion, if the next time your credibility will be compromised? This is clearly a question for the media as well as for those scientists who like to promote their discoveries.

Just a suggestion: if you are a scientist in Manhattan, don't make it evident in certain Italian restaurants. They might not take you seriously, and don't be surprised if they ask you to pay in cash ...