"Full" Cancer Treatment is the story of the tricky and tragic

If any Is the more original title than "scientists discover cancer treatments"? The story of some versions of this fantastic suit pushed the news cycle to the super blood Wolf Moon was a better part of the century. In 1998, James Watson reported The York Times That cancer cure will come from Y2K. This magazine was not immune, nor was it the "end of the cancer" a few years later. Each institution strengthens the hope for patients and their families to get the solution, no risk or cost. And yet, here we are in 2019 that the constellation of a complex, diverse disease, we are getting closer and we call for the obedience of cancer for eight men and one of 11 women, according to the World Health Organization's latest data.

You'd think that the creators and users' newsletters have learned a lesson. But the latest version of the fake cancer treatment story is even more flagrantly flawed than usual. Emergence of people's cancer and the desire of media outlets by clicking it as uninterrupted as never before. Hopefully, it seems trumps history.

What is happening

on Monday, Jerusalem Post, the centrist Israeli newspaper, has published online story profiling a small company called Accelerated Evolution Biotechnologies that works with potential anti-cancer drug cocktail since 2000. It was somewhat cautious about the "treatment of cancer" Israeli scholars think they found one "and almost entirely relied on the interview to the board of directors of the company Dan Aridor, only on the AEBi website. In it, Aridor made a series of sweeping claims, including this eye-popper: "We believe that we offer you for one year full treatments for cancer."

This was particularly disturbing because the company did not conduct a one-time trial or published an ounce of data on the petter dish cells and rods in a cage. In the process of normal drug development, the pharmaceutical beginner will present such preclinical work in order to support any claim and use it for the purpose of funding clinical trials. AEBi's PR move might be an attempt. In an interview Tuesday, the director and executive director of the company told Ilan Moradze Israeli time The lack of cash flows is the reason that AEBi has chosen not to publish data.

Original Jerusalem Post The article was not an interview for external experts in the field of oncology. Nor does it skepticate between the speculative and preclinical work in a controlled laboratory environment and the universal treatment for a 12-month period. Anyone who knows about oncology does not tell you that a large number of prospective treatments can not test human tests. The recent assessment has led to the adoption of cancer drugs for success in the market.

What do people say?

About 12 hours later Jerusalem Post tweeted out a link to his story, the numbers distant right began to strengthen its optimistic headline. Pro-Trump twitter troll Jakob Volley Published, Followed by a conservative political prisoner Glenn Beck, who added his own self-confident touch. "As we had hoped and prayed, and by 2030 I was talking about: the whole tumor for cancer."

On Tuesday morning, Fox News published its own account. The story added some statements, including strictly commented comments from the New York Oncology Expert, who called AEBi's claim that it might be "another spontaneous, irresponsible and ultimately fierce false promises for cancer patients". Fox's grabby title line retained almost identical formula original Jerusalem Post The story and the similar reports were printed in Philadelphia in local television news spaces Melbourne, Australia.

Although many major news outlets are ignored, New York Post And Forbes Both published their own brilliant versions that were largely based on Jerusalem PostReporting. But within 24 hours, both sites came up with new, obviously less acute stories where they (gas) surveyed cancer experts. Forbes Really published two. According to the author of the original story, "Experts have complained about the Israeli team's claims that they have been found to cure cancer," and one more explicitly said: "The Israeli company claims they have medication for a year, do not believe them."

This course is not uncommon or unreliable, fast moving world of online journalism. But as the Internet certification researchers, misinformation is spreading faster than attempts to retreat. Despite the fact that anger can be fuel that feeds the most fake news when it comes to our health, people are more motivated. "Positive becomes more about how to read and what to share," wrote Ohio State University Communication Researcher HENNEK KU KIMI, in one of the analysis of how social networks are available through health care news.

So "Cancer is cure!" The piece is faster, faster than the "Cancer" is the story. Case: when Forbes tweeted his original article, Received 47 replies, 821 retweets and 1,635 likes. One day later, after the 180-th coup issued by the tone, there were only four answers, 30 retweets and 61 likes.

Why is this issue?

Social media is more straightforward than never being an unlawful user of information. The permanent scroll-scroll-scroll is practically designed to encourage laziness thinking. At the same time, people are hungry for good news for people who use talk-stories from platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. Whenever you feel the battle for the whole party, sex, race, class, and generational lines, the cancer is a single enemy. The story about the end of the cancer can be the olive branch for the patient's friend or relative social shutdown. Or maybe just let me assure you, one of the blissful moments that your body cells are not already impossible to mitigate your death.

But in all chairs philosophy can not change the sad truth of the permanent cancer treatment: the temptation of false hope is immoral.

More great WIRED stories