Controversy
Questions have been raised about the quality and neutrality of the articles in Healthline. One critic noted that a Healthline article about a new drug used promotional language, copied from the drug-maker's press release, neglected to cite adverse side effects, and framed the drugs claimed benefits in misleading language not correctly representing the evidence reported in a classical peer-reviewed medical journal.
Other critics have noted:
• headlines that exaggerate the substance of the article;
• inadequate journalistic and scientific skepticism, when reporting "news";
• failure to balance quotes from vested interests with quotes from interviews of independent sources;
• reported medical "news" that had not yet validated by publication in a peer-reviewed journal;
• implied clinical applicability for developments not yet so scientifically validated;
• failure to balance reports of claimed theoretical benefits, of a new treatment, with a corresponding report of the associated cost or required frequency of treatment;
• failure to cite sources;
• failure to link to source of studies cited in the article;
Hmm.