And you wonder why

I remember this article from a week ago, saying that most people felt that cancer advice was constantly changing, and a load of scientists saying that simply wasn't true - it was single studies that keep proposing new ideas that confuse people

Is it any wonder? This is currently the Indie's top story - If that's a respectable paper, god knows how the tabloids will handle it

This is of course the problem - and the scientists questioned in the article were missing the point (or the BBC were performing yet another exercise in futility) - the media loves a new headline about cancer, I remember a few years ago when I read a story about trees causing cancer, and a month or so later read that trees were now good for you...it is dozy

Now it's not the scientists fault for researching and publishing their findings, but the media for reporting it all as actual conclusive proof - it's not, and it's hardly surprising people are highly sceptical of new cancer warnings in such an environment

But the scientists seem to misunderstand, as they say: their advice hasn't changed for over a decade - eat healthy, don't get fat and don't smoke - I don't think people ignore this advice as barmy, but most reports they will read will be in the Sunday health supplement and offer all sorts of weird opinions

It probably really doesn't matter, but I'm just pointing out this is really a non-story