Breakthrough cure (for mice)

Abstract

Many a science writer has fantasized about capping a story with the headline “Good News for Sick Mice!” One of the toughest struggles is deciding how to cover a story that has produced tantalizing, even amazing, results in laboratory animals but could well be a total bust by the time it gets to humans.That issue came up in early July, when Elan Pharmaceuticals, an Irish company with laboratories in South San Francisco, announced a vaccine that is remarkably effective at treating Alzheimer's-like symptoms in a genetically engineered strain of mouse. These mice don't get Alzheimer's or severe mental impairment — or even the brain ‘tangles’ characteristic of the disease. They do, however, develop amyloid plaques, which are present in many, but not all, brains ravaged by Alzheimer's disease. The company's experimental vaccine vanquished the plaques, at least in a handful of mice. That result was published in Nature, and reporters were left to decide how to handle the announcement.The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times considered the news marginal enough to rate a few paragraphs buried deep in the paper. But many others took the bait and dusted off a word that's all but taboo among US science writers: “Breakthrough.” And television in particular attacked this story with relish. “We are going to begin tonight with the very best news there has been in many years, perhaps ever, about one of the most debilitating chronic diseases that haunts us,” Peter Jennings told his audience on ABC's World News Tonight. The report was long on excitement about this “breakthrough” and short on caution. It was also a bit confused on some of the basic facts, declaring that “one in 10 people who suffer from Alzheimer's is over 65.”We're going to benefit from this no matter whether it works in humansAnd that word “breakthrough” crept up in reports by the (London) Independent, the Sacramento Bee, and the Tampa Tribune. New Scientist didn't use the ‘B’ word, but reached instead for the even more dangerous ‘C’ word by declaring: “A cure for Alzheimer's might be within the grasp of researchers at a Californian company.” The Express (London) managed to use both “cure” and “breakthrough” in its opening paragraphs.Christine Gorman at Time Magazine was much more philosophical about the “possible breakthrough.” Under the headline “Hope Meets Hype,” Gorman said “This is the hardest kind of story for me to write. It's about real advances in basic research on Alzheimer's.” She went on to describe the horrors of the disease — and the real limitations of this kind of research. Her sober, albeit colorless, conclusion is, “The most important thing to take away from this research news is that it's a ‘proof of concept’, as scientists call it.”The New York Times mixed equal parts of optimism and caution in its story, which ran deep in the paper. The report quoted an enthusiastic official from the Alzheimer's Association and then declared “This is the first time the association has expressed optimism about any pharmaceutical development in treating or preventing the disease.” But to dampen that excitement, the report also noted, “It remains to be seen if the compound will produce the same effects in people. Indeed, it remains to be seen if it improves cognition even in mice, which is difficult to measure.”One paper managed to strike a magic balance — putting the story on the front page without overselling the results. The Wall Street Journal report had this strong lead: “When a researcher at a small California drug company first suggested vaccinating people against Alzheimer's disease, his fellow scientists thought the idea nutty enough to put it on an office bulletin board of outlandish comments.” The story then proceeded to weave this personable tale in with a broader development: several drug companies are gambling on products that could affect amyloid plaques in Alzheimer's patients.The Irish Times noted apparent serendipity in the timing of Elan's news. The paper reported that, earlier in the week, the pharmaceutical company had been publicly rebuked by the US Securities and Exchange Commission for accounting practices, “which, it felt, inflated reported earnings.” The mouse announcement apparently stemmed a slide in the company's stock value triggered by the SEC letter.Of course, nobody ended up declaring that the whole business is simply good news for sick mice. But a writer for the San Francisco Chronicle settled on the next best thing — a metaphor that sounds encouraging yet is utterly ambiguous. The report called the results “a new turn” in the battle against Alzheimer's. The metaphor is particularly apt for California drivers, who are accustomed to driving on mountainous roads with seemingly endless truns and bends.