Grrr!! BBC sweeping statement!

[Northerner]

They've just had a report on mentoring people at risk from diabetes on Breakfast. The reporter said 'Because of poor lifestyles 2.5 million people in the UK have diabetes...'

Grrrrr!!!! 😡

 

[veganlass]

Just watched it. Typical BBC.

It makes me sad as a disabled person I am unable to exercise!! .

 

[Northerner]

Just watched it. Typical BBC.

It makes me sad as a disabled person I am unable to exercise!! .

I've emailed them:

Your reporter on the diabetes report said that 2.5 million people in the UK have diabetes because of bad lifestyles. Lifestyle has nothing to do with Type 1 diabetes – I was due to run a marathon the week I was diagnosed. Please differentiate between Type 1 and 2. Not everyone gets diabetes (of either type) because they have a poor lifestyle so please don’t use such sweeping statements.

 

[Caroline]

SOmetimes people only hear and see what they want to see, although I think this is lazy reporting because no one could bebothered to do the prper research.

 

[Northerner]

SOmetimes people only hear and see what they want to see, although I think this is lazy reporting because no one could bebothered to do the prper research.

What makes it worse is that they had Barbara Young on from Diabetes UK. I wonder if they'd shown her the report before interviewing her?

 

[Copepod]

The same story, about a study in Norfolk researching the effects of people with type 2 diabetes acting as mentors to help those at risk of developing type 2 diabetes improve lifestyle and lessen their chances of developing the condition, was much better reported on BBC news website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12764852 and BBC Radio 4 Today programme (0722 on 22 March 2011 if you want to check on Listen Again http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/listen_again/default.stm).

 

[MargB]

I heard the Today programme and was impressed they did stress Type 2. Perhaps your earlier complaints made them amend their storyline? Caught the news at 8am on Radio 2 and they also said Type 2.

To be honest, I was impressed with the idea of mentoring and immediately thought of this forum and the support we give each other is mentoring by another name.

 

[Northerner]

I heard the Today programme and was impressed they did stress Type 2. Perhaps your earlier complaints made them amend their storyline? Caught the news at 8am on Radio 2 and they also said Type 2.

To be honest, I was impressed with the idea of mentoring and immediately thought of this forum and the support we give each other is mentoring by another name.

Ah, that's good then 🙂 It does bother me though that they do a story like this and say such things in the first place - they shouldn't need correcting, it shows a complete failure to understand the causes of diabetes, assuming bad lifestyle is the only cause and therefore it must be entirely preventable. Even suggesting all Type 2 is due to poor lifestyle is grossly innacurate.

 

[MargB]

That is true and I did think that. They didn't mention the chances of getting Type 2 if there is a family history of it but there again maybe they did in a very roundabout way! They were talking about someone who was diagnosed Type 2 when in their 50s and had no family history of the disease. However, the main thing was it was all about lifestyle which is unfair.

Also, delaying the onset of diabetes, I was told by doc it would happen sooner or later. OK, I wish it had been later and I was expecting it later but it was always going to happen.

 

[FM001]

The BBC never seem to get anything right with regards to diabetes.🙄

 

[Mark T]

The BBC never seem to get anything right with regards to diabetes.🙄

The BBC needs some new Science reporters/editors.

I haven't watched any BBC investigative or science programming since a few years ago when they had a program in which it was obvious to me (as someone who did have some experience of the subject) that they were stating only those facts that supported the point of view that they wanted to get across.

From someone outside it wouldn't of been obvious that they were being sparse with the truth.

It's a shame because I used to enjoy watching BBC Horizon in my teenage years, but these days I just can't see it in the same light.

 

[AlisonM]

To be fair, it's not just Aunty. The media as a whole has consistently misrepresented the data on many subjects, including Diabetes. In this sound-byte world of ours few folk have time for accurate facts. So it is that all diabetics are lazy and fat, all addicts are violent criminals and all teenagers are thugs needing ASBOs. 'We' are moving so fast that 'we' have no time to spare on thinking so these days 'we' like our news and views pre-digested so 'we' don't have to think about it. Quite what we can do to redress the balance is beyond me I'm afraid. Keep sending the emails and teach our young to think for themselves perhaps?

 

[fruitloaf]

I agree that they should have differentiated between the types but really the point of the report was to highlight lifestyle changes. The aim being to reduce the number of people who develop type 2 diabetes. If they had talked about genetic predisposition then this would have defeated the object of the scheme. It's easy to criticise, but when you have 2 minutes to describe a campaign you have to keep the message clear and some generalisations are inevitable.

 

[mcdonagh47]

I've emailed them:

I think you will find the statement you attributed to the BBC ('Because of poor lifestyles 2.5 million people in the UK have diabetes...') is substantially correct. There are 2.8 million dmers in the UK - 2.5 T2s and 300,000 T1s. So the statement about the 2.5 million was specifically referring to T2 diabetics and automatically EXCLUDED T1s.

 

[Northerner]

I agree that they should have differentiated between the types but really the point of the report was to highlight lifestyle changes. The aim being to reduce the number of people who develop type 2 diabetes. If they had talked about genetic predisposition then this would have defeated the object of the scheme. It's easy to criticise, but when you have 2 minutes to describe a campaign you have to keep the message clear and some generalisations are inevitable.

I wasn't criticising the scheme at all, I think it's an excellent idea. I was objecting to the statement that said every diabetic in the country got diabetes because of a bad lifestyle, as though (as I've already said) it is entirely avoidable for every single person. It was an unnecessary and wholly inaccurate remark that didn't need to be made.

 

[Northerner]

I think you will find the statement from the BBC is substantially correct. There are 2.8 million dmers in the UK - 2.5 T2s and 300,000 T1s. So the statement about the 2.5 million was specifically referring to T2 diabetics and automatically EXCLUDED T1s.

They didn't say that in the report I watched.

 

[mcdonagh47]

They didn't say that in the report I watched.

They didn't need to - if they used the magic figiure of 2.5 million they are just talking about T2s by definition 😉

 

[AlisonM]

They didn't need to - if they used the magic figiure of 2.5 million they are just talking about T2s by definition 😉

And how many people listening would know that?

 

[Mark T]

And how many people listening would know that?

I belive you just re-made my point about the BBC selectively quoting facts but not always the whole truth.

 

[Northerner]

They didn't need to - if they used the magic figiure of 2.5 million they are just talking about T2s by definition 😉

I stand corrected. She does actually say, 'Bad lifestyles mean that 2.5 million people in the UK already have Type 2 diabetes'. It's still an incorrect statement though.