February 21, 2016

Meta-Post: John Horgan Posts on Cancer, Etcetera

Cross-Check columns on cancer and related topics

Photo of lung cancer tumor: James Heilman, Wikimedia Commons.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American

This is a meta-post linking to posts I’ve written for this blog on cancer and related topics. If I'm missing any posts, please let me know.

Sorry, But So Far War on Cancer Has Been a Bust.

Cancer Establishment Admits We’re Getting Overtested and Overtreated.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Cancer Spending Higher in U.S. Than in Europe--and So Is Cancer Mortality.

Do Mammograms Kill More Women Than They Save?

Questioning Mammograms Versus "Torturing the Data."

Consumers Must Stop Insisting on Mammograms and Other Ineffective Cancer Tests.

ABC Reporter, National Football League Promote Mammograms While Experts Question Benefits.

Celebrities Should Inform Women about Risks as Well as Benefits of Mammograms.

When Mammograms Are Mandatory.

Why I Won't Get a Colonoscopy.

How Can We Curb the Medical-Testing Epidemic?

Maybe Now Americans Will Finally Get Affordable Care!

Bayes's Theorem: What's the Big Deal?

So Far, Big Data Is Small Potatoes.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American