Shane Hegarty trawls through the myriad of medical "discoveries" which bombard us daily, and asks are they really good for our health?
Reading the newspaper can seriously confuse your health. In recent weeks you could have read how alcohol makes you slim, but that too much drinking makes you fat. But then there was news that being overweight might actually be good for your heart, which makes it heartening to read reports that chocolate is good for you too.
Health stories come so thick and fast that it's hard to know what to believe. Other recent stories included news that taking antibiotics for six weeks might double your chances of a chest infection the next year, that decaf coffee could be more dangerous than caffeinated, and that sauerkraut helps fight bird flu.
We learned that exercise is good for the brain, but that too much will dumb you down. But we were then told that classical music makes you more receptive to learning. So, if you listen to classical music while working out too much, do they cancel each other out?
Reading the daily reports of new scientific "breakthroughs", wacky research findings and latest diets can give the reader a headache. Not only is the information often contradictory, but you don't know whether the information is reliable in the first place.
Often, stories might be written based on a press release, not the actual research paper. Sometimes, a full research paper mightn't even exist or, if it does, has not yet been peer-reviewed or published.
The research might involve only a small group of people, the results might be taken out of context or a brand might have commissioned the research and released results that make them look good.
A snappy headline ("Fat is Good for You!") is likely to receive more attention than the underlying research. Last year, for instance, plenty of space was given to research which claimed that watching Channel 4's Richard and Judy can boost your IQ, while reading is bad for you.
It turned out that the data was unpublished and the research methods had been questioned, but that wasn't allowed spoil a good story.
If it's confusing for the reader, it is often infuriating for those working in the health industry. Margot Brennan is public relations officer of the Irish Nutrition and Dietetic Institute, and says her job was created not just to give people correct information but to warn them about what is misleading.
"Journalists love these types of stories," she says. "Quite often I'll get a call about something and they'll be trying to make me say what they want to hear."
So many science stories are health-related, not just because it has a personal impact on the reader, but also because they can be made exciting. "Let's be honest about this, real science is boring. There's no sexiness or glitz about it compared to what the commercial world can put into something.
"Although, I don't mind that so much, as long as the story is balanced out by independent opinions," Brennan says.
A couple of stories in particular have really annoyed her over the past couple of years. She has spent a lot of effort trying to debunk the Atkins diet. ("Yes, you'll lose weight, but it's not a healthy diet to be on.")
Margot Brennan recommends that readers ask a few questions while they're reading a story. "Where's the story coming from? What publication is it out of? Are there references available? Are there commercial interests behind it?
"Is it put in the general context or are we expected to destroy all previous information on the subject? If the research was done abroad, how does it apply to Ireland?"
Usually, a story might have a slightly amusing twist to it. Christmas wouldn't be Christmas, for example, without the news items that tell us that booze is actually beneficial to our health.
Sometimes, it can be faddish, such as with the never-ending production line of diets. But occasionally, a confusion of information can be very serious. The MMR controversy, for instance, showed how flawed research, backed by an interest group, could infest the media and create enormous problems for health authorities across the world.
In that case, both the research and the reporting was flawed, with journalists often writing stories without having a full understanding of the facts.
Yet, once that became apparent, the stories telling us that the danger was over-stated came with far smaller headlines than those telling us our children might get autism.
"That story cost six or seven children's lives," remarks Dr John Murphy, editor of the Irish Medical Journal. He cites the MMR story as the prime example of a story that can get into the media and, from an incorrect assumption, lead to over-reaction and an ultimately fatal result.
"If something is sensational, it's more likely to make it into the papers. The media agenda is different to the medical agenda, although doctors have also used the media to their advantage and the reporting of smoking or binge-drinking has been very responsible."
Dr Murphy has recently been keeping count of medical stories in the press, and has concluded that "anything with sex is always popular".
But the real science is often ignored. "The best science and the biggest advances in medicine often slip in quietly."