OPINION: Medical researchers in Tanzania must not shun journalists

Medical scientists cannot avoid the media. This was the key message that branded my piece last week on why leveraging mainstream media and the internet was key for effective communication to the public in Tanzania.

The message came along with a promise that I would explain this week what it takes to confront a journalist. Today, I fulfill that promise.

But, before I do so, one may very well ask if it matters to the man in the street whether or not researchers do work with the media. Yes, it does matter, I can rightly attest!

Think of it this way... A number of people in your community have suffered bouts of fever, vomiting, headaches and general malaise. Yet, when they went to a nearby health facility, common medical tests could not rule out any specific disease.

Then, as time goes by, the number of people reporting to the facility with a similar pattern of symptoms goes on rising. But, in that community, the standard approaches of treatment suggest that patients with such symptoms as fever, vomiting, headaches and body malaise could have common diseases such as malaria or dengue fever.

Unfortunately, it so happens that the diagnostic tools that the community is equipped with cannot detect diseases beyond those that are generally known. This is when researchers step in.

The researchers would help to establish if the community members could be infected by viruses or bacteria that had not yet been identified, but that could in the future form the basis for improving diagnostic supplies in that area.

There are three things that researchers could do to keep the government and the community informed: and that’s research, publish and communicate...

In countries such as Tanzania where governments usually supply diagnostic tools to communities depending on what current research dictates – or, rather, informs – some diseases may go undetected for so long if there were no data or information that can inform government authorities to make relevant interventions.

If the researchers, for instance, knew there was a risk of Lassa fever in your area – yet they researched on it and kept mum – that would be considered a great disservice to the community and the nation at large.

There have been scenarios where journalists approached researchers to elaborate on such aspects. Yet, it turned into a game of hide-and-seek. Indeed, some researchers have complained that they fear being misquoted by journalists.

It remains debatable if the cause of ‘misleading information’ in newspapers is solely a journalist’s fault, or if the researchers could also be blamed for not fully informing journalists who have to inform communities in due course.

It would, therefore, be prudent for researchers not to panic when approached by journalists on health issues in their community.

Why not find out who the journalists are, and what they may want to raise? Why not get back to them in case you promised to do so?

Just in case you (the researcher) were called and could not speak at first, try calling the journalist back when you can talk calmly about the issues raised – or explain why you are unable to speak to them.

If a journalist has presented research information that is new to you, why not call the journalist back when you have seen the research – and you can then give them an informed response?

Bear in mind that journalists work to meet deadlines and never say anything that may harm you professionally or personally, or breach confidentiality.

Never get angry, or lose control of the situation. Journalists don’t have to be the enemy. As far as I know, many journos love getting clear comments – and on time.

But, above all: always bear in mind that you as a researcher have the responsibility of ensuring that correct information reaches the community.