Micro Bacteriain Showerhead - Case Study Example

Opportunistic Pathogens: A Critical Evaluation in the Media Reports The scientific research In order to determine the microbiological composition ofthe showerhead biofilms and waters, 45 showerhead sites around nine cities in the United States were studied to analyze its rRNA gene sequences. The rRNS genes obtained were amplified from the sample PCR, cloned the amplicons thus determining their sequences. These sequences were then identified phylogenetically. Test results showed that there is a high level concentration of non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) and other opportunistic human pathogens as represented by the sequences of significant microbial assemblages present in the showerhead biofilms observed. The most dominant microbacteria observed was Mycobacterium avium, with an average density of 32% in 20% of the showerhead biofilms observed. More than half (57%) of the collected showehead biofilm swabs and 78% of the swab extracts of M. avium’s ITS sequence was found identical to the clinical isolates associated with NTM disease. On the other hand, the sequence was rarely encountered from the water samples tested (Baumgartner, L. et al, 2009). The popular media reports As its major responsibility, the media has to let this health issue be known to the community. The scientific research was popularized by four news contributors from different media companies namely The Times, The Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail and BBC News. The news articles simply want to let the people know the danger that the microbacteria present in their showerhead biofilms may pose to their health. Alleyne, The Daily Telegraph’s Science Correspondent, reported that showerhead biofilms are “breeding grounds for bacteria.” He even quoted directly Prof. Norman Pace saying that “a face full of water when you first turn your shower on… may not be too healthy.” To provide more evidence to the report, another quote, indirectly this time from Leah Feazel, who is one of the researchers of the study, was added. A warning this time, Alleyne indirectly quotes Feazel saying that respiratory infections due to opportunistic pathogens may be avoided if showerheads will be changed every few months (Alleyne, 2009). A similar statement was used by David Derbyshire of the Daily Mail. However, aside from mentioning only a single kind of mycobacteria that is present in the showerhead biofilms, he added one of the observed microbacteria whose sequence was also observed in the research, the Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, which is said to kill 300 Britons a year (Derbyshire, 2009). Another news report stating the sam ideas with the first two articles appeared in The Times. Replacing the metal biofilm in showerheads with plastic ones is also recommended by the article based on the statements released by Prof. Norman Pace. The illnesses and diseases associated with the microbaceria were also brought up in the article. Putting the blame on metal showerhead biofilms was what the article portrayed specifically in the last part of the article (The Times, 2009). BBC News, on the other hand seemed to try its bets to appear neutral with the issue, yet it tries hard to grad the readers’ attention with its title, which may simply be sensationalized. The content of the article cited specifically M. avium and Pseudomonas aeruginosa to be the dominant microorganisms to cause illnesses and/or diseases to man that may be acquired in the showerhead biofilms. The article has become more passive as it discloses a quote from an HPA spokesperson saying that a further research is necessary in order to provide more evidence to the claim that the researcher said based on their study (BBC, 2009). The scientific research and the popular article Closely observing the scientific research and the news articles in the media, there is but a wide difference in the way the results of the study was presented. This may be a common situation since the scientific paper has to be presented in an accurate manner, precisely enumerating the various methods used and the theories along with the discussion of the research. News reporters, on the other hand, given the task of popularizing the contemporary issues in the biomedical science they are expected to be able to write them in a straightforward and effortless manner, making it more comprehensible for the masses. Nevertheless, they must not neglect the accuracy of the research. Significantly, the media provided some accurate figures that had resulted from the study – the prevalence of the opportunistic pathogens in the showerhead biofilms. There were, however, significant information that must be added based on the data gathered in the research. Generally, the manner in which the popular media had presented the study was somehow inflated, posing an alarm in its readers with the lack of significant and accurate data that are necessary. While all the news articles focus and associate Mycobacterium avium to respiratory problems, there were two who have included other microbacteria in which they have been known to cause respiratory diseases. BBC News included in its report that the study had also found a presence of yet another infectious disease causing bacteria, which is the Pseudomonas aeruginosa (BBC, 2009). However, it failed to convey that only a relatively small amount of which has been observed in the samples gathered by the study. Derbyshire, on the other hand, incorporated in his news report additional information saying “Another germ, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, also thrives in the black gunk that lines shower heads and taps. It kills around 300 Britons a year.” For a commoner who may have not read the primary source of the news, may assume that this perilous microorganism may have been observed in the study when in fact it was not. He may also create alarm when he says in his article that “One of the most infamous cases of waterborne infection, the deadly outbreak of Legionnaires disease in America in 1976, was caused by bacteria in shower heads.” Similar to BBC’s news report, although this may have been true, only a trivial of which was found in the resulted data (Derbyshire, 2009). Accuracy, which is an integral part in news conveying relevant information, has been neglected in some areas of the news reports popularizing the biomedical issues affecting the society. BBC and The Times failed to report an accurate data concerning the number of household sampled and the American states that were sampled. In BBC’s report, it claimed that there were a total of 50 different households sampled for the said study (BBC, 2009), yet in reality, there were only 45 of them that were swabbed in order to identify the rRNA sequence of the microbateria present in the household showerheads (Baumgartner, L. et al, 2009). According to The Times, however, there were “ten American regions” sampled for data gathering (The Times, 2009) though there were only nine cities that were identified for sampling (Baumgartner, L. et al, 2009). Furthermore, stating that “More than 20 per cent had significant amounts of M. avium (The Times, 2009)” may be considered inaccurate. Directly quoting the primary source, “Sequences indicative of M. avium, the most noteworthy potential pathogen detected, were identified in 20% of showerhead swabs overall, with an average density of 32% of the library when observed.” Numbers on the data collection process are critical since they are closely observed in analyzing and interpreting the prevalence of the organisms observed. In this case, negligence is the most unnecessary and the least expected circumstance particularly in popularizing a biomedical studies concerning health. References: Baumgartner, L. et al. Opportunistic pathogens enriched in showerhead biofilms. PNAS 2009; Published online before print September 14, 2009. Shower heads harbour germs that cause lung disease, study finds. The Times, September 15, 2009. Taking showers can make you ill. BBC News, September 15, 2009. Derbyshire, D. How clean is your shower head? The peril lurking in your cubicle could be bad for your health.Daily Mail, September 15, 2009. Alleyne, R. Daily shower could be hazardous. The Daily Telegraph, September 15, 2009. Read More