My initial reaction was "Well, doh!!" But, I still need to see their discussion of the results. I'm not sure what they were measuring or thought they were measuring using the endpoints they used.....

Well, that's what you'd expect to be part of the job description of the folk calling themselves *the science correspondent* and writing the article, no? You'd expect a bit of fact checking beyond the press release on their list serve.


There is a wealth of relevant physiology, biochemistry, endocrinology, and cell biology already known regarding the differences in metabolism of glucose and fructose

One explanation is that the folk writing these science columns don't know that. Another is that they don't think it's important to fact check because their readership isn't likely to know either.

That's the state of science journalism......or journalism in general, for all I know. Maybe the person who writes the auto column can't drive and writes the reviews based on advertising copy from car manufacturers.