Based on the observation that health related information is often distorted and exaggerated in comparison with the scientific statements originally published in peer-reviewed articles, the authors demonstrate in this paper that the exaggeration originates in academic press releases and is therefore not the sole responsibility of the journalists. To demonstrate this, the authors rely on a corpus of press releases published by 20 UK universities and the associated scientific articles and news stories. They compared their content by manually coding the news stories according to whether they give advice to readers to change behaviour, make causal claims drawn from correlational results, or over-sell the results of animal research as a promised cure for humans' diseases. They discover that hype in news outlets is higher when the associated press releases already contain exaggeration. They are optimistic about this finding since the problem is not solely dependent on journalists and seems to be easier to solve rather than changing the working practices and cultures of journalists at independent news organisations. Indeed, press releases could be a primary target to improve the accuracy of science news. Researchers have a responsibility here and are in a position to ensure that there are no overstatements when interacting with press officers, especially as the occurrence of exaggeration is not significantly associated with greater media coverage, compared to press releases without exaggeration. Although exposure of scientific results in the mass media is appropriate and useful for the diffusion of scientific information, even accurate claims are not sufficient for the public readership to make well-informed choices in health related issues, because the opinion and the behaviour of the different publics are complex and many factors are involved. But authors argue here that appropriate claims in academic press releases are a necessary starting point.