Was he poisoned or not

This is getting almost confusing now. Yesterday one of my local papers had pictures of Yushchenko splashed all over the world section front page, headlining "Poisoned Politics" and "Dioxin in food 'a bid to kill me'".

Another one of my local papers had a tiny little article tucked away in the corner from Vienna reading "so far 'no evidence' of Yushchenko poison".

This morning news-google searching 'yushchenko poison' produces 1,600 results. The second result an old record from 7 December titled:

Doctors confirm Yushchenko poison claim.

On the same morning searching '"no evidence" yushchenko poison' produces 112 results, with more recent dates then just searching "yushchenko poison" turns out. The third search item, dated 8 December, reads:

No conclusive evidence Yushchenko poisoned, hospital says.

What does this all mean? Perhaps running the "poisoned" header sells more papers. I don't know. A lot of news outlets are going for broke with the dioxin theory, while at the same time reports are starting to creep through that doctors from the Viennese clinic treating Yushchenko have stated there is "no evidence of poison", that they have "only undertaken a descriptive diagnosis" and that the symptoms "do not correspond to the clinical image of an illness".