Bad Science

This is a wonderful, angry, ranty book that educates and entertains, and ultimately leaves you sad that the world is the way it is, and wanting to change it.I have read some good works on critical thinking and on science, and this book is right up there with the best of them. Ben Goldacre works in the NHS and the science he is talking about is unashamedly the science of healthcare - but the points he makes about understanding scientific reporting and spotting quackery applies in other fields too.Indeed it was very refreshing to read a book attacking bad science, and defending reason that focussed on such real world and downright useful subjects as how to answer someone who thinks MMR jabs cause autism, or who thinks eating spinach will oxygenate your blood.I thought I was usually reasonably good at spotting bad science, but putting the book down and picking up today's paper I was immediately struck by two stories I would normally have quicky forgotten, and was left suspecting that both are very inaccurately reported.Bad science is all around us, and in this book you can sharpen your skills at spotting and refuting bad arguments. The only people who will hate this book are people who think that "there are more things in heaven and earth..." and thus we should never discount homeopathy (or crystals, or tarot or whatever) just in case they work by some mechanism we do not know.(And the message of the book to those people is - fair enough. But there is simply no evidence that the *do* work at all).The only down sides of this book are the writing style. It is open and amusing, but sometimes some people might feel it grating a little. I didn't - I liked it, but I would understand if others felt differently.Moreover, there writing was sometimes a tad opaque. I found myself re-reading some paragraphs because the book was so chatty that sometimes the author repeated himself and at other times he seemd to assume his point was clear before he had quite finished writing it. It is a minor criticism, because for the most part the author has done an admirable job of making science and the scientific method clear and understandable.One last criticism - had I been explaining the material in this book, I would have covered much sooner the issues of prabability and chance, and the point that even where there is no effect to be discovered, 1 in 20 experiments attempting to show the effect (or rather, to disprove there is no effect) will come up with positive results merely by chance.He does mention this in a very good chapter on statistics. It is just that it was relevant earlier, and even when mentioned it is not a point he labours.Again a very minor criticism for a very good, readable and enjoyable work that is thoroughly recommended.

Having studied biology and chemistry at A-level, while I'm far from an expert, I'm probably more knowledgeable about science than the average person on the street. And I'm certainly not one to panic about whatever the Daily Mail's decided to claim causes cancer this week, or to put my faith in homeopathic remedies, so I felt like this book might be preaching to the converted. Instead, I found it a bit of a revelation just how unscrupulous some providers or both traditional and alternative remedies can be and just how bad huge swathes of science journalism actually are.This is far from a ranty polemic. While the author clearly has his own views, he puts his faith in research rather than opinion, and subjects everything from cancer treatments to detox regimes to the same level of scrutiny, starting from the principal that properly conducted experiments are the bedrock of all medicine. Throughout, he really shows his working. By the end, if you've been paying attention, you'll not just have learnt about specific examples of "bad science," but learnt what a good study should look like and the tricks people use. This isn't rooted in cynicism - far from it. The author is willing to give everything a chance, as long as there's strong research to back it up. And as a result, he scrutinises both medical journals and magazine articles and carries out his own bits of mini-research.This was all very compelling. It's nice to read a book that actually teaches you something and that combines this with a bit of humour and some good storytelling. I felt that this should be taught in schools as part of both science and critical thinking.I had a few complaints: though he was generally balanced and likable, the author occasionally came across as a little smug, and showed far too much disdain towards "humanities graduates." The book was slightly overlong and repeated a few key points over and over. Though I mostly enjoyed it, I found some parts to be a bit of a slog.Still, this is a must read for anyone who realises that newspaper headlines about disease and the claims of some alternative medicine purveyors seem equally dodgy, but don't yet have the tools or knowledge to pick these arguments apart.

I liked the careful examination of the bad science examples. This should be mandatory reading for all medics, pharmacists and journalists. Keep up the good fight exposing the quacks and snake oil sales people.

Clinical Research and Evidence Based Medicine to a level that everyone should understand and use in their daily health decisions

I've just started reading it and I cannot stop. It is written in an understandable language with many jokes added by the author. A leisure reading that will also open your mind to correct ways of thinking.

Great read, logical, to the point, and brings up loads of valid information. My issues- Ben is skewed toward treating ills with pharmaceuticals whereas I'm coming to believe that lifestyle/functional medicine that looks at lifestyle issues first is the direction medicine needs to go in. Change your crappy diet first, then throw drugs at symptoms if necessary. Issue #2- in a nod to changing diet, he states that most people know what food is good for them. I'd beg to differ. No they don't. The vast majority of grocery store aisles are packed with processed food industry junk. The government, the educational system and the medical system all promote a diet heavy on crap. Official diabetes association advice still recommends “healthy whole grains” and keep injecting that insulin. Brilliant. When official advice leads you down the road to chronic disease, then you have to assume that most people DON'T know what to eat. Real food with no ingredients labels vs processed, carb-laden junk that we're surrounded with and told to eat. What are most people going to pick? And mostly because they're addicted to it.Ben, if you haven't already, read Denise Minger's book Death by Food Pyramid. She's another that looks at the evidence and presents a very well-documented case for diet change first. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

Il devait avoir une obligation de lire cette livre qui expose les mythes sur des pratique douteuse de certains dans la monde de Pharma, medicines douce et des Statistiques truqués. Il procède par types, couvrante des remèdes comme le homéopathie, ou, il lance un défis au fabricante de démontré en labo son efficacité. Il traite de fumisterie, en nous expliquant que les fabricantes devais l'attaquer en justice, mais cinq ans après toujours pas de dépôt de plainte. Pourquoi? Par ce que il faudrait démontre en labo que ça marche. Quelque chose qu’ il ne peut pas faire car il ne marche que en tant de placebo. Puis, il nous monte la manipulation des statistiques, ses stats qui sont destiné aux docteurs aux hôpitaux et nous. Une fois finies avec ce chapitre vous ne regarderais pus jamais un stat pareil. EG. lidl nous dit dans son pub, meilleur chaînes de magasins 5 ans en succession. On prend cette info pour acquis car il est a la télé. Et, on se pose pas la question, voté par qui? Leurs employées? Il parle des stats qui montre un efficacité des certaines médocs avec un tôt de efficacité hors normes. Il s’averre que ses stats sont vrai mais, ont étais réaliser avant 1980, le labo oublie ce détail et, bien sur depuis l’efficacité de ce produit a étais trouver d’être inefficace bien que toujours sur la marché. On fais un tour en Afrique ou un charlot Allemande a provoquer la mort des milliers des gens qui ont étais convaincu par lui d’abandonner leurs traitement classique pour des traitement a base d’herbes qu’il vendait a prix fort.L’individu a quand même dupé le gouvernent de l’Afrique de sud qui a l’autorisé son utilisation dans la traitement de cancer.Il y a trop de sujets a couvrir, mais j’espère vous avoir mis l’ eau a la bouche.

Well written book by knowledgeable author with references to support his statements. As a scientist I know how much effort it takes to be a researcher and most of all how to survive financial, moral and psychological crisis. Sometimes we as researchers succumb to these stresses and are forced to practise "Bad Science". This book is a must read to have an insight that how these mistakes (Which seems small) lead to bigger blunders. Everyne should read this book irrespective of the field of study. In fact, Bad Science should be a part of high school curriculum. Take home message from this book is, authenticate the source of information, don't believe in any statement blindly, this applies not only in science but in every field of life.