Bad Science

This is a very enjoyable, readable and highly informative book dealing constructively with a number of high profile subjects, primarily related to health and well-being, that have been vigorously manipulated by elements of society for selective gain. However, Ben Goldacre presents a very analytical approach to science, this is a pity in the respect that he tends to overlook the 'wholeness of nature', which is now starting to be understood by the scientific community with respect to the limitations that it reveals are inherent in purely analytical approaches.

The book seeks to inform the reader about how some individuals, companies, governments and global corporations successfully go about the misuse of science to deceive and defraud the public at large by the unscrupulous manipulation of opportunity for the purpose of maximising their personal gain.

At its core the book aims to identify and to some extent address the prevailing dominance of non-scientific thinking in the `public mind' by encouraging a greater understanding of science and its role in the search for truth.

Ben Goldacre constructively discusses the scant real evidence for justifiable belief in the doctrines of many of the popular alternative therapies and the associated approaches to health and wellbeing currently in vogue for society. He demonstrates how aspects of these doctrines are purposefully promoted for none other than creation of personal wealth for the few at the expense of the majority, where expense is defined in terms of financial, health and life costs. At the same time he recognises and explains elements of truth existing in such beliefs and relates these to the significance of achieving states of mind conducive to the life styles being sought - this can be related to being in harmony with your environment. There is an interesting section on the Placebo effect and the impact that it can have in creating the impression that interventions of all kinds are being effective, where in fact the benefit is most likely related to be changes in state brought about by related changes in attitudes of mind.

The book cites, alternative therapies, school staff and pupil indoctrination, instances of manipulation of public concerns and scaremongering as examples of where `Bad Science' is used to direct public belief, create fashionable trends, for the purpose of increasing the power base of the few.
There is also significant coverage of the part played by much of the media in actively and irresponsibly misleading the public about topical issues of concern; in the case of the book, by promotion of ideas that have little basis in science and by the misrepresentation of statistics. A role quite opposite to that expected of the media by the general public, who tend to look to the media as a source of protection from abuses of power. However, it is a role much to be expected in the light of the very tight control over the media that results from ownership being in the hands of a very select few, themselves a part of the very power base from which the public might think it is being protected.

The BBC, amongst others of common knowledge, comes in for frequent criticism. This is not surprising. The change in the way that the BBC presents `news' and the significant drop in the quality of its content over the past few decades is obvious for all to see. The corporation has tragically become just another example of an institution being a pawn in the hands of its own power hungry administration seeking to maximise their own wealth at the expense of the taxpayer; with one major difference, in its case it does not even have to deceive people to get them to part with their money, it just gets given it in the form of the excessive TV licence fee. What a disaster! Especially when considered in the light of the high aspirations existing at the time of its formation and during the early stages of its existence.

A fantastic non-fiction page turner (0/1 people found this helpful)

This a a very interesting and very well written discussion of "bad science" in the media. I do not normally read non-fiction books for enjoyment but this book is a real page turner.

Errata? (0/3 people found this helpful)

Generally very good however the stats examples on pages 269-271 are fuzzy and unclear - e.g. no clear working for example 2 - how does it relate to answer 1?. How do we reach the figures "[...] wrong eighty-six times out of a hundred [...]" and "[...] ninety-seven times out of a hundred."? Confusing.

Quite a disappointment. (0/1 people found this helpful)

Sadly, because this book (like Prof. Dawkins' 'The God Delusion') is more emotional rant than measured reason, it is likely to have the opposite the effect to that intended: it will make sceptics of science even more sceptical.

Which is a shame because, in general, I am convinced of the truth of Dr Goldacre's (and Prof. Dawkins') arguments. But then I was convinced of such before I read the books.

Quite a disappointment.

A Primer In Evaluating Evidence (1/1 people found this helpful)

Next time you are in the London Science Museum, ask why it is that evidence-based medicine, "the ultimate applied science, [containing] some of the cleverest ideas from the past two centuries, [having] saved millions of lives ... has never had a single exhibit on the subject in the London's Science Museum". This is the thought that occurred to me when this fact was pointed out in Ben Goldacre's book. This glaring fact is a good example of the limited exposure even educated people get to the subject of evaluating the evidence for scientific claims and the more general subject of thinking scientifically.

It is hard to think of the kind of reader who would not benefit from this book. Ben Goldacre is a doctor-journalist-broadcaster who writes the "Bad Science" column in the Guardian newspaper. His goal in both that column and this book is to help people separate scientific wheat from pseudoscientific chaff. Although he spends considerable time going through a myriad of ideas himself, what is most beneficial in this book is that he supplies the reader the tools to think scientifically so that by the time you finish this book, you also should be analyse claims critically by yourself.

The ideas Goldacre tackles head-on include the "foolishness of quacks..., the credence they are given in the mainstream media, the tricks of the £30 billion food supplements industry, the evils of the £300 billion pharmaceuticals industry, the tragedy of science reporting..." At times, this list can seem a little idiosyncratic and his arguments turn into rants although generally he is aware of this himself. This flaw, if one can call it that, is easily forgivable as one begins to realize that level of sheer nonsense that markets itself as science. A neat example is the whole field of nutrition where - did you know? - anyone can legally call themselves a nutritionist, this in itself accounting for the deluge of contradictory advice given to the public by these so-called "experts". The last chapter, "The Media's MMR Hoax" should put that whole issue to rest as it reveals how the "controversy" existed purely in the media and not in the science.

A chapter or two are devoted to explaining the cognitive illusions psychologists have discovered that explain why even the smartest of us can see patterns where there really are none. Related to this are misuses of statistics that are sometimes unintentional but which again give the impression of a positive result when really there is no difference from chance. Knowing these things can help us be on the guard against them when we are confronted with interesting or extraordinary claims.

The parts of the book dealing with statistics and the methodology of experiment are terrific: Goldacre covers simply and clearly both why these things are important and how to understand them. It is the kind of essential information often missing from books that attempt to combat pseudoscience. Concepts covered include how to conduct a scientific trial (the need for randomization, blinding and control), relative risk versus absolute risk, sensitivity, specificity, predictive value and more. Indeed, I wish he had gone into it in more depth. I guess I'll have to follow up this section with "How to Read a Paper" by Professor Greenalgh (Goldacre's recommendation).

This is a book which is incredibly useful for everyone but truly essential reading for anyone who communicates scientific and/or health related information.

Ben Goldacre

Reader Reviews:

Bad Science - Good Read (0/0 people found this helpful)

A fantastic non-fiction page turner (0/1 people found this helpful)

Errata? (0/3 people found this helpful)

Quite a disappointment. (0/1 people found this helpful)

A Primer In Evaluating Evidence (1/1 people found this helpful)

Similar Products

Categories