Ben Goldacre is exasperated . . . He is irked, vexed, bugged, ticked off at sometimes inadvertent (because of stupidity) but more often deliberate deceptions perpetrated in the name of science. And he wants you, the reader, to share his feelings . . . There's more here than just debunking nonsense. The appearance of ‘scienceiness': the diagrams and graphs, the experiments (where exactly was that study published?) that prove their efficacy are all superficially plausible, with enough of a "hassle barrier" to deter a closer look. Dr. Goldacre (a very boyish-looking 36-year-old British physician and author of the popular weekly Bad Science column in The Guardian) shows us why that closer look is necessary and how to do it . . . You'll get a good grounding in the importance of evidence-based medicine . . . You'll learn how to weigh the results of competing trials using a funnel plot, the value of meta-analysis and the Cochrane Collaboration. He points out common methodological flaws . . . ‘Studies show' is not good enough, he writes: ‘The plural of "anecdote" is not data.'” Katherine Bouton, The New York Times
“British physician and journalist Ben Goldacre takes aim at quack doctors, pharmaceutical companies and poorly designed studies in extraordinary fashion in Bad Science. He particularly loathes (most) nutritionists, especially Scottish TV personality Gillian McKeith. To prove that her American Association of Nutritional Consultants membership isn't so impressive, Goldacre describes registering his dead cat Hettie for the same credentials online. Goldacre shines in a chapter about bad scientific studies by writing it from the perspective of a make-believe big pharma researcher who needs to bring a mediocre new drug to market. He explains exactly how to skew the data to show a positive result. 'I'm so good at this I scare myself,' he writes. 'Comes from reading too many rubbish trials.'” Rachel Saslow, The Washington Post
“Ben Goldacre, a British physician and author, has written a very funny and biting book critiquing what he calls "Bad Science.'' Under this heading he includes homeopathy, cosmetics manufacturers whose claims about their products defy plausibility, proponents of miracle vitamins, and drug companies and physicians who design faulty studies and manipulate the results . . . While it is a very entertaining book, it also provides important insight into the horrifying outcomes that can result when willful anti-intellectualism is allowed equal footing with scientific methodology.” Dennis Rosen, The Boston Globe
“I hereby make the heretical argument that it is time to stop cramming kids' heads with the Krebs cycle, Ohm's law, and the myriad other facts that constitute today's science curricula. Instead, what we need to teach is the ability to detect Bad ScienceBS, if you will. The reason we do science in the first place is so that ‘our own atomized experiences and prejudices' don't mislead us, as Ben Goldacre of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine puts it in his new book, Bad Science: Quacks, Hacks, and Big Pharma Flacks. Understanding what counts as evidence should therefore trump memorizing the structural formulas for alkanes.” Sharon Begley, Newsweek.com
“Dr. Ben Goldacre's UK bestseller Bad Science: Quacks, Hacks, and Big Pharma Flacks is finally in print in the USA, and Americans are lucky to have it. Goldacre writes a terrific Guardian column analyzing (and debunking) popular science reporting, and has been a star in the effort to set the record straight on woowoo ‘nutritionists,' doctors who claim that AIDS can be cured with vitamns, and vaccination/autism scares. Bad Science is more than just a debunking expose (though its that): it's a toolkit for critical thinking, a primer on statistics and valid study design, a guide to meta-analysis and other tools for uncovering and understanding truth . . . The book should be required reading for everyone who cares about health, science, and public policy.” BoingBoing.net
“One of the best books I've ever read. It completely changed the way I saw the world. And I actually mean it.” Tim Harford, author of The Undercover Economist
“Ben Goldacre lucidly, and irreverently, debunks a frightening amount of pseudoscience, from cosmetics to dietary supplements to alternative medicine. If you want to read one book to become a better-informed consumer and citizen, read Bad Science.” Sandeep Jauhar, author of Intern
“This is a much-needed book. Ben Goldacre shows uswith hysterical withow to separate the scam artists from real science. In a world of misinformation, this is a rare gem.” Timothy Ferriss, author of The 4-Hour Workweek
“Smart, funny, clear, unflinching: Ben Goldacre is my hero. Bad Science should be kicking up the dust on every high school science curriculum in America. ” Mary Roach, author of Stiff, Spook, and Bonk
“Ben Goldacre uses a brilliant mix of science and wit to challenge and investigate alternative therapists and the big pharmaceutical corporations. Bad Science is an invaluable tool for anybody who wants to protect themselves from the snake-oil salesmen of the twenty-first century. ” Simon Singh, author of Big Bang and Fermat's Last Theorem
British doctor Goldacre is in a tizzy and wants you to know about it. He's sick of unproven medical advice, homeopathic treatments, and poor pseudoscientific educational and nutritional programs. He writes the Guardian's "Bad Science" column and feels strongly about the healthy doses of misinformation floating around, buoyed by poorly conducted research studies. Explaining the meaning of randomized, double-blind, placebo studies, he directs his wrath at supplement hucksters past and present. Originally published in the UK, his book has been updated for American audiences—it features both UK and U.S. examples—and includes a chapter he was unable to publish previously because of a lawsuit. Funny and profane, Goldacre discusses the horror of U.S. pharmaceutical marketing campaigns, the value of evidence-based medicine, and how to lie with statistics. From vaccine scares to murder cases, there's something for everyone. VERDICT Great fun for science and statistics geeks, this is challenging in the best sense of the word. Recommended for public, academic, and medical libraries.—Elizabeth Williams, Washoe Cty. Lib. Syst., Reno, NV
British National Health Service physician Goldacre shoots down what he considers to be quackery.
This updated version of the UK edition, published in 2008, begins with the statement, "Homeopaths are morons." However, the author's real targets are not proponents of alternative medicine—although he considers their remedies to be no more effective than "sugar pills"—but the ignorance of the vast public who are led astray by media hype and advertisers. The author writes the weekly "Bad Science" column for The Guardian, which, like the book, is intended to help people "who are angry about the evils of the pharmaceutical industry and nervous about the role of profit in health care." While his dismissal of concerns about the use of MMR vaccine—an immunization shot against measles, mumps and rubella which many suspect may trigger autism in some children—are a bit cavalier, his purpose in writing is not to defend "big pharma" but to give the reader the tools to understand "how a health myth can be created, fostered, and maintained by the alternative medicine industry, using all the tricks on you, the public that big pharma uses on doctors." This edition includes an account of a libel suit filed against Goldacre and The Guardian, which was settled (in his favor) in 2008. The author had investigated the nefarious activities of a group of big-money entrepreneurs who had spread a conspiracy theory in South Africa. In order to market vitamins as a replacement for antiretroviral therapy in the treatment of AIDS, they circulated the big lie that the pharmaceuticals not only did not retard the disease but were responsible for its spread. For Goldacre, it is these "journalists and miracle cure merchants" who undermine people's understanding of the scientific basis for good medicine.
The author's attacks on alternative medicine are often misguided, but he provides a valuable service in exposing the countless examples of bad science being perpetrated throughout the medical community and in the press.