You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.09 AVERAGE
4.09 AVERAGE
A real eye opener and lightly humorous to boot, I would recommend this to everyone who has even just an interest in science.
This is something that’s been recommended to me on and off over the years and now I understand why, because it was fascinating.
There’s nothing more I love in a book than for it to be not only well written, but engaging. And this book had a really engaging style of narration, which I find authors sometimes struggle to do with nonfiction. Here, it managed to juggle the facts, personal opinion, and snark commentary in a way that just worked for me. It also tried its hardest to be fair and not undermine anything unnecessarily, it had a good balance for me and the arguments and information were always presented well. It was thoroughly researched and explained clearly.
At no point did I feel too far out of my depth, the book took its time to explain things in a way I found accessible and easy to understand which I loved. There’s nothing worse than reading a book that thinks it’s smarter than you, and that makes you feel stupid. Goldacre pushed his ego aside to accommodate the everyday reader, which I’m thankful for because it’s been a hot minute since science and academic papers have been on my mind.
It broached a range of interesting topics throughout, half of which I’d never even considered. To be fair, it was published in 2008 when I was a literal child but some of the things still resonated with the modern day world. I’d be fascinated in an updated version of this book.
One thing I will say that brought my rating down, is that that last 40% or so of this felt completely different to how it began. As the chapters got lengthier and more political, my interest did wane as it felt a lot more complex to keep up with. The writing took less of a comical approach and it made for a quite dry reading experience, I felt like I really had to push through to the end. I was a bit confused. It definitely fely to me as if the first portion of the book was a lot more enjoyable.
There’s nothing more I love in a book than for it to be not only well written, but engaging. And this book had a really engaging style of narration, which I find authors sometimes struggle to do with nonfiction. Here, it managed to juggle the facts, personal opinion, and snark commentary in a way that just worked for me. It also tried its hardest to be fair and not undermine anything unnecessarily, it had a good balance for me and the arguments and information were always presented well. It was thoroughly researched and explained clearly.
At no point did I feel too far out of my depth, the book took its time to explain things in a way I found accessible and easy to understand which I loved. There’s nothing worse than reading a book that thinks it’s smarter than you, and that makes you feel stupid. Goldacre pushed his ego aside to accommodate the everyday reader, which I’m thankful for because it’s been a hot minute since science and academic papers have been on my mind.
It broached a range of interesting topics throughout, half of which I’d never even considered. To be fair, it was published in 2008 when I was a literal child but some of the things still resonated with the modern day world. I’d be fascinated in an updated version of this book.
One thing I will say that brought my rating down, is that that last 40% or so of this felt completely different to how it began. As the chapters got lengthier and more political, my interest did wane as it felt a lot more complex to keep up with. The writing took less of a comical approach and it made for a quite dry reading experience, I felt like I really had to push through to the end. I was a bit confused. It definitely fely to me as if the first portion of the book was a lot more enjoyable.
This was a very interesting look at the lies, tricks, and deception that are used by both the "alternate" healing methods, and the pharmaceutical producers. The book was designed to teach the reader how to recognize "good science" and distinguish it from "bad science," so that informed decisions can be made that are based on a careful analysis of quality of the research being done. This book was eye opening and informative. Dr. Goldacre writes with a sense of humor that made the book fun, but he also has extreme arrogance that can be annoying in some places.
informative
medium-paced
The information in this book is very interesting but the way in which the information is conveyed means the book annoyingl condescending at times. There's a sense of Goldacre being the smartest person in the room, every single room
I really wanted to like this more that I did. I like the premise as I enjoy debunking and misuse of statistics stuff, and some sections were very interesting and contained things I wasn't previously aware of. However the overall tone slid into patronising and 'aren't the general public stupid' a bit too much. Also could have done with a bit more humour that wasn't just "isn't that person an idiot?"
I'll give this four stars for how informative it was to someone who has not taken a stats or biology class and has never read the author's blog. I did feel he was too condescending and ranted a bit much at times. I still found it valuable fodder for what to look at when reading about a medical study, what factors can play into results and common ploys made by the pharmaceutical industry.
British doctor Goldacre's criticism of the science put forth by complementary and alternative medicine, nutritionists, drug companies, politicians, journalists, Brain Gym, cosmetics companies, AIDS dissidents, etc. It is written by someone from the UK, and therefore is not America-centric. However, I think a lot of what Goldacre says about the UK also applies to America.
My favorite thing that I learned from this book was regression to the mean. Also, I laughed a lot when he talked about people's blood 'drying out.' He advises that statistics provided to the public should be useful. For example when someone says 50% MORE DEADLY! More deadly than what? How deadly is it actually? How many people died? He advises use of your common sense. He also says really, you don't have to be a rocked scientist to call somebody on bad science. This is true.
Good book. Recommended. You can read more of his writing at http://www.badscience.net/
My favorite thing that I learned from this book was regression to the mean. Also, I laughed a lot when he talked about people's blood 'drying out.' He advises that statistics provided to the public should be useful. For example when someone says 50% MORE DEADLY! More deadly than what? How deadly is it actually? How many people died? He advises use of your common sense. He also says really, you don't have to be a rocked scientist to call somebody on bad science. This is true.
Good book. Recommended. You can read more of his writing at http://www.badscience.net/
challenging
funny
informative
fast-paced
I would have given it 4 and a half if he hadn't done the weird autism tangent in the mmr chapter.
Drier than I thought it was going to be. Probably best to read a section at a time between other books, which would've kept me more engaged.