You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.09 AVERAGE
4.09 AVERAGE
hopeful
informative
medium-paced
While the stories discussed were interesting, and the scholarly diligence laudable, the narrative style came off as obnoxious at times. Perhaps a mismatch in sense of humour?
Masterly exposition on evidence based decision making and how it is perverted by many groups of organizations. This will be on my top 5 list of go to books...
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Very interesting read. A little out dated at this point
So, I finally read this.
The good: It's fun, it's breezy, it's fast and full of real-life examples. Also, I really decided to look into 'the nutricionism hoax' he mentions.
I really like his take on 'quacks', because he does not demonise them but instead chooses to show them as human beings that do human things. Like dowsing, you know - *whispers* We all do it.
The bad: Well, I could follow it, no prob, seeing as I already did statistics and scientific method courses at college. I don't know if all my friends could understand him, really. I guess I should check it out.
The ugly: Well, there is repetition, and ramming it in, and preaching to the converted. But it didn't bother me that much, really.
The good: It's fun, it's breezy, it's fast and full of real-life examples. Also, I really decided to look into 'the nutricionism hoax' he mentions.
I really like his take on 'quacks', because he does not demonise them but instead chooses to show them as human beings that do human things. Like dowsing, you know - *whispers* We all do it.
The bad: Well, I could follow it, no prob, seeing as I already did statistics and scientific method courses at college. I don't know if all my friends could understand him, really. I guess I should check it out.
The ugly: Well, there is repetition, and ramming it in, and preaching to the converted. But it didn't bother me that much, really.
This book is very important. Well, the ideas put forward in the book are hugely important. I started off chortling at the daft things that people believe but winded up feeling horribly impotent and miserable about how much damage is done and how much the media can fuel ignorance.
It's just not funny.
Ben Goldacre is a man I have lots of respect for. His mission is honourable.. To encourage transparency in the world of research.. To improve knowledge and understanding... To empower patients to make informed decisions. Bad Science is a good popular science book, giving an overview of the problems with science reporting and shows the scope of misrepresented facts and their very disturbing consequences.
The reason it's not 5 star brilliant I find hard to put my finger on. I agree with pretty much all the author says. It's the pitch and tone that's not quite hitting the mark. He can't decide whether to be a hard-hitting Dawkins-esque warrior of logic or a happy-go-lucky science munchkin and the result isn't a perfect balance. He's holding back. You can tell he's holding back. Seasoned cynics like myself want to meet him for a pint and watch him have a proper rant. It's just a little bit passive-aggressive.
I also found it a lot easier to read as a doctor of several years than I did as a baby medical student. The discrepancy here shows that it's probably aimed a little technical for a lay audience.
But why am I complaining? Ben Goldacre is an inspiration in the pursuit of understanding science and I hope his message gets out there.
It's just not funny.
Ben Goldacre is a man I have lots of respect for. His mission is honourable.. To encourage transparency in the world of research.. To improve knowledge and understanding... To empower patients to make informed decisions. Bad Science is a good popular science book, giving an overview of the problems with science reporting and shows the scope of misrepresented facts and their very disturbing consequences.
The reason it's not 5 star brilliant I find hard to put my finger on. I agree with pretty much all the author says. It's the pitch and tone that's not quite hitting the mark. He can't decide whether to be a hard-hitting Dawkins-esque warrior of logic or a happy-go-lucky science munchkin and the result isn't a perfect balance. He's holding back. You can tell he's holding back. Seasoned cynics like myself want to meet him for a pint and watch him have a proper rant. It's just a little bit passive-aggressive.
I also found it a lot easier to read as a doctor of several years than I did as a baby medical student. The discrepancy here shows that it's probably aimed a little technical for a lay audience.
But why am I complaining? Ben Goldacre is an inspiration in the pursuit of understanding science and I hope his message gets out there.
This book is written in a very engaging and funny way. It clears up all the rubbish that has been fed to you by the media and advertising whilst also opening your eyes to the selective reporting of science, meaning you will not look at a dramatic headline in the same way again. However, I felt that this book was more a take down of the medias reporting on science and there was much emphasis on how the media can do a rubbish job on reporting and fuel fear felt by the public. I would have given this book 5 stars if there was more chapters like the first couple, focusing on debunking 'Bad Science' rather than persuading me that the media is bias.
I really liked this book. He talks about something that I believed for a long time, but felt alone. Our science journalism sucks. They have no clue what they are talking about, and they don't really care. It is more important to make a nice sounding headline, than to really inform people.
So, all of us that really like science, but no longer work directly with it, feel like orphans, with few good places to search for reliable information. I loved this quote:
"meanwhile the nerds, the people who studied biochemistry but who now work in middle management at Woolworths, are neglected, unstimulated, abandoned".
Swap for biology and another UK company, and that's me :)
Not a 5, because it's so UK specific sometimes, with lot's of references to people that I've never heard about.
So, all of us that really like science, but no longer work directly with it, feel like orphans, with few good places to search for reliable information. I loved this quote:
"meanwhile the nerds, the people who studied biochemistry but who now work in middle management at Woolworths, are neglected, unstimulated, abandoned".
Swap for biology and another UK company, and that's me :)
Not a 5, because it's so UK specific sometimes, with lot's of references to people that I've never heard about.
Most of this is smart, succinct analysis of how and why science gets misrepresented so often and so extremely. It’s humorous as well as insightful and well researched, but the chapter on autism is, in contrast to the central thesis of the book, quite reliant on outdated and unproven ideas around autism. The disproving of the link between vaccines and autism is great, but the follow up commentary on autism itself demonstrates a shallow understanding of the disorder which was disappointing to see in an otherwise great book. A mostly informative read - but the ideas thrown out on what ‘real’ autism looks like are unfortunately a perfect example of Bad Science.
This book should be made compulsory reading for anyone wanting to enter scientific research (especially in medicine). I mean it. It is a fascinating look at how both the media and entrepreneurs can twist data to portray what they want, whether this is factual or not. Goldacre covers topics from homeopathy to MRSA to MMR to the horrifying implications of campaigning against AZT. All of the chapters are light-hearted enough to make it an enjoyable read but detailed enough to clearly convey the message. All in all, a good time.