List Price: £12.99 Price: £6.49 You save: £6.50 (50%)
Media: Paperback Availability: Usually dispatched within 24 hours
Customer Reviews:
Avg. Customer Rating: 5.0 / 5.0
If you feel you're being conned by scare stories . . . . I bought this book because I thought it would be a good idea to have an antidote to all the scare stories we read in the media. I was not disappointed. The descriptions of how trials and research should be done were excellent and easy to read and understand. It really helps to counteract the headlines and shows you how to work out the facts behind the stories. The book is worth its price for the chapter on the placebo effect alone and if you wanted to know what happened to the MMR controversy you can find... more info
Should be a standard School text book This is not just a good read but also a really important subject - dumbing down of media led science reporting. I'll be giving it to some school age students for Christmas to encourage them see how science fact can be spun in papers/TV etc to give sensation led copy. I was lucky: I had an excellent science teacher in school (1970s - 80s) and was inspired to find out the background for myself behind every popular science or medical story. Great book.
Superb - Make sure you read this book Bad Science cuts through the spin and misinformation we all read every day in newspapers and see on the TV regarding health issues. Ben explains how the high status given to science has been stolen by a variety of pseudo-scientific concepts like homeopathy and nutritionists. The media is taken to task for its sensation seeking headlines that help to create problems like the recent MMR hoax. Particularly amusing is Ben's explanation of journalist ignorance - "Unskilled and unaware of it". Mainstream medicine... more info
Yes, but... A book for cynical critical people, of whom I am one with much sympathy for his mission. After reading it, I feel even more cynical about almost everything I read in the media, but, unfortunately, also about this author. I didn't find it particularly funny, the written style was very clumsy; he came over as just as egotistical as the so-called experts he criticised. And considering he is so critical of others' referencing, it is a pity his is so inconsistent - could he not have used straight Harvard... more info
