Ben Goldacre is a doctor and a writer. His first book, Bad Science, was an international bestseller and has been translated into twenty-five languages. He lives in London.
"Slightly technical, eminently readable, consistently shocking, occasionally hectoring and unapologetically polemical . . . This is a book that deserves to be widely read, because anyone who does read it cannot help feeling both uncomfortable and angry." --The Economist "Ben Goldacre has done it again . . . This is a morbidly fascinating and dispiriting account, yet one which deserves (and needs) to be read and acted upon without delay." --Dennis Rosen, Dennis Rosen, The Boston Globe "Read this book. It will make you mad, it will make you scared. And, hopefully, it will bring about some change. " --Chris Lee, Ars Technica "A thorough piece of investigative medical journalism. What keeps you turning its pages is the accessibility of Goldacre's writing, . . . his genuine, indignant passion, his careful gathering of evidence and his use of stories, some of them personal, which bring the book to life." --Luisa Dillner, The Guardian "Goldacre's research is scrupulous, and lay readers may find themselves converted by his geeky ardor. " --The New Yorker "[A]n eye-opening glance into a world of experts who have failed us." --The New York Times Book Review "In this searing expose of the pharmaceutical industry, physician and journalist Goldacre uncovers a cesspool of corrupt practices designed to sell useless or dangerous drugs to an unsuspecting public . . . Goldacre conveys complicated scientific, medical, and ethical issues in simple, clear, plainspoken language that pulls no punches. The result is a smart, infuriating diagnosis of the rotten heart of the medical-industrial complex." --Publishers Weekly "A useful guide for policymakers, doctors and the patients who need protection against deliberate disinformation." --Kirkus Reviews "Goldacre's essential expose will prompt readers to ask more questions before automatically popping a doctor-prescribed pill." --Karen Springen, Booklist "Smart, funny, clear, unflinching: Ben Goldacre is my hero." --Mary Roach, author of Stiff, Spook, and Bonk, on Bad Science "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 . . . You'll get a good grounding in the importance of evidence-based medicine . . . 'Studies show' is not good enough, he writes: 'The plural of anecdote is not data.'" --Katherine Bouton, The New York Times, on Bad Science "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, on Bad Science "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, on Bad Science "This is a much-needed book. Ben Goldacre shows us--with hysterical wit--how 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, on Bad Science "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, on Bad Science "British physician and journalist Ben Goldacre takes aim at quack doctors, pharmaceutical companies and poorly designed studies in extraordinary fashion in Bad Science . . . 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, on Bad Science "Funny and biting . . . 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, on Bad Science "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 Science--BS, 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, on Bad Science "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 it's 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 on Bad Science
Goldacre (Bad Science) here turns his attention to medical research and the pharma-ceutical industry. He explains that negative or no-result studies of drugs are less likely to be published anywhere in the professional literature than positive ones. The author further explains that medical professionals are manipulated by planted articles, drug vendors, and the selective use of statistics. All true, if not exactly new ideas. Unfortunately, despite his claims of nonbias, -Goldacre supports his opinions with interesting anecdotes and carefully selected metadata studies. This fact-filled book is scientifically no better than the studies it critiques. The audiobook, competently read by Jonathan Cowley, has its own problems. It comes with so-called bonus materials-PDF files of graphs. In several places, people are expected to go to their computer and look at figures while listening to the text, not easy for those who listen while driving, exercising, etc. -VERDICT While not an impartial expose, this is an enjoyable and informative book, best read in print form. Recommended for individuals interested in medical issues who are good at mental data manipulations. ["Goldacre's recommendations for much larger, simpler trials and for more access to clinical trial data, as well as educating people about risk assessment, clinical trial design, and statistical literacy, make this much more than a condemnation of the pharmaceutical industry," read the review of the Faber & Faber hc, LJ Xpress Reviews, 3/22/13.-Ed.]-I Pour-El, Des Moines Area Community Coll., Ames, IA (c) Copyright 2013. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.