I Think You'll Find It's a Bit More Complicated Than That

BOOK: I Think You'll Find It's a Bit More Complicated Than That
4.61Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub

Copyright

Fourth Estate

An imprint of HarperCollins
Publishers

77–85 Fulham Palace Road,

Hammersmith, London W6 8JB

www.4thestate.co.uk

First published in Great Britain by Fourth Estate in 2014

Copyright © Ben Goldacre 2014

Ben Goldacre asserts the moral right to be identified as the author of this work

‘Dr Goldacre Doesn’t Make Everything Better’ by Jeremy Laurance © the
Independent
/
www.independent.co.uk

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. By payment of the required fees, you have been granted the non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and read the text of this e-book on-screen. No part of this text may be reproduced, transmitted, down-loaded, decompiled, reverse engineered, or stored in or introduced into any information storage and retrieval system, in any form or by any means, whether electronic or mechanical, now known or hereinafter invented, without the express written permission of HarperCollins

Source ISBN: 9780007462483

Ebook Edition © October 2014 ISBN: 9780007505159

Version: 2014-09-18

Dedication

To whom it may concern.

And Archie.

And Alice.

Contents

Cover

Title Page

Copyright

Dedication

Intro

HOW SCIENCE WORKS

Why Won’t Professor Susan Greenfield Publish This Theory in a Scientific Journal?

Cherry-Picking Is Bad. At Least Warn Us When You Do It

Being Wrong

Kids Who Spot Bullshit, and the Adults Who Get Upset About It

Existential Angst About the Bigger Picture

The Glorious Mess of Real Scientific Results

Nullius in Verba

Is It OK to Ignore Results from People You Don’t Trust?

Foreign Substances in Your Precious Bodily Fluids

How Myths Are Made

Publish or Be Damned

Academic Papers Are Hidden from the Public. Here’s Some Direct Action

BIOLOGISING

Neuro-Realism

The Stigma Gene

Pink, Pink, Pink, Pink. Pink Moan

STATISTICS

Guns Don’t Kill People, Puppies Do

Datamining for Terrorists Would Be Lovely If It Worked

Benford’s Law: Using Stats to Bust an Entire Nation for Naughtiness

The Certainty of Chance

Sampling Error, the Unspoken Issue Behind Small Number Changes in the News

Scientific Proof That We Live in a Warmer and More Caring Universe

Drink Coffee, See Dead People

Voices of the Ancients

BIG DATA

There’s Something Magical About Watching Patterns Emerge from Data

Give Us the Data

Care.data Can Save Lives: But Not If We Bungle It

Care.data Has Been Bungled

SURVEYS

The Huff

A New and Interesting Form of Wrong

‘Hello Madam, Would You Like Your Children to Be Unemployed?’

EPIDEMIOLOGY

Beau Funnel

When Journalists Do Primary Research

Confound You!

Bicycle Helmets and the Law

Screen Test

How Do You Know?

Anecdotes Are Great. If They Really Illustrate the Data

The Strange Case of the Magnetic Wine

What Is Science? First, Magnetise Your Wine …

BAD ACADEMIA

What If Academics Were as Dumb as Quacks with Statistics?

Brain-Imaging Studies Report More Positive Findings Than Their Numbers Can Support. This Is Fishy

‘None of Your Damn Business’

Twelve Monkeys. No … Eight. Wait, Sorry, I Meant Fourteen

Medical Hypotheses
Fails the Aids Test

Observations on the Classification of Idiots

More Crap Journals?

GOVERNMENT STATISTICS

If You Want to Be Trusted More: Claim Less

Is This the Worst Government Statistic Ever Created?

Anarchy for the UK. Ish.

More Than Sixty Children Saved from Abuse

Home Taping Didn’t Kill Music

Is This a Joke?

EVIDENCE-BASED POLICY

I’d Expect This from UKIP, or the
Daily Mail
. Not from a Government Leaflet

Andrew Lansley and His Imaginary Evidence

Why Is Evidence So Hard for Politicians?

Politicians Can Divine Which Policy Works Best by Using Their Special Magic Politician Beam

Pornography in Hospitals

The Power of Ideas

‘Exams Are Getting Easier’

Over There! An Eight-Mile-High Distraction Made of Posh Chocolate!

As Far as I Understand Thinktanks …

Meaningful Debates Need Clear Information

Minority Retort

Building Evidence into Education

DRUGS

A Rock of Crack as Big as the Ritz

The Least Surrogate Outcome

Heroin on Prescription

LIBEL

NMT Is Suing Dr Peter Wilmshurst. So How Trustworthy Is This Company? Let’s Look at Its Website …

‘We Are More Possible Than You Can Powerfully Imagine’

Science Is About Embracing Your Knockers

The Return of Dr McKeith

QUACKS

The Noble and Ancient Tradition of Moron-Baiting

How Do You Regulate Wu?

Blame Everyone But Yourselves

MAGIC BOXES

ADE 651: WTF?

After Madeleine, Why Not Bin Laden?

Who’s Holding the Smoking Gun on Bioresonance?

AIDS

House of Numbers

Aids Denialism at the
Spectator

ELECTROSENSITIVITY

Wi-Fi Wants to Kill Your Children … But Alasdair Philips of Powerwatch Sells the Cure!

Why Don’t Journalists Mention the Data?

POST-MODERNISM

Archie Cochrane: ‘Fascist’

IRRATIONALITY

The Golden Arse-Beam Method

Illusions of Control

Empathy’s Failures

Blind Prejudice

Yeah, Well, You Can Prove Anything with Science

Superstition

Evidence-Based Smear Campaigns

Why Cigarette Packs Matter

All Bow Before the Mighty Power of the Nocebo Effect

So Brilliantly You’ve Presented a Really Transgressive Case Through the Mainstream Media

BAD JOURNALISM

Asking for It

Jab ‘as Deadly as the Cancer’

Health Warning: Exercise Makes You Fat

The Caveat in Paragraph Number 19

Why Don’t Journalists Link to Primary Sources?

A Fishy Friend, and His Friends

MMR: The Scare Stories Are Back

Prevention Is Better than Cure When It Comes to Health Scares

Dodgy Academic PR

Suicide

Roger Coghill and the Aids Test

BRAINIAC

Ka-Boom! Science! COOL!!?!

Who’s the Daddy?

STUFF

Here’s My … Foreword to the Romney, Hythe and Dymchurch Railway Guidebook

How I Stalked My Girlfriend

EARLY SNARKS

Staying Beautiful Is Easy to Do

Because You’re Worth It

More Than Water?

‘Nanniebots’ to Catch Paedophiles

Nanniebots and Neverland

Artificial Intransigence

BOOKENDS

Be Very Afraid: The Bad Science Manifesto

What Eight Years of Writing the Bad Science Column Has Taught Me

Footnotes

Notes

List of Illustrations

Index

Acknowledgements

About the Author

Also by Ben Goldacre

About the Publisher

Intro

This is a collection of my most fun fights, but the fighting is just an excuse. There is nothing complicated about science, and people can understand anything, if they’re sufficiently motivated. Coincidentally, people like fights. That’s why I’ve spent the last ten years lashing science to mockery: it’s the cleanest way I know to help people see the joy of statistics, and the fascinating ways that evidence can be distorted or ignored.

But these aren’t personal attacks, and I’m not an angry person. All too often, people hoping to make science accessible fall into the trap of triumphalism, presenting science as a canon, and a collection of true facts. In reality, science is about the squabble. Every fight you will read in this book, over the meaning of some data, is the story of the scientific process itself: you present your idea, you present your evidence, and we all take turns to try and pull them both apart. This process of close critical appraisal isn’t something we tolerate reluctantly, in science, with a grudge: far from it. Criticism and close examination of evidence is actively welcomed – it is the absolute core of the process – because ideas only exist to be pulled apart, and this is how we spiral in on the truth.

Away from the newspapers and science TV shows you can see that process, very clearly, in the institutions of science. The question-and-answer session at any academic conference, after someone presents their scientific research, is often a
bloodbath
: but nobody’s resentful, everyone expects it, and we all consent to it, as a kind of intellectual S&M activity. We know it’s good for our souls. If the idea survives, then great; if it needs more evidence, we decide what studies are needed next and do them. Then we all come back next year, tear the evidence apart again, and have another think. Real scientists know this. Only the fakers cry foul.

In short, this book has a manifesto: check the evidence and fight back against anyone who tries to stop you. Along the way, you will get a grounding in statistics, study design, evidence-based policy and much more, in bite-size chunks. Because while my last two books –
Bad Science
and
Bad Pharma
– were polemics with a shape, this is a racing collection of short pieces. As such, I hope it works as a kind of statistics toilet book, bringing satisfaction in short bursts, with a fight and an idea in each one.

So in the section of this book on surveys, we laugh at the stupidity of the nuclear power industry, some silly anti-abortionists and StoneWall (whom I actually adore). Or, if you prefer: we learn about the distortions of ‘participant bias’, misleading question design and a sticky problem involving a complex time-dependent variable. In the first piece of the book we cover some surprisingly unprofessional behaviour from a Baroness, Professor and previous Director of the Royal Institution. Or, if you prefer: we cover post-publication peer review and why the conventions of academic journals are helpful.

These pieces cover two decades of work. There are lots of
Guardian
columns, but also academic papers, a report for the UK education minister, my work in the
Romney, Hythe and Dimchurch Railway Guidebook
, the odd undergraduate essay and more. If I’m honest, it’s pretty soulful (for me, not you) looking back over two decades and seeing what has changed. I was in my twenties and barely out of medical school when I started writing a column in the
Guardian
. As time passed, the targets got bigger, my day job took me through postgraduate qualifications and grown-up battles, and I think I got better at pulling claims apart. There was also discipline from outside: writing about other people’s misdeeds, collecting ever greater numbers of increasingly powerful enemies – and all under British libel law – is like doing pop science with a gun to your head. So for that, thanks.

At the end I might tell you a little about how I work, why I do what I do, who made me, and how things have changed over the past two decades. For now, let’s just say I’m very grateful to all the many companies and people who, by their optimistically bad behaviour under fire, have given narrative colour to what might otherwise have been some very dry explanations of basic statistical principles.

What’s in this book

I’ve written 500,000 words in the last decade, so there is no repetition, and the corpses of folk like Gillian McKeith, the homeopaths and Big Pharma are left in my previous two books (although these characters fight on, like zombies, in the real world). My academic work on statins and Big Data is saved for a fun project that will be launching shortly. Lastly, most of my writing on randomised trials in education, policing and everywhere else is held back, as my book on this topic will come out in due course.

Other books

Mindbond by Nancy Springer
Decay Inevitable by Conrad Williams
A String of Beads by Thomas Perry
War Against the Rull by A E Van Vogt
Where the Dark Streets Go by Dorothy Salisbury Davis