Bad Science

I just started to read this book by Ben Goldacre and thought, I can post a book recommendation for it here.

The book is written by a british scientist and its purpose is to educate readers about how to be more critical and how to spot what is "bad science". The book for example has chapters about homeopathy and nutrition experts and also medical trials (haven't read that one yet).

Although this might sound a bit dull, the book is written in a very entertaining and understandable way (not like physics school books), it is something that can be easily read in the evening.

I'm hoping the book gives me some ideas how to better evaluate tinnitus treatments. As in general it is quite astonishing how otherwise fairly intelligent people (me included) sometimes end up believing anything that is promised when it comes to alternative health treatments. I have two PhD scientist relatives who are using homeopathy for treating flues or stomach bugs in their children...

 

Sounds interesting. I've read a domestic book thats written by a former sports doctor that released some pretty amazing facts about how the pharmaceutical industry works. We are getting bluffed and fooled into trusting these corporations, but what they do is actually invent diagnosis so they can produce medication thats supposed to treat it. It's an evil cycle of lies. Theres many reasons to stay skeptic.

 

attheedgeofscience should definitely be given a copy.

 

Why?

 

The problem with bad "science" is that good science is not easily defined or described. To be familiar with good science you must practice it for years.

 

It is people like yourself who are a constant reminder why I have always avoided Internet forums. Inevitably, one bumps into an armchair critic - like yourself - with infinite wisdom about anything and everything from particle physics to pediatrics and the upbringing of children.

However, unlike you, I live in the real world. And in the real world, knowledge is not universal, nor infinite. Scientific progress is often slow and non-directional. And, as with anything in science - and especially medicine - somebody has got to be the first - be it the first to try a Polio vaccine, the first to try anti-viral medication, or the first person to use a parachute. As I am amongst the first handful of people to ever attempt to cure cochlear tinnitus using stem cell technology, nobody can really tell what the outcome will be. But some human beings (not you) come with a gift called "insight". Insight is what allows (some) people to turn a risk into a calculated risk or a decision into an informed decision. In other words: insight enchances the chance of a favourable outcome. Based on my insight (not yours), I decided to attempt stem cell therapy. [If the vocabulary in this section is causing you too much of a headache, might I suggest you find somebody who can explain it to you?].

On plain paper, my stem cell treatments might seem simple and straightforward. But only on plain paper. In reality there is nothing simple about financing treatments equivalent to buying two brand-new Audi A3s, travelling 40.000 kilometers, finding six weeks time off work, reading 500+ pages of research, corresponding with 4 different stem cell clinics, travelling four times to Berlin for VISA requirements - not to mention any risk with the treatment itself. However, I guess I must have certain qualities - which is perhaps also why I am pioneering in a new field of medicine... and... you are not.

I have now seen more than a handful of unnecessary criticisms of me from you over the past 3 months. If I stumble across another one from you - past, present, or future - my exit from this forum will be just as sudden as my entrance. Sadly, any knowledge I will have gained - as well as potentially unique insights into curing tinnitus - will consequently go unnoticed. Until somebody decides to walk in my footsteps.

I guess the question that remains open is: do you have the self-discipline to shut your big fat mouth...? I will take the absence of a response as a "no".

 

The first people to study the body functions were digging graves to extract bodies and study the anatomy.

Was it regarded as insane at that time? yes

Has it been useful up to nowadays, definately yes.

Those people from the past took enormous risks for the benefit of future generations.

If athedgeofscience is willing to walk in their footsteps, what's wrong with that?

Personnaly i admire his quest!

 

Umm, can we move on? @Luca, you already have several times stated your opinion of @attheedgeofscience's treatment, an opinion you are entitled to. It's ok to disagree with someone respectfully. But cheap potshots, or repeatedly bashing someone's actions, isn't helpful and breaks community. It also can lead to caustic crossfires where no one wins, @attheedgeofscience.

TT has been an exception to many Internet forums in part because of its civility, and I would like to see it stay that way. Please respect the work that Markku has done to make this a helpful, supportive place. Thanks.

 

I find this very strange. They are PHD's in what exactly ? Biology ? Usually scientists with a hard science background are perfectly able to see how homeopathy is an absurdity. You just need to know what chemical reactions are. And that medications work by chemistry.

 

Very, very well said!

 

No, my relatives don't have a PhD in medicines or biology. That might give them some excuse. Other than that I think it's more a case of believing what you want to believe and being disappointed with medical doctors. Doctors are often not very willing to listen to people with complaints like tinnitus, dizziness, head aches,... or at least in many cases they can't give a diagnosis or treatment. Whereas alternative doctors take a lot of time to listen to their patients and their complaint and then offer some advice, whether it be helpful or not.