Aucun appareil Kindle n'est requis. Téléchargez l'une des applis Kindle gratuites et commencez à lire les livres Kindle sur votre smartphone, tablette ou ordinateur.

  • Apple
  • Android
  • Windows Phone
  • Android

Pour obtenir l'appli gratuite, saisissez votre adresse e-mail ou numéro de téléphone mobile.

Prix Kindle : EUR 6,21

Économisez
EUR 5,96 (49%)

TVA incluse

Ces promotions seront appliquées à cet article :

Certaines promotions sont cumulables avec d'autres offres promotionnelles, d'autres non. Pour en savoir plus, veuillez vous référer aux conditions générales de ces promotions.

Envoyer sur votre Kindle ou un autre appareil

Envoyer sur votre Kindle ou un autre appareil

Repliez vers l'arrière Repliez vers l'avant
Narration Audible Lecture en cours... Interrompu   Vous écoutez un extrait de la narration Audible pour ce livre Kindle.
En savoir plus

Bad Science Format Kindle

5 étoiles sur 5 10 commentaires client

Voir les formats et éditions Masquer les autres formats et éditions
Prix Amazon
Neuf à partir de Occasion à partir de
Format Kindle
"Veuillez réessayer"
EUR 6,21

Longueur : 387 pages Word Wise: Activé Composition améliorée: Activé
Langue : Anglais

Ponts de mai 2016 Promo Ponts de mai 2016


Descriptions du produit

Extrait

1
MATTER
 
 
I spend a lot of time talking to people who disagree with me—I would go so far as to say that it’s my favorite leisure activity—and repeatedly I meet individuals who are eager to share their views on science despite the fact that they have never done an experiment. They have never tested an idea for themselves, using their own hands, or seen the results of that test, using their own eyes, and they have never thought carefully about what those results mean for the idea they are testing, using their own brain. To these people “science” is a monolith, a mystery, and an authority, rather than a method.
 
Dismantling our early, more outrageous pseudoscientific claims is an excellent way to learn the basics of science, partly because science is largely about disproving theories, but also because the lack of scientific knowledge among miracle cure artistes, marketers, and journalists gives us some very simple ideas to test. Their knowledge of science is rudimentary, so as well as making basic errors of reasoning, they rely on notions like magnetism, oxygen, water, “energy,” and toxins—ideas from high school-level science and all very much within the realm of kitchen chemistry.
 
 
DETOX AND THE THEATER OF GOO
Since you’ll want your first experiment to be authentically messy, we’ll start with detox. Detox footbaths have been promoted uncritically in some very embarrassing articles in the New York Daily News, the Telegraph, the Mirror, The Sunday Times (London), GQ magazine, and various TV shows. Here is a taster from the New York Daily News: it’s a story about Ally Shapiro, a fourteen-year-old who went to a “detox” center run by Roni DeLuz, author of 21 Pounds in 21 Days: The Martha’s Vineyard Diet.
 
“The first day I did it,” says Shapiro, “the water was completely black by the end.” By day three, twenty minutes in the footbath generated a copper-colored sludge—the color of the flushed buildup from her joints related to arthritis, DeLuz explained. The hypothesis from these companies is very clear: your body is full of “toxins,” whatever those may be; your feet are filled with special “pores” (discovered by ancient Chinese scientists, no less); you put your feet in the bath, the toxins are extracted, and the water goes brown. Is the brown in the water because of the toxins? Or is that merely theater?
 
One way to test this is to go along and have an Aqua Detox treatment yourself at a health spa, beauty salon, or any of the thousands of places they are available online, and take your feet out of the bath when the therapist leaves the room. If the water goes brown without your feet in it, then it wasn’t your feet or your toxins that did it. That is a controlled experiment; everything is the same in both conditions, except for the presence or absence of your feet.
 
There are disadvantages with this experimental method (and there is an important lesson here—that we must often weigh up the benefits and practicalities of different forms of research, which will become important in later chapters). From a practical perspective, the “feet out” experiment involves subterfuge, which may make you uncomfortable. But it is also expensive: one session of Aqua Detox will cost more than the components to build your own detox device, a perfect model of the real one.
 
You will need:
• One car battery charger
• Two large nails
• Kitchen salt
• Warm water
• One Barbie doll
• A full analytic laboratory (optional)
 
This experiment involves electricity and water. In a world of hurricane hunters and volcanologists, we must accept that everyone sets their own level of risk tolerance. You might well give yourself a nasty electric shock if you perform this experiment at home, and it could easily blow the wiring in your house. It is not safe, but it is in some sense relevant to your understanding of MMR, homeopathy, postmodernist critiques of science, and the evils of big pharma. DO NOT BUILD IT.
 
When you switch your Barbie Detox machine on, you will see that the water goes brown, due to a very simple process called electrolysis; the iron electrodes rust, essentially, and the brown rust goes into the water. But there is something more happening in there, something you might half remember from chemistry at school. There is salt in the water. The proper scientific term for household salt is “sodium chloride”; in solution, this means that there are chlo ride ions floating around, which have a negative charge (and sodium ions, which have a positive charge). The red connector on your car battery charger is a “positive electrode,” and here negatively charged electrons are stolen away from the negatively charged chloride ions, resulting in the production of free chlorine gas.
 
So chlorine gas is given off by the Barbie Detox bath, and indeed by the Aqua Detox footbath, and the people who use this product have elegantly woven that distinctive chlorine aroma into their story: it’s the chemicals, they explain; it’s the chlorine coming out of your body, from all the plastic packaging on your food and all those years bathing in chemical swimming pools. “It has been interesting to see the color of the water change and smell the chlorine leaving my body,” says one testimonial for the similar product Emerald Detox. At another sales site: “The first time she tried the Q2 [Energy Spa], her business partner said his eyes were burning from all the chlorine that was coming out of her, leftover [sic] from her childhood and early adulthood.” All that chemically chlorine gas that has accumulated in your body over the years. It’s a frightening thought.
 
But there is something else we need to check. Are there toxins in the water? Here we encounter a new problem: What do they mean by toxins? I’ve asked the manufacturers of many detox products this question time and again, but they demur. They wave their hands, they talk about stressful modern lifestyles, they talk about pollution, they talk about junk food, but they will not tell me the name of a single chemical that I can measure. “What toxins are being extracted from the body with your treatment?” I ask. “Tell me what is in the water, and I will look for it in a laboratory.” I have never been given an answer.
 
After much of their hedging and fudging, I chose two chemicals pretty much at random: creatinine and urea. These are common breakdown products from your body’s metabolism, and your kidneys get rid of them in urine. Through a friend, I went for a genuine Aqua Detox treatment, took a sample of brown water, and used the disproportionately state-of-the-art analytic facilities of St. Mary’s Hospital in London to hunt for these two chemical “toxins.” There were no toxins in the water. Just lots of brown, rusty iron.
 
Now, with findings like these, scientists might take a step back and revise their ideas about what is going on with the footbaths. We don’t really expect the manufacturers to do that, but what they say in response to these findings is very interesting, at least to me, because it sets up a pattern that we will see repeated throughout the world of pseudoscience: instead of addressing the criticisms, or embracing the new findings in a new model, they seem to shift the goalposts and retreat, crucially, into untestable positions.
 
Some of them now deny that toxins come out in the footbath (which would stop me measuring them); your body is somehow informed that it is time to release toxins in the normal way—whatever that is, and whatever the toxins are—only more so. Some of them now admit that the water goes a bit brown without your feet in it, but “not as much.” Many of them tell lengthy stories about the “bioenergetic field,” which they say cannot be measured except by how well you are feeling. All of them talk about how stressful modern life is.
 
That may well be true. But it has nothing to do with their footbath, which is all about theater, and theater is the common theme for all detox products, as we shall see. On with the brown goo.
 
 
EAR CANDLES
You might think that Hopi ear candles are easy targets. But their efficacy has still been cheerfully promoted by The Independent, The Observer, and the BBC, to name just a few respected British news outlets. They pop up endlessly in American local papers desperate to fill space, from the Alameda Times-Star to the Syracuse Post-Standard. Since journalists like to present themselves as authoritative purveyors of scientific information, I’ll let the internationally respected BBC explain how these hollow wax tubes, Hopi ear candles, will detox your body: “The candles work by vaporizing their ingredients once lit, causing convectional air flow towards the first chamber of the ear. The candle creates a mild suction which lets the vapors gen tly massage the eardrum and auditory canal. Once the candle is placed in the ear it forms a seal which enables wax and other impurities to be drawn out of the ear.” The proof comes when you open a candle up and discover that it is filled with a familiar waxy orange substance, which must surely be earwax. If you’d like to test this yourself, you will need: an ear, a clothespin, some poster putty, a dusty floor, some scissors, and two ear candles.
 
If you light one ear candle, and hold it over some dust, you will find little evidence of any suction. Before you rush to publish your finding in a peer-reviewed academic journal, someone has beaten you to it: a paper published in the medical jo...

Revue de presse

You'll laugh your head off and then throw all those expensive health foods in the bin. --The Observer Book of the Year

Détails sur le produit

  • Format : Format Kindle
  • Taille du fichier : 2085 KB
  • Nombre de pages de l'édition imprimée : 387 pages
  • Editeur : Fourth Estate (7 décembre 2008)
  • Vendu par : Amazon Media EU S.à r.l.
  • Langue : Anglais
  • ISBN-10: 0007283199
  • ISBN-13: 978-0007283194
  • ASIN: B002RI9ORI
  • Synthèse vocale : Non activée
  • X-Ray :
  • Word Wise: Activé
  • Composition améliorée: Activé
  • Moyenne des commentaires client : 5.0 étoiles sur 5 10 commentaires client
  • Classement des meilleures ventes d'Amazon: n°5.549 dans la Boutique Kindle (Voir le Top 100 dans la Boutique Kindle)
  •  Voulez-vous faire un commentaire sur des images ou nous signaler un prix inférieur ?


Quels sont les autres articles que les clients achètent après avoir regardé cet article?

Commentaires en ligne

5.0 étoiles sur 5
5 étoiles
10
4 étoiles
0
3 étoiles
0
2 étoiles
0
1 étoiles
0
Voir les 10 commentaires client
Partagez votre opinion avec les autres clients

Meilleurs commentaires des clients

Format: Broché
Livre essentiel pour une époque dominée par les modes, les relations publiques, le storytelling et le marketing.
Important aussi pour le domaine de la santé et des diètes miracles. Ben Goldacre ne tombe jamais dans le dualisme pour ou contre. Il se limite, souvent avec humour et sans véhémence, à défendre toujours l'approche rigoureuse et scientifique contre les excès et les affirmations non documentées, tant des médecines alternatives que des grands laboratoires farmaceutiques ou de modes "New Age" et des nutritionistes peux scrupuleux. Sa définition d'une étude sérieuse est simple et basée sur des règles essentielles. Il tient compte aussi des erreurs humaines, même chez des scientifiques sérieux, et de la tendance inconsciente à choisir les résultats favorables à l'hypothès de base dans la recherche. Pour ceux que la Sémantique Générale intéresse, les nombreux exemples de l'utilisation de mots et de structures de langage pour convaincre ou confondre sont très instructifs.
Remarque sur ce commentaire 2 personnes ont trouvé cela utile. Avez-vous trouvé ce commentaire utile ? Oui Non Commentaire en cours d'envoi...
Merci pour votre commentaire.
Désolé, nous n'avons pas réussi à enregistrer votre vote. Veuillez réessayer
Signaler un abus
Format: Broché
L'auteur, jeune médecin psychiatre écrivant régulièrement dans le Guardian, est connu au Royaume-Uni comme ardent défenseur de la médecine scientifique ("evidence-based medicine") face aux croyances et aux pratiques pseudo-médicales. Il s'attaque aussi bien aux "médecines douces" et à certains nutritionnistes qu'aux grands laboratoires qui manipulent les études et leurs résultats pour conquérir des marchés, et aux médias qui parlent de médecine en privilégiant le spectacle au mépris de la rigueur et de la déontologie. C'est une vraie œuvre de démocratisation de la médecine scientifique : Goldacre donne à ses lecteurs des outils pour se faire une idée aussi juste que possible de ce qui est bon pour eux et pour la santé publique, loin des dogmes et sans s'en remettre à une quelconque autorité.
Remarque sur ce commentaire Une personne a trouvé cela utile. Avez-vous trouvé ce commentaire utile ? Oui Non Commentaire en cours d'envoi...
Merci pour votre commentaire.
Désolé, nous n'avons pas réussi à enregistrer votre vote. Veuillez réessayer
Signaler un abus
Format: Format Kindle Achat vérifié
A well written and even handed book, no attempt to force the reader to a point of view but just pointing out realities.
It does lead one to the conclusion that the NoW Sun, Daily Mail etc if one didn't already know it are chronically irresponsible in the science field and have very low journalistic standards, if any. See Leveson.
1 commentaire Une personne a trouvé cela utile. Avez-vous trouvé ce commentaire utile ? Oui Non Commentaire en cours d'envoi...
Merci pour votre commentaire.
Désolé, nous n'avons pas réussi à enregistrer votre vote. Veuillez réessayer
Signaler un abus
Format: Broché Achat vérifié
excellent - biting and funny. a book which clears away a lot of the nonsense and fear around many medical issues.
Remarque sur ce commentaire Une personne a trouvé cela utile. Avez-vous trouvé ce commentaire utile ? Oui Non Commentaire en cours d'envoi...
Merci pour votre commentaire.
Désolé, nous n'avons pas réussi à enregistrer votre vote. Veuillez réessayer
Signaler un abus
Format: Broché Achat vérifié
This book reminds the reader that by forgetting common sense in favour of impressions given by medias without any thinking we often go wrong. In a world in which appearance and images build people mind we never repeat enough that a logic explaination is a must. In addition to that I discovered how important are statistics for medical care improvement.
Remarque sur ce commentaire Avez-vous trouvé ce commentaire utile ? Oui Non Commentaire en cours d'envoi...
Merci pour votre commentaire.
Désolé, nous n'avons pas réussi à enregistrer votre vote. Veuillez réessayer
Signaler un abus

Discussions entre clients