Bad Science

I was delighted to hear Ben Goldacre on The Now Show the other day, not least because I'm currently in the middle of Bad Science, a book that I imagine I will badger everyone I know into reading before the year is out. He says an awful lot of things about the relationship between the media and health research that I would like to communicate, but in my case I end up shouting at the telly and getting too aerated to construct coherent blog posts, whereas Dr Goldacre manages to focus his frustrations into far more concise and persuasive arguments.

If you'd like a taste of his perspective, here's his slot on The Now Show:

Well, quite. My only gripe is that The Daily Mail Oncological Ontology Project (surely the best named blog ever) ran for a mere 4 days before ceasing to progress. Perhaps the author spontaneously combusted under the strain of reading all the crap spouted by the Daily Maul. Given the general ignorance about the difference between correlation and causation, I feel confident in stating (on the basis of this scant 'evidence' which I have extrapolated from an observation) that reading the Daily Mail is bad for your health.

What do *you* reckon?

During an innocent conversation about the merits of the various radio stations we listen to at work, a colleague commented that she found the Jeremy Vine show on Radio 2 rather annoying. "Oh yes!" I agreed. "I hate those programmes where members of the public are allowed to phone in with their opinions".

The reaction was: "That is such a [Ginger] thing to say!" Which has me slightly worried. Surely I don't have a reputation for favouring oppression of free speech, or a disinterest in what Joe Public has to say? I was all set to explain here in detail my defence, comprising points such as (i) such programmes favour polarised opinions and just aren't interested in the calm middle ground (ii) the sort of people/opinions that get aired just conform to the most obvious stereotypes of both ends of any debate and (iii) I get annoyed at such opportunities being presented as though the actual opinions really matter when, in the great scheme of things, they don't change a thing and are just a tokenistic way of filling airtime.

But it seems that others can say it far better than I:

Tiger, Tiger, Burning Bright

Some wonderful bits in this week's Now Show on Radio 4 regarding the attempted terrorists attacks:

SP: Well, we all had a lucky escape this week as Britain was saved from two terrorist attacks by the fact... that it's Britain. First, two would-be bombers failed to remember when attacking Glasgow Airport that it would be full of Glaswegians. People who would have no problem repeated punching a man in the face even while he was on fire.

'Glaswegian': Smoking in a public place, eh? Take that, pal.

SP: And in London, one car bomb was only discovered because a drunk clubber fell down some stairs, while a second car bomb was towed away by traffic wardens for being illegally parked. The situation couldn't be more British if Michael Caine was standing outside Glasgow Airport, shouting: 'You're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!'

---

SP: Amidst all the fear and panic, what these events showed, I think, is the advantages of taking global warming a bit more seriously. If we switch to a low carbon economy it would greatly help the fight against terror.

'Journalist': I'm here outside Glasgow Airport where, at 3.13, two terrorists attempted to ram the terminal entrance in an electric G-Wizz town car. Witnesses say the two-seater approached the terminal at speeds of up to 28 miles per hour, and smashed up against the revolving doors to the building, only to find that the door had a more powerful motor than the G-Wizz, and the car was soon trapped. One of the men then strapped several solar panels to himself and waited to catch fire...

---

JH: There was a lot of speculation, of course, as to whether the recent wave of failed car bomb attacks were the work of Al-Qaeda. The general consensus is that it was, but to be honest I'm not so sure. Think about the location of the first one: a nightclub called Tiger Tiger. I don't think it was Al-Qaeda. I'm pretty sure it was the work of William Blake fanatics. "Tiger, Tiger, burning bright"? We are dealing with fundamentalist poets.

'Terrorist': It is our goal to bring down a reign of iambic pentameter on anyone who does not appreciate the work of the romantics or the poets of the Renaissance. It is time to get metaphysical. We are the poetry terrorists. Who do you think has been planting those 'Poems on the Underground'? That's right - those nice posters are ours. Death to the limerick! Wordsworth be praised!

JH: They're dangerous, of course, but they're not as bad as the 'suicide poets'. They go to training camps in Japan to learn how to commit haiku.

Well, you've got to see the funny side, haven't you?