July 7, 2014
Schwarcz (Dr. Joe and What You Didn't Know), director of McGill University's office for science and society, provides the straight dope on a collection of chemical cases that range from fiction to fact. In mostly simple language, he provides good criticism of celebrity pseudoscience, Health Canada's implicit endorsements of homeopathic products as effective, and California's Proposition 65, which would declare bisphenol A (BPA) a reproductive hazard. More attention is focused on homeopathy to more fully skewer it as a practice that cannot be supported by science. Calling out individual scientific claims as "scientifically bankrupt slop," "garbled rhetoric," "unsubstantiated blather," and "nonsense" makes for entertaining reading, but may be less effective in the stated goal of teaching "how to separate sense from nonsense" than describing in a more general fashion how readers may properly apply critical reasoning skills to recognize false claims for themselves. That's something Schwarcz does do in some cases, for example, when contrasting criteria currently used to define risk to human health and the criteria we more rationally should be using, instead. Readers looking for curious light anecdotes about science being used and misused will be satisfied. Agent: Robert Lecker.
April 15, 2014
If you combined the rigorous scientific approach of Ben Goldacre (Bad Science, 2010) with the enthusiasm and outspoken prose of James Randi (the noted skeptic and debunker), you would have Joe Schwarcz, chemist, science writer, and radio host. Here, in his latest collection of essays, he tackles a wide variety of topics: bogus self-help products, quackery, homeopathy, misinformed celebrities (i.e., celebs who make ridiculous statements because they don't know they're misinformed), fish-oil supplements, weight-loss plans, Dr. Oz, Jamie Oliver, GMOs, and the list goes on. It's important to note, too, that he doesn't take a hard-core debunking tack to everything he discusses: the book is divided into three broad categories called black, gray, and white (black representing things for which there is no scientific evidence, white being those for which there is hard evidence, and gray being those in between). The author's entertaining writing style and clear, precise explanations make the book a joy to read, and his choice of subjects is so wide-ranging that there really is something for everyone here.(Reprinted with permission of Booklist, copyright 2014, American Library Association.)
April 15, 2014
Hoping to help people inundated by information do a better job of separating the good from the bogus, Schwarcz (McGill Univ.; "The Fly in the Ointment; Radar, Hula Hoops, and Playful Pigs") covers a lot of ground in relatively few pages. He explains critical thinking and the need for better teaching of it, and then gives more than 60 instances of when it has and hasn't been used. The author divides the resulting miniessays into black (covering phenomena that are "pretty dismal when it comes to facts," such as homeopathy), gray ("a blend of facts and falsehoods," e.g., the Twinkie diet), and white ("factual, at least as far as present evidence indicates," such as how the Olympic torch burned underwater). Schwarcz's mix of historical and current examples demonstrates how gullible many of us continue to be despite the learning opportunities frauds and quacks have provided. VERDICT Written with a light touch and refreshing humor, this book provides a solid, authoritative starting point for anyone beginning to look at the world with a skeptical eye and a refresher for those further along that path.--Richard Maxwell, Porter Adventist Hosp. Lib., Denver
Copyright 2014 Library Journal, LLC Used with permission.