The reason for this eclectic mix is that Dave Farina feels that they provide the knowledge foundation required to counter much online woo, whether it's about things 'not containing chemicals', so-called alternative medicines or the random use of the word 'quantum' to try to make a treatment that is nothing more than a placebo seem more scientifically based.
In between the basic science chapters we do get into the dodgy claims, also taking on, for example, that marketing term 'organic' and various other unlikely ways scientific terms are misused (sadly we never do encounter that organic wi-fi). Farina emphasises the ridiculous distinction between 'natural' and 'synthetic' in chemical terms, pointing out the many dangers of nature and the fact that a chemical with identical structure is the same thing whether it is natural or synthetic in origin. He also does an effective job of demolishing the idea that there can be a product or treatment that does a detox.
Taking on all these examples of pseudoscience and 'natural'-based marketing is a well trodden path, but what's novel here is providing a fair amount of straight science to accompany it - I was particularly pleased to see the chemistry section, as the subject is woefully under-represented in popular science.
What I'm less sure about, sadly, is whether this will change any minds. You have to be interested in science to read those science sections, and Farina's regular suggestion that no sensible person would fall for alternative therapies and their ilk is unlikely to win over current believers. The weakest part of the book is when he oversimplifies the history of science. For example, he describes alchemy as pseudoscience, where it is the ancestor of chemistry with considerable overlap by the time you get to Robert Boyle. For that matter, Farina is (rightly) very positive about Isaac Newton's work, without pointing out the considerable time he put into alchemy.
This book is probably preaching to the converted - but it will do a very useful job for those who feel that pseudoscience is nonsense, but lack the science knowledge to back up their assertion.
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
Comments
Post a Comment