Science: So What? Commissioning and promoting bad research in the name of science communications

We were disappointed to see that The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills’ (BIS) science communication campaign Science: So What? So Everything had commissioned and was promoting a poor quality research report. This report – The Shape of Jobs to Come by Rohit Talwar and Tim Hancock [PDF] of Fast Future – has been heavily PRd, with approving quotes from Gordon Brown and Lord Drayson [PDF]. Even at a glance, though, it clearly fails to meet some basic research standards: for example, the methodologies used are not justified and the references provided are frequently inadequate.

We therefore asked a few social scientists for their opinions of the report. One of them wrote an extensive review of the report, to highlight some of the problems. The review has been sent to BIS, but they still stand by the report. The review is therefore pasted below: so that readers can make up their own minds as to the quality of the Fast Future report.

Because we wanted to give BIS time to respond, before posting, it has taken a while to blog this. In the meantime, 10minus9 has been starting to pull the report apart in excellent posts on Fast Future‘s report for Science: So What. There’s a little overlap with the review below, so definitely worth reading 10minus9 too.

The review follows in full

1 in 6 NHS Patients Is Misdiagnosed: BBC Scotland Investigation

One in six patients in the NHS is misdiagnosed, according to an investigation by BBC Scotland. I’m surprised that this investigation into the extent of misdiagnosis in the NHS has not received more publicity. The figures being quoted are that 1 in 6 patients receives a misdiagnosis from a GP or a hospital

Science: So What Is Looking for a Dialogue Manager

From the Science: So What Campaign. A job opportunity for someone who shares their interests (it is a paid position but the hours and salary are unspecified here). [See update for some outline details.]

Alan Breen in praise of chiropractic and democracy

We were pleased to see a call from Prof Alan Breen (at the Anglo-European College of Chiropractic, and on two GCC committees) for a move beyond or supplement to evidence-based medicine in order to achieve a “more democratic and inclusive…age” in “musculoskeletal practice”. However, it is unfortunate that Breen fails to follow through on the implications of his demand.

The Telegraph runs uncritical articles discussing homoeopathy and unconventional theories about climate change

The Telegraph runs a lot of excellent articles. However, it is unfortunate that today they ran two that fell below their usual standards.

British Chiropractic Association and The Plethora of Evidence for Paediatric Asthma

British Chiropractic Association (BCA) has issued a third update in the matter of BCA v. Simon Singh. Leaving aside the BCA discussion of the legal aspects of the case, the BCA has risen to the challenge so famously issued by Professor Frank Frizelle when he was entrammelled in a dispute with chiropractors in New Zealand: “let’s hear your evidence not your legal muscle”. The BCA is to be commended for releasing the details of the research papers they rely upon for their stance that “chiropractic can help various childhood conditions” such as asthma.

Chiropractors accuse critics of “witch hunt” for examining evidence

The case of Simon Singh vs the BCA (British Chiropractic Association) is prompting calls for a re-examination of the UK’s libel laws. Bloggers are responding by scrutinising some of the chiropractic claims that triggered this case and this has already resulted in changes to what chiropractors are willing to claim.

Evidence Matters on UK political parties manifestos for the EU elections

Evidence Matters is pleased to see that science bloggers Frank Swain and Martin Robbins, of Sciencepunk and Layscience respectively, have an article on The Guardian website analysing the science policies of the various UK political parties standing in the forthcoming EU elections on 6th June.

Frank and Martin have blogged and analysed the parties responses to questions in the following areas on their own sites:

ENVIRONMENT
ENERGY
OPEN ACCESS
STEM CELL RESEARCH
CHEMICALS
SPACE
ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE
GM FOOD AND RESEARCH
CLIMATE CHANGE

Evidence Matters would also like to draw your attention to the blogger ‘gimpy’, whose correspondence with the Green Party about some of their policies leads him to believe that it has the potential to destroy biological research and to ‘holfordwatch’ who have grave concerns with the Green Party’s policy on alternative medicine.

Evidence Matters is in full agreement with Frank and Martin in concluding:

This was a fascinating exercise, and the first question one has to ask is why the mainstream media aren’t giving more attention to actual party policy ahead of the European Elections. Instead, there is a worrying likelihood that this election will be a protest against expenses and the Labour party.

[…] we were pleasantly surprised by the main parties, who seem to have reached a consensus on a variety of scientific issues. One notable exception to this was in the area of alternative medicine, where there appears to be a crippling lack of action on government and opposition benches.

The minor parties are a much more mixed bunch, and one wonders if voters seeking to register protest votes with the likes of UKIP and the Greens realise that they are supporting parties that apparently contain creationists and climate denialists (UKIP), and supporters of quackery (The Greens).

Martin Robbins can be contacted at

robbins.martin@googlemail.com
Evidence Matters can be contacted at
info@evidencematters.org

================================================================================
Evidence Matters is an independent, loose association of bloggers with a special interest in accurate science coverage and the use of appropriate evidence in decision-making. At present it is a means of contacting organisations and letting people know about stories that aren’t being covered or gross distortions of particular issues.

C4 and the Lamentable Kitchen Pharmacy

Many of us have an anecdote or family story we’ve never checked into because we don’t want to learn that it isn’t true. Sometimes, the motives are that we want to avoid humiliation but frequently it’s because it’s a good story as it stands but would lose something in the re-telling if it were accurate. How many people acknowledge that Simon Singh’s version of 9 Million Bicycles is more rigorous and logical but still prefer Katie Melua’s version if only because it scans better?

C4 must like to believe that chlorophyll is just like haemoglobin.

Paul Flynn MP Early Day Motion on Dore (and bloggers)

Paul Flynn MP has tabled an Early Day Motion in Parliarment, on the promotion of Dore. The Motion states:

That this House is appalled at the gullible uncritical promotion by the media of Dore, a claimed miracle cure for dyslexia, in the absence of scientific proof of its value; notes that there were five resignations from the editorial board of the journal Dyslexia in protest at false claims published in that journal on the efficacy of Dore; welcomes Ofcom’s finding that Dore’s television advertisement was in breach of its rules on evidence,; calls on the Jeremy Vine Show, Channel Five News, Radio Five Live, BBC London, ITV Central, ITV Yorkshire, the Daily Mail, the Daily Record, Scotland on Sunday, Tonight with Trevor McDonald and You and Yours to correct the false impressions they broadcast on an unproven treatment; and congratulates the bloggers and journalist Ben Goldacre for exposing this bad science and other exploitative snake oil salespeople.

That is an excellent Early Day Motion, and we hope that Parliament and the mainstream media take note.

Flynn asks “Will the media react and repent their gullibility”, and encourages readers of his (very interesting) blog to persuade their MPs to sign EDM 1770 (at the time of writing, the motion has five signatures). We would encourage our readers to do the same.