Participants skipped between buzzwords such as ‘authenticity’, ‘self-actualisation’ and ‘creativity’. Photograph: Alfred Pasieka/Getty Images/Science Photo Library Computer illustration of cancer cells.

Especially when we realise with a rush of all-too-rare self-awareness, that the reason we posted it was because it appealed more to our prejudices than to our reason. It's definitely a very interesting summary of the topic although, as mentioned, I didn't find much new here, there were definitely some new insights and a helpful overall framework. Drawing on a deep well of expertise in statistics and computational biology, Bergstrom and West exuberantly unpack examples of selection bias and muddled data visualization, distinguish between correlation and causation, and examine the susceptibility of science to modern bullshit.

Very definitely a book that should be issued to everyone, although what it doesn't tackle is the people who are absolutely determined to believe bullshit because it suits them better than the truth. Patients engaged with unproved treatments for cancer are more likely to reject conventional treatment, or delay life-saving interventions.

A related text I'd also suggest (and that is included in the authors' coursework) is Carl Sagan's wonderful The Demon Haunted World, which remains a must-read and as a bonus can be casually enjoyed chapter by chapter over time. It is a nice and to-date summary of how and why bullshit spreads, how to protect oneself from it, and finally how to protect others from it.

I'm disappointed because I was looking for a book on how to beat the very dangerous bullshit threatening the world today (in areas like pandemics). Plus, if there were such a conspiracy, wouldn’t those who work in the cancer sphere be just as susceptible to its malignant influence as anyone?