Bad Science in medicine

I've just finished reading Ben Goldacre's book, Bad Science, and it's a fascinating insight into the bad aspects of (mostly medical) science, like nutritionists, pharmaceutical companies, alternative medicine and homeopathy, anti-vaccination campaigns, antioxidants, and suchlike, and the influence of the media in promoting them. He discusses those specifics, but delves into how many trials and studies are done and how they should be done, showing how study statistics are manipulated to meet certain agendas. He also has a chapter in the most recent edition of the book on the HIV/AIDS scandal in South Africa, where quack Matthias Rath influenced then-President Thabo Mbeki and his sidekick, Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, into denying that HIV led to AIDS, and directly and indirectly leading to the infection and deaths of hundreds of thousands.

Some of the problems Goldacre touches on include stuff like press releases that talk about relative improvements instead of absolute improvments (e.g. "50% improvement" when talking about a difference between 0.4% and 0.6%, i.e. a 0.2% absolute improvement), presenting to the media instead of publishing in medical journals, deliberate faking of figures (e.g. Andrew Wakefield and the MMR vaccines), and comparison of treatments with placebos instead of with the current best treatment.

Highly recommended; this book is an eye-opener.