Ben Goldacre
"Bad Science" ''Guardian'' column and blog
### "Bad Science" *Guardian* column and blog

Goldacre was known for his weekly column, "Bad Science", which ran in the Saturday edition of *[The Guardian](/wiki/The_Guardian "The Guardian")* from 2003 until November 2011\. The column largely concerned [pseudoscience](/wiki/Pseudoscience "Pseudoscience") and the misuse of science. Topics discussed included marketing, the media, [quackery](/wiki/Quackery "Quackery"), problems with the [pharmaceutical industry](/wiki/Pharmaceutical_industry "Pharmaceutical industry"), and its relationship with [medical journals](/wiki/Medical_journal "Medical journal").Goldacre, Ben. (2008\). [A quick fix would stop drug firms bending the truth](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/feb/27/pharmaceuticalindustry), *The Guardian*.Goldacre, Ben. (2008\). [The danger of drugs … and data](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/may/09/bad-science-medical-journals-companies). *The Guardian*.

Goldacre has criticised anti\-immunisation campaigners (particularly followers of [Andrew Wakefield](/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield "Andrew Wakefield") such as [Melanie Phillips](/wiki/Melanie_Phillips "Melanie Phillips") and [Jeni Barnett](/wiki/Jeni_Barnett "Jeni Barnett")), [Brain Gym](/wiki/Brain_Gym "Brain Gym"), bogus positive [MRSA](/wiki/Methicillin-resistant_Staphylococcus_aureus "Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus") swab stories in tabloid newspapers, [publication bias](/wiki/Publication_bias "Publication bias"),Goldacre, Ben (2008\). [Missing in action: the trials that did not make the news](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/sep/20/medicalresearch.cancer). *The Guardian*. and the makers of the product [Penta Water](/wiki/Penta_Water "Penta Water").

He has been a particularly harsh critic of the nutritionist [Gillian McKeith](/wiki/Gillian_McKeith "Gillian McKeith"). While investigating McKeith's membership of the American Association of Nutritional Consultants, Goldacre obtained a professional membership on behalf of his late cat, Henrietta, from the same institution for $60\. In February 2007, McKeith agreed to stop using the title "Doctor" in her advertising, following a complaint to the [Advertising Standards Authority](/wiki/Advertising_Standards_Authority_%28United_Kingdom%29 "Advertising Standards Authority (United Kingdom)") by a "Bad Science" reader. In an interview with [Richard Saunders](/wiki/Richard_Saunders_%28skeptic%29 "Richard Saunders (skeptic)") of the podcast [Skeptic Zone](/wiki/Australian_Skeptics "Australian Skeptics"), Goldacre said, "Nutritionists are particularly toxic because they are the alternative therapists who, more than any other, misrepresent themselves as being men and women of science."

In 2008, [Matthias Rath](/wiki/Matthias_Rath "Matthias Rath"), a vitamin entrepreneur, sued Goldacre and *The Guardian* over three articles,[No way to treat an Aids hero](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jan/20/southafrica.aids), *The Guardian*, 20 January 2007['Gambia's president may be weird, but Aids superstitions strike closer to home’](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jan/27/aids.badscience), *The Guardian*, 27 January 2007\.['How money is not the only barrier to Aids patients getting hold of drugs’](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2007/feb/17/badscience.uknews), *The Guardian*, 17 February 2007\. in which Goldacre criticised Rath's promotion of vitamin pills to [AIDS](/wiki/AIDS "AIDS") sufferers in South African townships. Rath dropped his action in September 2008 and was ordered to pay initial costs of £220,000 to *The Guardian*. As of September 2008, the paper was seeking full costs of £500,000, and Goldacre had expressed an interest in writing a book about Rath and South Africa, as a chapter on the subject had to be cut from his book while the litigation proceeded. The chapter was reinstated in a later edition of the book, and also published online in 2009\.Goldacre, Ben. [Matthias Rath – steal this chapter](http://www.badscience.net/2009/04/matthias-rath-steal-this-chapter/), badscience.net, 9 April 2009\. Goldacre continues to cite Rath as a proponent of harmful pseudoscience.


Why was Matthias Rath's promotion of vitamin pills to AIDS sufferers criticised?