30 books
—
16 voters
Bad Science Books
Showing 1-50 of 234

by (shelved 11 times as bad-science)
avg rating 4.06 — 44,539 ratings — published 2008

by (shelved 2 times as bad-science)
avg rating 4.29 — 78,959 ratings — published 1995

by (shelved 2 times as bad-science)
avg rating 3.96 — 1,081 ratings — published 2018

by (shelved 2 times as bad-science)
avg rating 4.13 — 998,120 ratings — published 2012

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.07 — 311 ratings — published 2010

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.27 — 2,085 ratings — published

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.37 — 37,560 ratings — published 2016

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.06 — 180 ratings — published 2015

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.41 — 321 ratings — published 2016

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.08 — 21,796 ratings — published 2015

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.73 — 339 ratings — published 2011

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.17 — 570,854 ratings — published 2011

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.01 — 373 ratings — published 1999

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.33 — 146,930 ratings — published 2024

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.65 — 786 ratings — published 2020

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.23 — 2,761 ratings — published 2017

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.41 — 277,844 ratings — published 2018

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.06 — 3,367 ratings — published 2018

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.96 — 1,603,653 ratings — published 2012

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.55 — 1,042 ratings — published 2008

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.20 — 3,355 ratings — published 2017

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.14 — 50 ratings — published

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.27 — 336 ratings — published

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.41 — 37 ratings — published

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.55 — 60 ratings — published

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.83 — 224 ratings — published 1969

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.38 — 174,214 ratings — published 2012

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.76 — 693,752 ratings — published 2001

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.25 — 313 ratings — published 1915

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.62 — 1,834 ratings — published 2013

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.67 — 6,795 ratings — published 2022

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.04 — 5,973 ratings — published 2020

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.51 — 2,666 ratings — published 2021

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.31 — 32,771 ratings — published 2022

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.79 — 197 ratings — published 2018

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.62 — 42 ratings — published

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.89 — 6,179 ratings — published 2021

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.05 — 1,534 ratings — published 2021

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.07 — 44,489 ratings — published 2018

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.57 — 336 ratings — published 2013

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.39 — 3,213 ratings — published

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.11 — 862 ratings — published 1996

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.00 — 65 ratings — published 1987

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.08 — 90 ratings — published 1993

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.80 — 1,233,611 ratings — published 2020

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.05 — 86 ratings — published 1885

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 3.91 — 42,180 ratings — published 2017

by (shelved 1 time as bad-science)
avg rating 4.26 — 6,302 ratings — published 2021

“Just as animal research tells us that gluttony and sloth are side effects of a drive to accumulate body fat, it also says that eating in moderation and being physically active (literally, having the energy to exercise) are not evidence of moral rectitude. Rather, they're the metabolic benefits of a body that's programmed to remain lean.”
― Why We Get Fat: And What to Do About It
― Why We Get Fat: And What to Do About It
“It is hard to see how scientific theories that don't correspond with reality and consequently don't work can benefit marginalized people, or anyone.”
―
―