
My lovely book, Information Is Beautiful, is out in the UK (Amazon).
To celebrate, I’ve teamed up with HarperCollins to give away five signed copies.

My lovely book, Information Is Beautiful, is out in the UK (Amazon).
To celebrate, I’ve teamed up with HarperCollins to give away five signed copies.
The global response to the Haiti earthquake has been extraordinary and generous. But in the midst of all the reporting, it’s difficult to keep track of the numbers.
In particular, who has given what, who has dug deepest, and how the Haiti relief fund currently compares to those of other tragedies.
This is an image I created for The Guardian Datablog to visualise the international contributions to the Haiti Earthquake recovery effort as of 24th January 2010.

And the data is here for you to explore. (Thanks to Phil Wand and Jeffrey Grabell for the idea).

Dating site OKCupid uses data from their members to overturn myths about what makes a successful online dating profile photo. A fascinating & funny read.
Summary:
men – mysteriously looking away from camera, unsmiling, holding an animal
women – flirting into camera, outdoors, with a hint of cleavage
They also did another great data-piece about what to say in an opening message.
[via Waxy.org]
New York-based designer Mike Deal has a great project going visualizing The Beatles.


I especially like this one. It tracks the keys of Beatles’ album tracks. You can see at a glance their poppier, more harmonic albums.


The project is an offshoot of an ongoing kaleidoscopic project at chartingthebeatles.com and on Flickr.
If it grabs you, head on over and take part. See you there!
Off the back of the recent Climate Skeptics vs The Consensus image, we were curious how many scientists might make up ‘The Consensus’.
The Skeptical side claims at least 31,486 dissenters in their ranks, according to the PetitionProject.org. That sounds like a lot. But is it?

Of course, not all 12 million US scientists therefore agree with ‘The Consensus’. But this puts the PetitionProject’s 31,486 signatories in some kind of context.
A visual map of the arguments for and against human-caused global climate change.
I’m fascinated by climate deniers. How could anyone deny the climate change is happening?
What evidence is there? Surely it’s unambiguous?
Curious, I investigated the key statements made by climate denialists and sought out the counter-views, as presented by climate research scientists. The result is this image.
(This a new and updated version of the spread on Climate Skepticism from my book The Visual Miscellaneum)
I researched this subject in a very particular way. I deliberately chose not speak directly to any climate experts or leading scientists in the field. I used only publicly available web sources.
Why? Because I wanted to simulate what it’s like for people trying to learn about climate change online.
My conclusion is “what a nightmare”. I was generally shocked and appalled by how difficult it was to source counter arguments. The data was often tucked away on extremely ancient or byzantine websites. The key counter arguments I often found, 16 scrolls down, on comment 342 on a far flung realclimate.org post from three years ago. And even when I found an answer, the answers were excessively jargonized or technical.
Most of the info for this image is sourced from Realclimate.org. It’s an amazing blog staffed tirelessly by some of the world’s leading climatologists.
Unfortunately, the majority of the writing on there is so scientific and so technical, it makes the website nigh on useless to the casual, curious reader.
This has got to be one of the reasons why scientists and leaders are struggling to convince sections of the populace that the threat of climate change is real. Because they’re doing such a terrible job explaining it.
(Saying all that, I would like to express my gratitude to Gavin A Schmidt, one of unsung heroes of the web IMHO. His sterling and patient replies to comments, on RealClimate.org in understandable English, have really helped this process.)
This image was a mammoth undertaking, especially for someone like me, unschooled in climate science. So I appreciate your understanding if any errors have crept into the process. If you spot any, please get in touch and I’ll will correct them on the double.
In every case, wherever possible, I went back the original data. (I’ve included a ZIP of all the data I’ve collected plus a spreadsheet of all the sources). And all the graphs in the image are generated from the original temperature records and other data sources. Feel free to rifle through and check everything.
RealClimate.org are (now) keeping an archive of all the data – if you want even more!
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/
UPDATE 1 (12th Dec 09): There have been a few complaints about the legibility of the image. So I’ve created a version on white instead of black.
Consensus sources: Realclimate.org, NOAA Satellite and Information Service, Nature.com, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Centre
Explore the sources In this Google doc
Here’s all the climate change data I used to create the graphs
My latest visual piece for The Guardian, The Billion Pound O Gram, is a British cousin of The Billion Dollar Gram. It reveals the scale of the budget deficit in the centre of the British economy. SPOILER: It’s a big one..
I’m doing a regular weekly visualisation for the excellent Guardian Datablog, the front-end for an amazing library of statistics and data, lovingly hand-gathered by The Guardian.
My first post is about Deadly Drugs.
There’s been a furore over here in the UK about the dangers of illegal drugs. The Government has sacked its most senior drugs advisor, Dr Professor Nutt, after he claimed cannabis was no more harmful than alcohol. And that horse-riding, and specifically ‘equasy’ (Equine Addiction Syndrome) was riskier than taking ecstasy. (Statistically he’s correct. His study here.).
Anyway, digging at the numbers behind his statements and how drugs are reported in the popular press, I found some stuff I didn’t expect about drug harms.
Check out the article on The Guardian blog for detail and data. You want both right?
The Change In Carbon Emissions
Another beautiful viz from Good Magazine. This time by Spanish viz supremo Lamosca. Twinned with Kyoto Targets.
Your pet’s CO2 pawprint
How much CO2 is that doggy in the window? [Via Good Magazine and NewScientist]
White fight or flight?
Here’s a little something I did, overlaying membership data from the racist British National Party and ethnic populations in the UK. See the full size image.
300 days of Swine Flu
Nice image from Michael Paulkner showing the death toll from Swine Flu after 300 days. Larger sizes here.
Blimey. Quite a lot of doom and gloom in those images. I’ll try to make the next one cheerier.
If you’re still hungry for more infographical morsels, check out the last selection.
In the meantime, if you come across any visual delights, please send them through.
SnakeOil? Scientific evidence for health supplements
A generative data-visualisation of all the scientific evidence for popular health supplements by David McCandless and Andy Perkins.
I’m a bit of a health nut. Keeping fit. Streamlining my diet. I plan to live to the age of 150 in fact. But I get frustrated by constant, conflicting reports and studies about health supplements.
Is Vitamin C worth taking or not? Does Echinacea kill colds? Am I missing out not drinking litres of Goji juice, wheatgrass extract and flaxseed oil every day?
In an effort to give myself a quick reference guide, I dove into the scientific evidence and created a visualization for my book. And then worked with the awesome Andy Perkins on a further interactive, generative “living image”.
Play with interactive version | See the still image
This visualisation generates itself from this Google Doc. So when new research comes out, we can quickly update the data and regenerate the image. (How cool is that??) Hopefully then this should be a useful web resources for years to come.
About the image
This image is a “balloon race”. The higher a bubble, the greater the evidence for its effectiveness. But the supplements are only effective for the conditions listed inside the bubble.
You might also see multiple bubbles for certain supps. These is because some supps affect a range of conditions, but the evidence quality varies from condition to condition. For example, there’s strong evidence that Green Tea is good for cholesterol levels. But evidence for its anti-cancer effects is conflicting. In these cases, we give a supp another bubble.
The evidence
We only considered large, human, randomized placebo-controlled trials in our data scrape – wherever possible. No animal trials. No cell studies. Many of the health claims made by the $23 billion supplements industry are based on non-human trials. We wanted to cut through that.
This piece was doggedly researched by myself, and researchers Pearl Doughty-White and Alexia Wdowski. We looked at the abstracts of over 1500 studies on PubMed (run by US National Library Of Medicine) and Cochrane.org (which hosts meta-studies of scientific research). It took us several months to seek out the evidence – or lack of.
You can see our key results in this spreadsheet. (It’s the same spreadsheet that generates the interactive image).
Generation Game
This is our first interactive piece here on Information Is Beautiful. We’ll be doing more generative pieces over the next few months so stay tuned!
Updates
UPDATE 1: 6th Mar 2010 - We’ve updated the spreadsheet (changes in bold) and the viz after great feedback and new evidence and corrections from our amazing visitors. Thank you all so much.
Quick summary: We’ve added CoQ10, cocoa, capsaicin, L-Lysine and hyaluronic acid to the chart. And adjusted entries for Magnesium, Tumeric and Omega 3 (part of a massive downgrade of Omega 3 in fact). Read the change-log for full details
UPDATE 1: 10th Mar 2010 - Omega 3 has been downgraded in almost every category. See the spreadsheet (changes in bold) for more details.
See the visualisation | Check out the spreadsheet
Feed Us Back
As ever, we welcome your thoughts, crits, comments, corrections, compliments, tweaks, new evidence, missing supps, and general feedback. Thank you!
source: PubMed, Cochrane,
data: in this Google spreadsheet
change-log: here
104 Comments