Scan barcode
msgtdameron's review
2.0
The two is a tad low, really a 2.5, reason: POORLY written. There are no transition paragraphs with make this work real real hard to read. There is a LOT of real good info in this work, but the lousy writing makes this so hard to read that the information is tough to discover.
Specter does have a lot a good information about how this country allows stupidity to lead to the denial of science. He interviewed Dr Faucci back in 2007. Well before the good doctor became famous as the voice of reason in the Trump Administration. Dr Faucci's message 14 years ago, Science will solve our problems of living with bacteria, viruses, and a plethora of other health problems as we go forward.
Their is one other problem with this work. Specter has a lot of anger towards the Anti- Vaxx movement and particular to Jenny McCarthy. This leads to the introduction and the first three chapters being a rant rather than usable information. Rants are fine but page after page does not make for a good read.
Fin ally Specter does glance over solutions to the problem by citing the down ward spiral of U.S. Education. Now I will digress a moment. When I retired from the Air Force I went to college and got a degree in Life Sciences Education. I taught HS Biology for several years before my PTS got the better of me. Many oldest Daughter taught first grade for eight years before she decided to become full time Mom. Her husband is a Associate Principal at a Middle School, 6-8. His parents were also both teachers and later in life administrators. My wife was a aid for elementary for ten years. My youngest taught every year she was working on her first Masters. Family dinners tend to discuss the latest in Education and ways to fix/repair the system to better serve our students. Our conclusion over the past ten years or so of weekly dinners, lunches, Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter etc: Test the students in the first week of school. Design the test with written questions on it. For example a biology test would have 50 multiple guess, then ten or so short answer questions, and then five or six essay questions, students have to answer two with a third for extra credit. Then in the last week of the school year the same test is given again. Each students grade will be by the difference between the first test and the end of year test. Who grades these tests you ask? Every school that I am aware of belongs to some type of league or district for sports, band, theater, debate, etc. each school in each district will have there tests graded by one of there other schools they are districted with. The beginning test have eight weeks to get graded. The end of year tests four. Seniors will be tested in Feb and then the rest of the year get ten free days where no explanation needed you don't have to show. Unexcussed absences after that and you don't walk, you don't get prom, Senior picnic and any other activities that go on in any particular school. Every one gets done and we have actually education going on instead of teaching to the test. Also we will have students who will be able to synthesis information, create new information from what they already know, and extrapolate answers. This type of testing would create more discerning adults. Adults who would believe what the science says, who would not believe the unsupported lies of politicians, and an acceptance of science.
Specter had a chance to write a better book but he did not. I'm glad this is on my shelf as the information is useful, but again the writing makes it a trudge.
Specter does have a lot a good information about how this country allows stupidity to lead to the denial of science. He interviewed Dr Faucci back in 2007. Well before the good doctor became famous as the voice of reason in the Trump Administration. Dr Faucci's message 14 years ago, Science will solve our problems of living with bacteria, viruses, and a plethora of other health problems as we go forward.
Their is one other problem with this work. Specter has a lot of anger towards the Anti- Vaxx movement and particular to Jenny McCarthy. This leads to the introduction and the first three chapters being a rant rather than usable information. Rants are fine but page after page does not make for a good read.
Fin ally Specter does glance over solutions to the problem by citing the down ward spiral of U.S. Education. Now I will digress a moment. When I retired from the Air Force I went to college and got a degree in Life Sciences Education. I taught HS Biology for several years before my PTS got the better of me. Many oldest Daughter taught first grade for eight years before she decided to become full time Mom. Her husband is a Associate Principal at a Middle School, 6-8. His parents were also both teachers and later in life administrators. My wife was a aid for elementary for ten years. My youngest taught every year she was working on her first Masters. Family dinners tend to discuss the latest in Education and ways to fix/repair the system to better serve our students. Our conclusion over the past ten years or so of weekly dinners, lunches, Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter etc: Test the students in the first week of school. Design the test with written questions on it. For example a biology test would have 50 multiple guess, then ten or so short answer questions, and then five or six essay questions, students have to answer two with a third for extra credit. Then in the last week of the school year the same test is given again. Each students grade will be by the difference between the first test and the end of year test. Who grades these tests you ask? Every school that I am aware of belongs to some type of league or district for sports, band, theater, debate, etc. each school in each district will have there tests graded by one of there other schools they are districted with. The beginning test have eight weeks to get graded. The end of year tests four. Seniors will be tested in Feb and then the rest of the year get ten free days where no explanation needed you don't have to show. Unexcussed absences after that and you don't walk, you don't get prom, Senior picnic and any other activities that go on in any particular school. Every one gets done and we have actually education going on instead of teaching to the test. Also we will have students who will be able to synthesis information, create new information from what they already know, and extrapolate answers. This type of testing would create more discerning adults. Adults who would believe what the science says, who would not believe the unsupported lies of politicians, and an acceptance of science.
Specter had a chance to write a better book but he did not. I'm glad this is on my shelf as the information is useful, but again the writing makes it a trudge.
psteve's review
3.0
An important book, about the dangers of denialism -- a distrust of science and facts in favor of magical and conspirational thinking. Specter covers the Vioxx story (very interesting, because though it killed thousands, it also gave relieve to hundreds of thousands, and maybe should still be on the market), anti-vaccine nutcases, organic foods, and more. The book is readable, but it needed a stronger flow throughout, and leaves me wondering what to do; the author give us no help in evaluating claims. His takedown of Andrew Weill was also great.
baghaii's review
3.0
After the local discussions by people afraid of 5G, I needed to read a book that was preaching to the choir of people who believed in scientific evidence over nonsense. A number of the people that the author relied on for this book are people that I read.
However, I was disappointed in the author's discussion on GMOs because he was measuring the harm of pesticides by the weight of the pesticides applied, arguing that GMOs required a smaller quantity of pesticide. This is not a good way to measure the harm of pesticides. We usually measure the harmfulness of chemicals not by the weight of the chemical but by their LD 50. He really should have discussed this chapter with some more pharmacologists or chemists.
It was quite jarring to watch the author transition from pesticides are not harmful because we measure them by weight to the chapter on echinacea where he is not discussing anything about the quantity of the harmful substances present in these supplements.
I really liked the chapters discussing vaccines and synthetic biology.
However, I was disappointed in the author's discussion on GMOs because he was measuring the harm of pesticides by the weight of the pesticides applied, arguing that GMOs required a smaller quantity of pesticide. This is not a good way to measure the harm of pesticides. We usually measure the harmfulness of chemicals not by the weight of the chemical but by their LD 50. He really should have discussed this chapter with some more pharmacologists or chemists.
It was quite jarring to watch the author transition from pesticides are not harmful because we measure them by weight to the chapter on echinacea where he is not discussing anything about the quantity of the harmful substances present in these supplements.
I really liked the chapters discussing vaccines and synthetic biology.
tareka's review
5.0
Michael Specter is presenting a very solid argument about different groups of people who share something in common, they deny the facts in favor of unproven information.
He is also admitting that yes, the price we have to pay for advancement is sometimes sever but truly we have no other options but to keep advancing. As people tend to forget how much science and technology has helped the human race to survive.
He is also admitting that yes, the price we have to pay for advancement is sometimes sever but truly we have no other options but to keep advancing. As people tend to forget how much science and technology has helped the human race to survive.
nks78's review
3.0
I read this book immediately before reading [b:Predictably Irrational|1713426|Predictably Irrational The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions|Dan Ariely|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1255573980s/1713426.jpg|3074803] and through the power of relativism (a concept explained in the latter book) this one did not have the same impact for me.
If I could give half stars this would be 3.5. Don't get me wrong, it's good, I recommend you read it. It's just that I found it dragged in places, and that I felt as though the author had a thesis going into the book and was merely picking evidence to buttress his pre-determined conclusions.
That said, I find myself returning to the themes and examples of this book more and more; Vioxx, the great Vaccine denial, herbal remedies - terrific stuff.
Since reading this book I am more able to spot denialism, the see similarities of language between anti-vaxxers and global warming denialists. What I don't feel I have is the tools to combat them - perhaps sadly, there are no such tools.
Returning to the point at the start, I enjoyed this book, but I felt as though the author was laying out a thesis and seeking to prove that thesis, rather than providing the more rational readers the tools to combat denialism where we see it.
If I could give half stars this would be 3.5. Don't get me wrong, it's good, I recommend you read it. It's just that I found it dragged in places, and that I felt as though the author had a thesis going into the book and was merely picking evidence to buttress his pre-determined conclusions.
That said, I find myself returning to the themes and examples of this book more and more; Vioxx, the great Vaccine denial, herbal remedies - terrific stuff.
Since reading this book I am more able to spot denialism, the see similarities of language between anti-vaxxers and global warming denialists. What I don't feel I have is the tools to combat them - perhaps sadly, there are no such tools.
Returning to the point at the start, I enjoyed this book, but I felt as though the author was laying out a thesis and seeking to prove that thesis, rather than providing the more rational readers the tools to combat denialism where we see it.
unusedphd's review
4.0
This was a good red with a nice overview of some of the big topics including anti-vacine and anti-gmo sentiments in America. The science was presented in a way that I imagine almost everyone would find accessible.
speljamr's review
4.0
A much needed book in an age of irrational thinking. These days, too many people are more willing to listen to a Playboy Playmate than the rational advice of the scientific community. Unfortunately, those probably won't be the people that read this book.
panxa's review
3.0
Fairly interesting, but the authorial attitude was sometimes hard to get passed. The introduction makes him seem like a crank, but he's fairly level in the main text.
More...