ASK Musings

No matter where you go, there you are.

Science Archive

Wednesday

11

June 2014

0

COMMENTS

The Pluto Files

Written by , Posted in Reviews

Neil deGrasse Tyson is national treasure. Hopefully you all are aware of this, either because you’ve known for years, or because you caught the fantastic Cosmos this year. About three years ago I was lucky enough to see him speak at the local university, where he told vivid stories that helped me understand the scale of things in the universe and on earth, including one story that aided me in fully grasping how much money Bill Gates really has. Mr. Tyson is coming back to Seattle this fall and the shows are already sold out, which makes me so, so sad. But at least I have his books, and honestly that’s saying a lot, because the books are awesome. “The Pluto Files” tells the story of Pluto and the drama surrounding its reclassification.

Neil Tyson

Now, I love science, but my last formal education in the field was over 15 years ago. Sometimes I fear I won’t be able to follow science books, but Mr. Tyson has this lovely way of explaining things that makes them understandable but somehow doesn’t make me feel like he’s talking down to me. He’s clearly a brilliant scientist, but I think he’s brilliant writer as well.

The book provides a history of Pluto’s discovery, and is full of fun facts, like why moons of planets usually follow the convention of characters from the myths of the gods the planets were named for, but one’s moons are named for characters from Shakespeare. I love these trivia nuggets (I find they come in handy during pub quizzes), and they are dropped throughout in a manner that keeps what could have been dry material interesting and even light.

Part of the story around the reclassification ties in with the opening of the Hayden Planetarium in NYC, and Mr. Tyson describes in some detail all the thought that was put into building this lovely facility. Understanding the nature of science and the fact that some things change, he shares how they addressed the more concrete versus the more likely to change elements of the exhibit. It’s an interesting story because the planetarium staff had to make a call on how to address Pluto while the discussion about classification was going on.

Because of Mr. Tyson’s opinion on the topic, as well as his association with the Hayden Planetarium, he has been subjected to many letters – often with an angry tone, and often from whole classes of children – decrying the decision to remove Pluto from the list of planets, and he shares them with us. He clearly has a sense of humor about all of it while avoiding being condescending to people who don’t have the level of knowledge he has.

If you like science, pick this book up. Shoot, if you just like a good story, pick it up. It’s a pretty quick read, and it’s highly entertaining.

Monday

26

May 2014

0

COMMENTS

The Great Influenza by John M. Barry

Written by , Posted in Reviews

Three stars

influenza

I work in public health emergency preparedness, so this book about the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic has been on my to-read list for a while. People rave about it; even though it’s about 450 pages of small print, I was ready to dive into it because I already have an interest in this sort of thing, I have some background in working on preparing for a pandemic, and I’ve found that histories of diseases and other medical issues (“The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks,” “The Ghost Map,” about cholera in London) can be really fascinating reads.

Unfortunately I can’t sing the praises of this book in the same way my colleagues (and apparently every major newspaper) have.

The book is clearly impeccably researched. The author spent seven years on it, and admits in the acknowledgments that he set out to write a very different book initially. He also lets the reader know that there actually isn’t a lot written in terms of first-hand accounts of experiencing the pandemic. There is a lot of information on the work done by scientists, and the work done by the military and government at the higher levels, but he isn’t able to really get into the areas that I am most interested in: how cities dealt with the pandemic.

Basically, I feel like the author wrote three books and attempted to weave them all together. Others say he was very successful in doing this; I think he was not. First, there’s the story of the scientists trying to figure out what was causing the influenza (a virus? A bacteria?). This story includes providing 80 pages of history of medicine. That is … fine, and I suppose sort of sets the stage? But not really. It felt like it could have been pared down to 15 or 20 pages and still more than gotten the point across that by the time this pandemic hit in 1918, medicine was still really in the dark ages.

The second story is about the war and the military’s treatment of the pandemic. If the information in here is accurate, well, DAMN. Wilson was not a great president when it comes to caring for civilians. He apparently didn’t really even acknowledge the pandemic and the devastation it was causing throughout the country, and pushed for some decisions that clearly cost lives unnecessarily – namely continuing to allow such close quarters at military bases. This part of the book was getting more at what I thought I would be reading about, but even this was oddly fleshed out. It didn’t fit very well, and kept popping up.

And this gets me to the issues of organization. In “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks,” the author jumps back and forth along a timeline. At the start of each chapter, that timeline is there, and she provides a consistent visual to let the reader know where we are going to be in this chapter – allows us to prepare ourselves to process what we’re going to read. I appreciate that some people prefer to be along for the ride – and I’ve enjoyed that when reading novels. But I found it utterly distracting in this book. Half the time I wasn’t sure where or when the chapter was taking place. The fall wave of the 1918 pandemic was not that long – it passed through cities in a matter of weeks – but other than the occasional date thrown out in the middle of a chapter, I didn’t really know how each component fit in with the whole.

Finally, there was the third, and very small, book, and sadly that was the book I thought I was reading. It was almost entirely contained in chapters 17, 18 and 19. Those chapters talk about what the city of Philadelphia did – or more accurately did not do – to inform and protect the public. That is the story I am most interested in, and those chapters were well-written. There just wasn’t enough of it.

I can’t say that I would recommend this book. Again, it appears to be very well-researched, and probably interesting to those who really want a history of the medical side. But not so great if you’re interested in learning about how individuals and cities prepared for and responded to the pandemic.

Monday

7

April 2014

0

COMMENTS

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot

Written by , Posted in Reviews

Five Stars

Others have reviewed this for Cannonball Read already, so here are the basics in case you missed it: Henrietta Lacks was a black woman who died at Johns Hopkins, where she had been admitted due to complications from cervical cancer. She had radium treatment at one point, and when she received the treatment, a biopsy of her tumor was taken at the request of a researcher. From there, the cells were cultured and became some of the first that would grow, and keep on growing, in a lab, making them perfect for testing all sorts of things, including the polio vaccine that helped eradicate the disease from the U.S. The problem is that she never knew about this (nor did she consent), and her family didn’t find out until about 25 years later. While researchers and biomedical companies were making history (and money), Henrietta’s descendants were mostly poor, without much secondary education or even basic health insurance.

Lacks

The author, Rebecca Skloot, is a white woman who first learned about the “HeLa” cells in high school. She wanted to know more about the woman behind the cells, and spent over a decade writing this book – she tracked down medical records, met with researchers, and eventually was able to spend lots of time with Henrietta’s children and grandchildren, helping them to learn more about the mother they didn’t ever get a chance to know.

This book is fascinating in many ways. The first is just the sheer quality of Ms. Skloot’s storytelling. She weaves the present and the past together seamlessly, finding clever and logical ways to intertwine the research, the history, and the science so that the book flows really well.

It is also a great book for those of us interested in biomedical ethics. Once we part with something that was once connected to us, does it stop belonging to us? Do we have any right to demand that our tissues not be used in ways that we might find objectionable? What about genetic mapping – if my DNA is found to be really helpful in some sort of research, am I obliged to be okay with that research? Are my (hypothetical) kids obliged to be okay with research that is traceable to their genetic code? And can we ever really consent when the alternative to saying “sure, use my cancer cells” may be that they don’t remove the cells? These issues are mentioned throughout the book, but get a more thorough review during the afterward, where one particularly douchey Harvard researcher seems to think that research matters above all else. Which, who knows, maybe he’s right, but he doesn’t make any legitimate  argument about it.

Finally, the book is fascinating in the most important way a non-fiction book like this can be – it tells us about a real, flawed family that has been devastated not just by the loss of their matriarch decades ago, but by the realization that her cells live on in ways they never imagined and didn’t entirely understand in the beginning. It’s a glaring statement about the priorities in this country when a person can ‘donate’ cells that very seriously changed the medical world forever, but her family can’t afford health care for themselves. There’s so much here about racism, classism, and elitism that I could write a thesis on it. But instead I’ll just leave you with the strong recommendation that you pick up this book.

Friday

11

October 2013

0

COMMENTS

Packing for Mars: The Curious Science of Life in the Void

Written by , Posted in Reviews

4 Stars

packingformars

This is my second Mary Roach book of this Cannonball read, and the fact that it popped into my queue right now is perfect, because Gravity is out and I cannot wait to see it.

I was excited to read this because when I was a kid I wanted to be an astronaut. Not enough to get into the physics and astronomy track in college, or enlist in the air force, or really do anything to actively pursue that career path, but enough that to this day I still think that if I win the lottery I plan to squirrel away a chunk of the change to pay my way into space (after donating the vast majority of it to charity, of course.)

The premise is not just exploring space travel, but specifically extended space travel. Ms. Roach does a great job of weaving in the history of space travel through specific areas from eating space food to … eliminating said food. There are so many wonderful facts, great footnotes and just fun stories. She gets to ride the vomit comet (i.e. the parabolic flight), interview groundbreaking (atmosphere-busting?) astronauts, scientists and others.

The book is especially interesting because it doesn’t sugar-coat anything about space travel. I didn’t realize, for example, that some of the early space flights involved two dudes hanging out in a capsule for two weeks, no ability to wash or really take care of any personal hygiene needs. Or how much fecal matter can end up floating around in the space shuttle, and how much research and development had to go into creating a toilet, or how much effort goes into creating food that allows for a little more time between … evacuations.

Along the way of telling the story of all the challenges that are increased on a long space trip, Ms. Roach drops great little bits of knowledge. For example, she explains how the flag on the moon looked like it was blowing in the wind even though there isn’t wind on the moon, and talks about why people get motion sickness. There are so many awesome nuggets that it’s worth it for anyone who is into trivia.

You know the drill. It’s Mary Roach. It’s good. You’ll probably like it. Add it to the list.

Wednesday

17

July 2013

0

COMMENTS

Gulp

Written by , Posted in Reviews

Gulp

I love Ms. Roach’s books. Stiff is a particular favorite of mine. Her writing style reads more like a fun conversation than an informative book, even though her books are inevitably also filled with interesting tidbits.

This book was no exception. Following the life of food as it passes through, well, us, Gulp spends each chapter focused on a different bodily function, some spreading across multiple chapters. Each chapter has some interesting history and interviews with folks doing research you probably didn’t know was going on. It is fun, entertaining, and an easy read.

Really the only wish I had is one that’s more for my benefit than others. I wish the book had started out with a basic reminder of the all the functions along the way. What does the small intestine do again? Is the large intestine different from the colon? Yes, I learned this in biology (I think), but that was a couple of decades ago, and I kind of assumed a book about digestion would provide me with that reminder. Additionally, while each chapter is definitely interesting on its own, there isn’t the connection one might expect in this type of book. It seems to lend itself well to a piece by piece narrative, but she only follows that in the most general terms.

Like Stiff, there are some who will be turned off by the realistic and blunt nature of the book. There’s a lot of talk of body fluids, smells and other things that people usually don’t discuss in ‘polite company.’ But if that doesn’t bother you, and like fun facts and interesting bits of trivia, then I suggest adding it to your list.

Monday

24

June 2013

0

COMMENTS

Bad Science

Written by , Posted in Politics, Reviews

Bad Science book cover

You guys. YOU GUYS. This book is amazing. I started reading it Sunday morning. Now it’s Monday night, and I’ve finished all 258 pages, and I’m sad that it’s over.

I found out about this book thanks to Cannonball Reader Mei-Lu, and picked up a copy on that same trip to Powell’s that netted me an okay and a good book (so far – more reviews to come). As a background, I do have a bout two years’ worth of graduate-level statistics training, and took a philosophy of science class that focused exclusively on evidence, objectivity, and how that all interacts with policy, and I still found things in this book that I’d not been exposed to before. Frankly, I’d love to see it be required reading for freshman in college (or seniors in high school) to help them become better informed citizens.

The book is extraordinarily well written. At times Dr. Goldacre sounds a bit arrogant, but that’s really only relevant if that’s something you find it difficult to get past, which in this case I did not. What is more relevant is that he has great information, strong examples to illustrate his points, and an overall way with words that makes this book feel more like an outstanding novel than a science non-fiction. It reminded me a bit of Mary Roach’s works, which makes sense – she even provided a supporting blurb for the back of the copy I purchased.

The biggest point I took away from this reading is frustration that the people we expect to be providing good information to us often aren’t. And that isn’t just the scientists (or I guess “scientists”) engaging in all manner of deceit to bend data their way; it’s the newspapers and members of the media who either choose not to engage in serious examination of the data and papers themselves, or frame the issue in ways not supported by the evidence. Not everyone has time to read through all the supporting evidence on an issue; that’s why we have the scientists, and the science reporters (or sadly, the general reporters tasked with reporting on science issues). When one or more of those folks aren’t providing good information, or willing to do their jobs, those of us who rely on them are taking a huge gamble.

Please check this book out. I’m so glad I purchased a hard copy of it; I can tell I’ll be re-reading it and referencing it a lot in the future.

Monday

17

June 2013

0

COMMENTS

Unscientific America

Written by , Posted in Reviews

I should know better than to ever go into Powell’s without a firm agreement with myself that I will NOT buy any books that aren’t already on my Goodreads list. I mean, I’ve got 138 waiting for me – do I REALLY need to walk up and down the aisles of this massive indie bookstore, pulling off books that catch my eye?

Yes, yes I do. Unfortunately, I wish I hadn’t picked up this one.

unscientific

Subtitled “How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future,” Mooney and Kirshenbaum’s book purports to explore why the lack of interest in or understanding of science is a threat to the U.S. While I appreciate the sentiment, there were a few negative things that really stood out to me as I read this book, resulting in a pretty low rating.

First, this book was published in 2009, and spends a good part discussing how scientists need to be better versed in how to discuss their findings and research with the media. Better communications training for all scientists is one of their main solutions to the problem referenced in the title, and overall it’s a good one. They point to Carl Sagan as a great scientist who the average person trusted and was interested in learning from; they also point out that he was essentially shunned by “serious” scientists. That’s a problem and needs to be fixed. However, one of the author’s biggest concerns is that we don’t have anyone like that these days.

Say what? Has he never heard of Neil deGrasse Tyson? That man is amazing. He got The Daily Show to (for the day at least) fix their opening credits so the world spins the right way. He got James Cameron to FIX THE SKY when he released the anniversary print of Titanic. This is a man people know, a man who is trying to bridge the unnecessary gap between science and policy, and he’s not even mentioned in the book. That alone gives me pause.

Second, the book has a disturbing chapter called “The New Atheists” that seeks to vilify PZ Meyers, Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. Now, I don’t know much about Meyers, and I know that Sam Harris seems to be EXTREMELY islamophobic, and Richard Dawkins seems to be quite misogynistic. However, those were the issues these authors had. They attempt to make the case that atheists like them, who suggest that religion today is incompatible with reason, are making the situation worse. I actually get the argument they are trying to make, but they make it so poorly that it’s a bit challenging to get on their side.

Additionally, while I see they have a larger goal in mind, they also seem to be doing the ‘give both sides equal time” thing they eviscerate just a few chapters earlier when discussing climate change. As an atheist (of the ‘there’s no evidence for a diving being now but if you gave me some obviously I’d change my mind’ variety) I am clearly more prone to sensitivity around discussions of this nature, so it is possible that I am either misreading that section or just disagree, but either way it left me with a pretty bad taste in my mouth.

Finally, while the title was clear enough to me that this was about the specific problem of science literacy in America, the nationalist undertones were ever-present and unsettling. I’d like to see the discussion about why it’s important for people to understand science and find it interesting from a policy perspective without ending the chapter with “BECAUSE AMERICA MUST BE NUMBER ONE!!!!1!1!!” I take issue with the U.S. not fostering financial support around issues like climate change, but not because we are the best yay U.S.A.! There seem to be constant appeals to that competitive, egotistical spirit in a lot of the promotion of the STEM areas (science, technology, engineering and math), often to the detriment of the humanities, which ironically these authors correctly point out are a necessary part of even science education. A focus on why this is a problem in our country without the ‘because WIN’ argument would be refreshing.

I appreciate (to a degree) what these authors were going for, but I think they missed the mark. The book was certainly an easy read (and very short, and only 130 pages of text with an additional 100 or so pages of references), and well written, but the arguments left me wanting something better.

Sunday

19

May 2013

0

COMMENTS

Paleofantasy

Written by , Posted in Reviews

“A simpler life with more exercise, fewer processed foods, and closer contact with our children may well be good for us. But we shouldn’t seek to live that way because we think it emulates our ancestors.” – Marlene Zuk, Paleofantasy

There are a lot of different diets out there, some couched as providing quick weight loss, others purporting to be full-on lifestyles. We’re likely all familiar with South Beach and Atkins, as well as some of the old-school fixes (cabbage soup, cayenne lemonade ‘cleanse’). But one that’s gotten a lot of coverage lately is the Paleo or caveman lifestyle. The basic foundation of these recent movements is that we haven’t evolved for this life (eating dairy, sitting at a desk, consuming refined grains), so we need to adjust our diet to get back to the time when we were best matched to our environment: the Paleolithic era.

I try to reserve judgment of people if they are not hurting others. If what you choose to do works – either because of placebo effect or otherwise – then yay for you! I’m not, however, a fan of people promoting certain actions for reasons that can’t be supported with facts. If I tell you that a car will go forward when you step on the gas pedal, I’m correct; if I tell you it goes forward if you step on the gas pedal because of magical fairy dust in the trunk, I’m wrong. Even if the outcome – you trusting me that pushing on the pedal will make the car go – will be the same, the supporting evidence matters to me.

Paleofantasy

That’s why I found this book to be SO fascinating. Dr. Zuk is interested in exploring the claims many people seem to be making about what evolution can tell us about how we should be living our lives. It was a bit of a challenging read, but certainly manaegable if you have a basic understanding of biology. She’s great at explaining things, although there were definitely areas that I had to re-read twice.

The purpose of the book is to explore in detail the oft-cited claims that we haven’t evolved for this life we’re living. She spends time building her case by talking about evolution of other species – including a really fascinating discussion of how quickly some crickets evolved to stop chirping because the chirps attracted some deadly flies – before addressing some of the main claims those who promote a Paleo lifestyle make. She tackles the dairy argument by providing evidence of how many of us HAVE evolved to process dairy (and why!). She looks at the caveman exercise model by pointing out that while the need for activity itself is supported, the idea that it needs to mimic chasing a mammoth is unsupported. She even takes aim at the “agriculture changed everything for the worse” argument. It’s fascinating and different from what seems to be pushed on a regular basis by many people who are promoting a specific agenda.

She also examines non-diet evolutionary biology issues, some of which she sees having support (attachment parents will like that part of the book) and some she does not (people who think women evolved to be monogamous and men did not may want to skip chapter seven). Those sections are especially interesting because those arguments – especially the ones around men and women evolving to be better suited to performing certain tasks – find their ways into daily life. Even political arguments from some conservatives (who ironically often don’t believe in evolution) are often based in this misunderstanding of how we have evolved.

My biggest take-away from reading this book is that there is not ‘perfect’ time that we’re best suited for, and evolution can happen much quicker (relatively speaking) than some Paleo proponents suggest. Dr. Zuk is NOT suggesting that, for example, eating fewer processed foods, or eliminating dairy, is bad; she’s just saying that the evidence for why it might be good to eat more whole foods or be more active is not necessarily found in how we lived 15,000 years ago.

I’d recommend this book to anyone who is interested in science, evidence, reason, and biology.