Customer Reviews

But Is It True?: A Citizen's Guide to Environmental Health and Safety Issues

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This book is an essential tool for those who truly wish to understand more about environmental health and safety issues. Worried about global warming? Concerned about pesticide residues in food? Look no further than this reference. The author sets out to objectively evaluate environmental health issues. All sides of a particular issue are explored in depth. Those that do not stand up to scientific scrutiny are exposed. At the end of the book, an explanation of how environmental issues get reported is addressed.

One of the most important parts of this book is that the author challenges the reader to become a responsible citizen. His premise is that becoming educated on these issues takes some work but is absolutely necessary in order to have the background to make informed decisions about important environmental issues.

The book is extensively researched and referenced. It provides a greal deal of information on a variety of subjects from toxic scares to global warming. Although the information presented is technical, the authors do a comendable job of organizing the information into a readily understandable format.

Absolutely a must read for anyone concerned about the environment.

Wildavsky's book is a welcome addition to the discussion of environmental politics. He actually dares to challenge the received wisdom of environmental activists. I would have thought that a book that critically examines the claims of environmental dangers and uses scientific knowledge to do that would contribute to our understanding of threats to the environment. Clearly, there are extreme and varied claims for environmental dangers. "But Is It True" helps sort out the exaggerations from the real problems. It also does it in reasoned and unemotional language. I strongly reommend the book for anyone who is concerned about environmental issues rather than the rhetoric of activism.

Aaron Wildavsky attemps (successfully in my opinion) to clarify a couple of things with this book.

#1 Scientific theory plus emotion does not equal scientific fact.

#2 Scientific theory plus consensus does not equal scientific fact.

The "Sky Is Falling" society will not like this book for obvious reasons (their own lack of objectivity being the biggest reason).

History has been riddled with so called "facts" that were accepted by the majority of scientists at the time, but consensus alone does not equate to proof.

Wildavsky's book is a good start - but the scientific community has a long road ahead when it comes to dealing with a general public that is largely ignorant of science. Environmentalists have a head start when it comes to winning the battle of public opinion - the scientific community must take books like Wildavsky's and "dumb it down" so that the average person with high school education or less can understand and make informed decisions.

This book is a refreshing corrective to the increasingly strident calls for government action on a range of issues from climate change to obesity. It asks the simple question 'But is it true?' and suggests that citizens inform themselves about the issues before reacting to media hype, overblown predictions of death and destruction and knee jerk policy reactions.

This is a brilliant book. While now dated, I seriously doubt that a new edition would do anything except reinforce its main conclusions. As to the claims of an earlier reviewer that "While some of the conclusions were warranted, most (including the overall points) were based on faulty analyses by an academic who had no training in the area upon which he expounds." The late Prof. Wildavsky, I am sure, would simply ask: "What is the evidence for your assertions?" "Are you sure you read the book?" "What is the book's title again?"
What is with the cult of the "specialist"? Are we all to be subjected to worldviews of agenda driven experts? Are the military the only ones who can speak on military matters? Politicians on politics? Economists on economics? What are we to do when specialists differ? How does a jury member think about dueling expert witnesses? If anything the entire book is a cautionary tale about how to listen to "experts". Prof. Wildavsky spent much of his life studying the making of public policy - which in many instances involves translating scientific findings into regulations and legislation. This book is informed by years of scrutinizing what experts assert and what the reality is. His views on risk, issues emanating from the precautionary principle and the actions of well-meaning and self-interested lobbyists are based on decades of involvement in public policy debates. Prof. Wildavsky's book does an excellent job alerting the average citizen to the "gray" areas on many public policy issues.

This book is a travesty in many respects. While some of the conclusions were warranted, most (including the overall points) were based on faulty analyses by an academic who had no training in the area upon which he expounds. Indeed, much of the "research" was performed by similarly untrained students. Numerous factual errors were manifest in the book in scientific and regulatory areas. A very biased look at issues that need a more sober approach.