Customer Reviews

In the Name of Science: A History of Secret Programs, Medical Research, and Human Experimentation

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This is a book that is truly terrifying some of the time, but ultimately it's marred by unsupported conjecture and scare tactics. Goliszek shows us that there is indeed a long and shameful history of medical experimentation on humans, dating as far back as medicine itself. In modern times there is still much unethical and often illegal experimentation on humans taking place by the government and corporations. And you guessed it - the human subjects are usually minorities, the handicapped, coerced military personnel, and uninformed volunteers. Strangely, these days lab animals have more rights than human subjects. Much of this book builds a deserved sense of outrage about these ongoing atrocities.

Unfortunately, the entire book doesn't hold up, becoming a repetitive tirade of unsupported opinions and scare tactics from Goliszek, attempting to force the reader's sense of outrage to the point of absurdity. A major issue is Goliszek's lack of notes and citations, regardless of a very extensive bibliography, because the reader cannot tell documented facts from the author's opinions. In the text Goliszek often adds extensive background to many tales of experimentation, sometimes down to the level of government document numbers. But strangely, in other narratives there is no information given whatsoever, so you have no way of knowing how much the story is embellished by the author. One example among many is a horror story in chapter 4 about radioactive iodine being injected into healthy infants, with no times, locations, or names given.

Meanwhile, conjecture and opinionating sinks much of the book. For example, in chapter 3 Goliszek brands Planned Parenthood as a eugenics organization, merely because the group's founder was involved in that movement almost a century ago. In chapter 5 the testimony of people subjected to unethical medical experiments is given verbatim, as if this were adequate documentation of atrocities, though there is no evidence that the people are telling the whole truth, and at least one shows signs of inaccurate repressed memory syndrome. Chapter 8 presents a parade of conspiracy theories about the origins of AIDS that leads nowhere. Goliszek's book is a potential powerhouse, and some of it has the desired effect, but overall his motives become very questionable. Public education or scare tactics? [~doomsdayer520~]

Goliszek is among the crowd of authors racing to become the next Preston. Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, few become that type of author. There is a huge difference between writing to educate, writing to expose illegal practices or bad practices on a journalistic basis, and writing to scare-monger. As one of the other reviewers indicate, this book is loaded to the gills not only with bad science, but bad writing and bad research.

As someone who has spent the last few years reading everything and then some on eugenics, I have gotten a bit fuddy-duddy about my expectations from authors. Either they write so well that previous information gains my attention again, or they research so well that they find something else that other authors did not. Anything else tends to get yawns from me, and the book gets relegated to the scrap heap.

Also, as someone who spent four years working on HIV in a lab and researching/studying it, it is not HELPFUL in disease awareness and education, when others, who know absolutely nothing about the disease and epidemiology of that disease offer their two cents worth based on conjecture, hearsay, and private opinion! This might be the only book that someone reads on this particular disease, and it provides the wrong information? Oh, great.

Writers who have no background in science should not race to write about science without doing the research first. Scientists, who have no background in writing for the public, should not race to write without doing the research first. And scientists who write for science journals are not necessarily good writers. And scientists in one area, should never presume to know everything else about any other science! I would think that would be the first thing hammered into the heads of graduate students in science.

There are very, very few Stephen Goulds, Robert Liftons, Stephen Pinker, and Prestons out there...those who try to join this elite group should get their facts straight, and take a few writing classes. The research was shoddy, even the chapter sequences made no sense. Ugh...

Karen Sadler
Science Education/Bioethics & Disability
University of Pittsburgh

A lot of readers may find this book disturbing. Some may find it unbelievable. Critics, especially those who believe that governments don't do things like this, might take issue with the author's style, which is basically to expose horror after horror and lay open the reality of human experimentation as it has been practiced and is still being practiced today. For those of us who want to know and be vigilent so that these practices never happen again, In the Name of Science is a book that will keep you riveted. From the opening chapters, which describe experiments with chemical and biological agents to the last two chapters, which describe ethnic weapons and what the future holds to the more than 100 pages of appendices (declassified documents, letters, memos, etc.), Goliszek does a good job of detailing what many of us don't want to hear but need to. It's a book that everyone ought to read.

This is an extremely superficial book on medical experimentation. Most of his material could come
from Jay Katz's massive book on human experimentation that was published in 1972 or from summaries; anything since Katz are from selected other sources that are treated briefly. There is no original research here, very little analysis of human experiments, and the stealing and summarizing of
other peoples work. He ignores completely the four year long hearings of the Kennedy Sub-committee that led to the 1974-1979 examination of medical experiments. He also ignores completely much of the work of the Nationaol Commission of the 1990's. The Commission was primarily a whitewash of human experiments, but an analysis of the flaws, in light of reality, would have helped move this book a little way from the superficial treatment Goliszek gives us. Let me give a couple of examples. Goliszek talks about radiation experiments on humans by way of a summary of Eileen Welsome's book, The Plutonium Files; Welsome's book is a comprehensive treatment of parts of radiation experiments; the author ignores completely, however, the very detailed work of Martha Stephens, The Treatment, about radiation treatments in Cincinnati, Ohio
that is, like Welsome's, a model of how research should be carried out. Goliszek's treatment is a superficial treatment that is misleading because he presents material that has been known about, and analyzed rather than summarized as Goliszek does in his work, for 60 years or so. To really know what is happening, and has happened, in medical research, read the original researchs and analysis. Skip Goliszek altogether as a waste of time, and an impediment to a real understanding of medical experiments. One other point: Amazon oftens hypes a book such as Goliszek's to promote sales. This seems to be one of those cases.

Thomas Patterson
Deming New Mexico

There have been other books written about human atrocities, medical experiments gone awry, and secret government programs. In the Name of Science goes a bit further in detailing some of the lesser known and more egregious misdeeds done by scientists over the past few decades. The author offers evidence throughout the book, as well as in appendices filled with declassified memos, documents, reports, and letters that will surprise most readers. From biological, chemical, and radiological experiments to CIA mind control programs and current medical research being done on unwitting subjects, the book reads like a thriller that ought to send chills through anyone's spine. Dr. Goliszek ends with a chapter on medical advances and future research trends. Written in a style that the average reader will understand, In the Name of Science will certainly ruffle a few feathers, anger some, and make all of us more aware of what has been going on in the name of science and national security.

If the author didn't have so many references and details, I would not have believed this was possible. I knew about human experiments, but this book goes beyond anything I had heard about. It's a chilling read, but for a non-fiction book it's written like a good suspense novel. Highly recommended for anyone who thinks medical experiments still don't happen.

I read the book after listening to the author on "Power-Hour" with Joyce Riley, the former army nurse who was one of the first to break the story of Gulf War Illness. First, I must say that In the Name of Science is easy to read. Dr. Goliszek writes for the non-science type and makes the true stories interesting. Some of the stuff is harrowing. The descriptions of human experiments are gruesome, but the author does a good job of documenting what he writes about. By the middle of the book, you wonder how people can get away with this, but it's precisely because of books like this that we hope it doesn't happen again.

Take a factoid, sometimes a well known factoid, and wrap it in unfounded accusations, unsupported facts and an intent to frighten - and you have Mr. Goliszek's book.
Examples of this tabloid technique in Goliszek's tome are far too numerous to count. In one, he relies on no less an authority on human population trends than Pat Buchanan. Yes, Pat Buchanan, sometime pundit, sometime Presidential candidate. Goliszek references Buchanan's book. _The Death of the West_ as the source of "alarming statistics. Goliszek goes on to claim that Buchanan's statistics are backed by UN studies and a London Times analysis. But Goliszek never specifically cites any statistics or sources.
This is the equivalent of getting stock tips from your brother-in-law whose barber knows the guy who shines the shoes of a big-shot CEO who said something big would be happening with his company.
Indeed, Goliszek piles on scary anecdote atop another. But even with all his claimed sources and citations, nothing quite hangs together. Overall I was left with the impression of yet another academic engaging in dubious "research" primarily to impress his peers and maybe turn a few heads on the talkshow circuit. The flyleaf says "No other book on the market provides the research here - or presents it with such persuasive force." Well, it appears the "research" is tacked on to lend bulk to the book: it is often not connected to anything in the book and it is persuasive only to the uncritical, the same people who believe what the tabloid press writes.

Jerry

Through hundreds of well-documented examples Andrew Goliszek brilliantly answers the key ethical question for Science in the modern era, and that is:

Is it OK to experiment on humans without their consent?

And you reader, after being shocked/horrified by the sooooo many examples of perfidy (too many to name or prioritize in this concise review) will agree & be outraged enough to answer unequivocally:

NO!

GET THIS BOOK & READ IT CAREFULLY.

I can understand why people will either praise this book as a landmark work that everyone ought to read or criticize it because it includes a lot of information that makes us pretty darn uncomfortable with what we have done. Not surprisingly, the critics seem to not want to know or to not want to believe that we are still capable of such things. Very narrowminded. For those of us who truly want to know, In The Name of Science is a well-documented book that will send a chill up your spine. As one leading authority on Gulf War Syndrome and government activity has said, "It is the book I wish I had written . . . everyone in this country needs to read this book." I absolutely agree. Despite some naysayers who may find it too dark or too cynical, it should be required reading for anyone wishing to be enlightened as well as entertained.