Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
26 of 31 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Outrage Ruined by Conjecture, January 5, 2004
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~]
|
|
|
23 of 28 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
I should have read the reviews on this one first!!!, April 6, 2004
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
|
|
|
19 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Rehash of few sources:a real injustice to real investigators, May 29, 2004
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
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|