Reading Journal #6: Catching Up

As predicted, I simply didn't have time to post during the week, and unfortunately I didn't get to visit many blogs either. By the time I have taught all day, attended meetings, got Giles home, cooked dinner, eaten dinner, given Giles his bath, put him to bed and sorted out everything for the next day, including planning and marking, I'm not in much shape for anything! Happily, one of the things I am in shape for is reading, so I've still been steadily going through books. Here's what I have read over the past two weeks or so:

Bad Pharma by Ben Goldacre is a non-fiction expose of the pharmaceutical industry and how trials, biased publications and access to doctors' training can lead to drugs being prescribed incorrectly, and patients not always getting what is the best for them. Prior to reading this, I had heard about the pharmaceutical industry in the USA, but had naively thought that we were more protected here in the UK, because we have the NHS and our medical system isn't for-profit. Goldacre quickly disabused me of this notion, pointing out how missing data, where nine unsuccessful trials could be buried and one successful one published, skews prescribing habits in all countries. It turns out that our regulators are no good at enforcing their own rules, that doctors can be paid to add their names to papers they did not write, and that drugs reps are allowed way too much sway over GPs. The single scariest fact in the book was that drugs are rarely if ever compared against the best available treatment, only against a placebo. This means we have no idea which drugs are the most effective for a whole host of common treatments.

Bad Pharma is well researched and it helps that Goldacre is a UK trained doctor, but at times his rhetoric was a bit over the top. I could have done without lots of the repeated anger, especially in a book as long as this one. It did however make me appreciate my own GP, who prescribes generic medications rather than the fancier branded ones that have the exact same ingredients, and who has explained this to me before prescribing. Bad Pharma covers an important topic and is well researched and written, so I would recommend it if you don't mind a bit of repeated anger on the part of the author.  3.5 out of 5

After non-fiction, I always need a bit of palate-cleansing fiction.  I've read White Teeth and On Beauty by Zadie Smith, and liked them both, so I decided it was time to pick up N-W. It tells the story of four Londoners from the same area - Leah, who is trying to avoid growing up and starting a family; Natalie, who has worked hard to leave her working class roots behind; Felix, who is trying to start again, and Nathan, who is angry.

Reviews of N-W seem to be very mixed, with readers tending to rank it lower than her other books. This is mainly due to the experimental writing style; parts of this novel are written in numbered sections, in fragments of sentences and in lists. Personally I loved that Smith had chosen to write like this, as she is definitely talented enough to pull it off.  The chaotic writing style matched the chaotic lives of the characters and I was hooked within a few pages. This book was challenging to read at times and the style didn't always work, but I found it thoroughly engrossing and a realistic portrait of London today.  3.5 out of 5.

And finally, an audio-book.  I was excited to start China Dolls by Lisa See, as See is one of my favourite historical fiction authors. Shanghai Girls in particular is up there with the best historical fiction I've read, and I've never read a bad book by her. Until now. China Dolls is the story of Ruby, Helen and Grace, who meet when they are auditioning to become dancers in a Chinese night-club in 1930s San Francisco. They soon become firm friends, and the narrative follows them through several decades, as they move through disappointments and traumatic times. Each is hiding a powerful secret.

To start with what I liked - I had no idea about the way 'Orientals' were treated in America at this time, and it was fascinating to learn about the 'Chop Suey Circuit' and the interment camps for American citizens of Japanese descendants during WW2. I liked the epic-ness of the story, how it covered many decades and events and gave a real sense of time passing. However, the three main characters were a major let-down. The only one I could ever really like was Grace, which wouldn't have been a problem if their storylines weren't so unbelievable.  Ruby, Helen and Grace kept on and on hurting each other, and their friendship seemed based only on jealousy and a common race. I just couldn't comprehend how they kept forgiving each other some pretty unforgivable things, and why they were so keen to hurt each other. It completely ruined what could have been an interesting novel, if only the portrayal of female friendship was more nuanced.  2 out of 5 stars.

So that's me almost up to date.  I've also finished The Bronte Myth by Lucasta Miller, but as it has led directly on to a reread of Jane Eyre, I'm going to save it for a joint post another time.  What have you been reading lately?

The Viral Storm by Nathan Wolfe

With the ebola outbreak capturing headlines, it seemed like a good time to pick up this non-fiction book about viruses and how they turn into pandemics.  Wolfe is a scientist, professor and self-confessed 'virus hunter' who spends his time studying viruses, their transmission from animals to humans, and predicting which viruses have the potential to mutate and turn into pandemics.  The aim is to catch viruses before they spread - pandemic prevention rather than pandemic reaction.  The Viral Storm is split into three sections, dealing with the science of viruses, how human societies and contact with animals has enlarged the risk of pandemics, and finally what can be done to prevent them.  The science sections of the book are interspersed with parts that feel more like a memoir, with Wolfe recounting his experiences studying viruses all over the world.

The Viral Storm is a great example of a widely accessible science book.  I have a science degree, but I specialised in neuropsychology, and I am rusty to say the least with regard to anything else! Wolfe assumes no prior knowledge in the reader, and has a really clear style that means he presents his information clearly and concisely.  I loved the initial section explaining the science of viruses, even if the information about just how many are out there made me squeamish (250 million virus particles per ml of seawater!).  Although studies are referenced, Wolfe doesn't get into the nitty gritty of how they were conducted or the analysis of results, which is just what I wanted in a general introduction to a topic like this.

One of the many things I didn't know before reading The Viral Storm is that viruses in humans can almost always be traced back to animal contact.  Whether it's a bite, or contact with tissues and blood through hunting, it comes back to our interaction with the environment.  The history of HIV included was very interesting, especially as this is something that is often misrepresented in the media.  I also didn't know that when a person has two viruses, they can mutate and create mosaic viruses combining elements of both, which is how some pandemics have started.

Wolfe's key argument is that we are living in a time when the potential for pandemics is high.  When our ancestors learned to cook food, destroying microbial life, the viruses we were exposed to gradually lessened, meaning that they are all the more potent when we do catch them from animals. Poverty forces many populations into subsistence hunting, which is often linked to human transmission of animal viruses.  And our inter-connected world means that viruses have a greater than ever potential to spread rapidly, and come into contact with more people than ever,  But that's not to say the book is all doom and gloom, as Wolfe recounts some of the work being done to prevent pandemics, and the early successes of such projects.

On the whole, The Viral Storm was an accessible and enjoyable read.  I learned a lot from it, but the reading experience never felt like a chore.  The inclusion of the memoir sections really broke up the science and it was interested to see what studying viruses in the field actually entails.  My only (minor) complaint is that sometimes Wolfe was a bit repetitive, but this didn't alter my enjoyment.  Definitely recommended.

Source: Personal copy
Score: 4.5 out of 5

Cat Sense: The Feline Enigma Revealed by John Bradshaw

As much as I love cats, I'm not normally a fan of books about cats.  They tend to be way too cosy for my taste, and too full of home-spun wisdom, which I am not a fan of at all.  But I was excited to read Cat Sense as it promised to be a scientific portrayal of cats, written by author who works in feline science and based on proper research.  Divided into three parts, Cat Sense covers the history of cats and their domestication, scientific explanations for their behaviour and challenges faced by cats as they live in great numbers alongside humans.

I have always been a cat lover.  Growing up, we always had a pet cat, first Stumpy (black and white) and then Phoebe (tortoise shell), who still lives with my parents and is now the grand old age of seventeen.  Currently, my husband and I share our house with Joseph, a tabby who is almost three years old, who we have had from a kitten.   He is spoiled rotten and basically does what he likes, whenever he feels like it!  Every cat I have ever owned has been completely different, so I was interested to pick up Cat Sense and learn more about what scientists have discovered about cat behaviour and emotion.

The first part of the book, which was a history of cats and their relationship with humans, was completely fascinating.  There was quite a lot of information on genetics, the ancestors of modern day pet cats and the genetic relationship between domestic and wild cats (not as far apart as you would think!).  I genuinely found this interesting, especially when Bradshaw discussed the genes responsible for cat colouring and markings.  I had no idea that blotched tabbies (like Joseph, but you can't see his blotches in the picture above), which are so common in the UK, are rare in other parts of the world.  It's also interesting how some features, such as white paws, have survived because we like them, even though they are counter-productive to the cat's role as a hunter.

After the history, Bradshaw moved on to the science behind cat behaviour, which took up the bulk of the book.  A lot of the information won't be new to anyone who has owned a cat or even observed one, but it was interesting to read about the studies that scientists have carried out.  The section I most enjoyed dealt with the way cats think, their emotions and their personalities.  The idea that animals have distinct personalities and can experience emotion in a similar way to humans is a modern one in science, so I was glad to see Bradshaw outlining the research in this area so far.  As much as this section on cat behaviour was interesting, I felt like it was overly long and too heavily skewed towards the author's own work.

Finally, Bradshaw covers several issues facing cats and their owners, such as what the rising numbers of neutered cats will mean for future kittens.  My cat was neutered at six months and I have always assumed this was the right and responsible thing to do, but Bradshaw argues that this narrows the choice of available males to part feral ones, meaning that the most domesticated, docile cats do not breed, and this could have consequences for the future.  He also discusses the way wildlife campaigners have targeted cats and campaigned for things like cat curfews, and whether this actually has any impact on the population of wild animals in the area.

On the whole, Cat Sense was an enjoyable book if not a mind-blowing one.  It was full of interesting information but tended to be over-long and wasn't always written in the most engaging style.   However, if you like cats and want to find out more about them, Cat Sense won't disappoint.

Source: From the publisher, in exchange for an honest review.

First Published: August 2013

Score: 3 out of 5

Mirror Earth: The Search for Our Planet's Twin by Michael D. Lemonick

One of the joys of having taken an astrophysics module last year is that I'm now fascinated with the universe.  I've always been a bit interested; but now I know about dark matter, black holes and the inside of stars, I'm completely absorbed. Expect this to be the first of many reviews of non-fiction books with a space theme.

Mirror Earth is about one of the most exciting research topics in astrophysics at the moment, planets that exist beyond our solar system (exoplanets).  It was only in the 1990s that scientists were able to detect such planets, and they've been overturning our expectations about the universe ever since.  Before exoplanets, scientists assumed that planets near their stars must be small and rocky, with large gaseous planets further away (such as Jupiter and Saturn).  But the first exoplanets discovered were many times larger than Jupiter and many times closer to their stars than Mercury is to our sun.  Many have strange orbits and don't behave in the way that we expect planets to at all.  Theoretically, these planets just shouldn't exist.  But they do.

Of course, discovering exoplanets (and there are many known ones now) is only the first step for scientists who hope to find a 'mirror' earth, one that could meet all the conditions for life.  This is really the meat of the book, as Lemonick discusses attempts to isolate and study planets that could possibly be habitable.  He takes a Bill Bryson-like approach of mixing the science with information about the scientists and the process of discovery, and this is largely successful.  I spent the first half of the book in awe of the perseverance and ingenuity of scientists who have been able to identify invisible planets around stars that are mere sparkling dots in the sky.  It's not simply a case of looking into the sky with a telescope, it's about the slightest movement of a star due to the planet's gravity and the tiniest possible blurring.  It's technical stuff.

Things get even more interesting as the discussion moves on to questioning our assumptions about life.  Most of the book and indeed, most of recent scientific history, is taken up with the quest to find planets like our own because scientists have assumed that life can only exist in similar conditions.  But in the final chapter, Lemonick considers other possible planetary systems from the realm of theoretical physics.  It's possible there are carbon-based planets with cores of pure diamond and "diamond continents sloping down to seas of tar."  What kind of life might such a planet harbour?  It seems physicists are questioning their basic ideas about life and I can't wait to see what research comes out of this in the future.

I really enjoyed Mirror Earth, but it wasn't perfect.  Whilst it was interesting to read about the actual scientists and their quests to discover planets (especially their funding issues), some of these sections went on for too long.  Had I not studied astrophysics at an introductory level, I would have struggled to understand the techniques the physicists used, although I could have kept up with the theories and discoveries easily.  But for an "awe and wonder" book, it's hard to beat.  The universe is more strange and diverse than we ever thought, and we're only scratching the surface of all the different possibilities.

Source: From the publisher, via Netgalley
First Published: 2012
Score: 4 out of 5.

Kraken by Wendy Williams

I am one of those people that started appreciating science a bit too late.  I thought it was OK at school but it was only halfway through a psychology degree when I started taking (and loving) neurobiology modules that I discovered that science is amazing.  Had I known it earlier, I would have done a biology degree and maybe ended up down a completely different path.  Anyway, I make up for it now by reading all I can about science and day dreaming about one day having the funds to complete a neurobiology masters/doctorate. 

I received this copy of Kraken through the publishers Abrams Books at NetGalley.  It tells the under-rated story of squid (and octopus and cuttlefish) and how they have had a vital role to play in advancing understanding about human health and function.  It also debunks some giant squid myths and contains some amazing facts about their life.

First off, I was really impressed with the writing style and accessibility of the book.  I've read a lot of dry science books in my time that manage to make interesting topics dull, but this wasn't one of them.  Williams writes for an interested novice, putting across all the science information in an easy to understand way but also adding interesting details about the scientists and animals themselves.  This gave the book a good balance and meant that it was easy to read.

And there was no shortage of interesting trivia and facts.  I didn't know much about cephalopods before reading, and was blown away by some of the information - about their blue blood, tool use, how they can bite off their own tentacles and make them light up to divert a predator, how a cuttlefish can camouflage to almost any background, how the suckers on some tentacles are more dexterous than human hands, how part of their brains are wrapped around their throats.  The startling information for me was just how intelligent they are as a whole, but in a different way to humans.  A cuttlefish can be trained to understand simple if..then rules e.g. if this signal comes up, go left; if a different signal comes up, go right.

Williams' agenda in writing the book did seem to be to show how intelligent they are and to argue that mammalian intelligence isn't the only kind of intelligence on the planet.    The other parts of the book seemed to almost be a cry for more funding for cephalopod research by showing how useful limited research has been. I thought it was very interesting how scientists used the giant squid axon to find out about human brain function and how this could lead to treatment for diseases like Parkinson's.  I agree with Williams that we should be spending more money on marine research.

If I had to find a criticism of this book, I would say that the title led me to believe there would be more about giant squid mythology/history.  I wanted to read about Krakens and monstrous octopuses and ancient mythology alongside the science and there wasn't much of that, only a quick debunk of some giant squid myths.

Score: 4 out of 5
Available: Now!

God is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens

And now a return to regularly scheduled programming!
I chose to read this book because even though I'm not at all religious myself, I've always been fascinated by religion.  My fiance is a secondary school religious education teacher so he's always recommending books about religions from all perspectives. 

Synopsis: Hitchens aggressively takes on religion, attempting to demonstrate that it is "man-made, dangerously sexually repressive and distorts the very origins of the cosmos" (from back cover).  He puts forward the theory that religion has caused profound damage to society at all levels.

Score: 3 out of 5  for quality of writing but 2 out of 5 for quality of arguments.

Before I share my thoughts on this book, I should probably explain the viewpoint I read it from.  When I said in the introduction that I am non-religious, I meant that I have never been exposed to religion personally at all - I was not baptised/christened and can count the times I have been to a place of worship on one hand.  No one in my family is religious either and I didn't miss it growing up.  I was taught instead to treat others as I wished to be treated, to be respectful and to realise that life can be tough, and sometimes it's bad luck, and all you can do is be ready for it and make the most of the time you have.  I didn't even meet a strongly religious person until I went to university at 19 and became friends with an Orthodox Jew.

So I was kind of in the middle with this book.  I have no bone to pick with religion myself; I do find it hard to understand why people are religious but each to their own as long as they aren't bothering me.  Hitchens in his book had a completely different attitude - I've read Dawkin's "The God Delusion" as well and Hitchens makes Dawkins look like a moderate!  I can only describe Hitchens' views as militant/fundamentalist atheism, in that he sought to make everything the fault of religion without acknowledging any of the good religious people have done or even that religious people can't be lumped together as one homogenous entity.  And that seriously weakened his arguments for me.

Hitchens also approached the topic from a mainly literal/historical perspective, which would have been fine if he had stuck with it, but he also veered into the scientific arguments.  The problem with this was that he made some mistakes - I know enough biology to know that his conclusions about ears were wrong, and if you're going to write such a controversial book, you better make sure your facts are straight!

In places his conclusions were too simplistic.  Concerning American slavery, he basically argued that religion caused slavery - correct me Americans if I am wrong, but whilst religion may have defended slavery for a while, there was more to it that that.  Societies the world over have taken slave from conquered areas since the dawn of time.  Hitchens was bending over backward to show that "religion poisons everything" when he would have been much more convincing if he had argued "religion makes things bad, sometimes" or "religion can prolong bad things".

That's not to say that all of his arguments were weak.  It has been historically well documented that parts of all the major religions have been man-made (Council of Nicea etc), and when Hitchens stayed with history or culture, he was on strong ground.  His sections on the use of condoms in Africa and Muslim protest against vaccinations were also very effective.

So overall, a mixed bag.  There were some good points struggling to get out but Hitchens was just too angry and a bit fundamentalist.  I can definitely see why some atheists argue that he gives them a bad name.