What do you think?
Rate this book
The Best American Science Writing 2006
Together these twenty-one articles on a wide range of today's most leading topics in science, from Dennis Overbye, Jonathan Weiner, and Richard Preston, among others, represent the full spectrum of scientific inquiry, proving once again that "good science writing is evidently plentiful" ( American Scientist ).
384 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 2006
About the author
Atul Gawande
31 books5,608 followersAtul Gawande is author of three bestselling books: Complications, a finalist for the National Book Award; Better, selected by Amazon.com as one of the ten best books of 2007; and The Checklist Manifesto. His latest book is Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End.
He is also a surgeon at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, a staff writer for The New Yorker, and a professor at Harvard Medical School and the Harvard School of Public Health. He has won the Lewis Thomas Prize for Writing about Science, a MacArthur Fellowship, and two National Magazine Awards. In his work in public health, he is Executive Director of Ariadne Labs, a joint center for health systems innovation, and chairman of Lifebox, a nonprofit organization making surgery safer globally. He and his wife have three children and live in Newton, Massachusetts.
He is also a surgeon at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, a staff writer for The New Yorker, and a professor at Harvard Medical School and the Harvard School of Public Health. He has won the Lewis Thomas Prize for Writing about Science, a MacArthur Fellowship, and two National Magazine Awards. In his work in public health, he is Executive Director of Ariadne Labs, a joint center for health systems innovation, and chairman of Lifebox, a nonprofit organization making surgery safer globally. He and his wife have three children and live in Newton, Massachusetts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews
May 28, 2012
Twenty-one essays about science--each essay on a completely different subject. Some of the subjects are quite surprising! There is an essay about a chess-playing computer, a cochlear implant to help a deaf person to hear music, the physics of time travel, a claim that the so-called "obesity epidemic" isn't real, the problems that may occur if longevity is extended further, the subtle influence of racism on anthropology, belief in religion as a consequence of innate dualism, and an essay that won't be boring--but will nevertheless force you to yawn! In one essay, you can vicariously experience the incredible feeling of climbing 350 feet into a giant redwood canopy--where your biggest fear might not be of falling, but of getting lost! You can learn why other species of trees don't survive in a redwood forest--and the reason is not due to the choking off from resources like air, moisture, light, and nutrients.
Each essay is fascinating and well-written. You can pick this book up, read a chapter, put it down again and pick it up months later without fear of having lost your train of thought. The sheer variety of essays is wonderful!
Each essay is fascinating and well-written. You can pick this book up, read a chapter, put it down again and pick it up months later without fear of having lost your train of thought. The sheer variety of essays is wonderful!
July 14, 2018
"Money and politics taint everything"
(A pearl of wisdom)
About a year ago I reviewed here on Goodreads The Best American Science Writing 2005 , a marginally recommended read that includes unquestionable jewels such as Frank Wilczek's essay Whence the Force of F = ma or Small Silences by Edward Hoagland, a wonderfully lyrical piece about the beauty of nature. Here I am reviewing the next issue in the set, which presents the presumably best science essays from 2006. I like this set better, because not only does it contain fewer "meh" pieces, but mainly because it conveys a powerful and very scary message about the many ways science is manipulated.
Three essays in particular show the mechanisms of manipulation. The best essay of the set, The Tangle by Jonathan Weiner, is about attempts to solve the mystery of a neurological "disease that once afflicted people living on Guam." An outsider in the field, a botanist, developed a hypothesis that the illness was a result of the Guam Chamorros eating bats that fed on cycad seeds. The hypothesis, likely because of its simplicity, brought its author instant fame. However, it also resulted in government-supplied research money disappearing from other research projects on related topics, which in turn caused many other researchers to work on debunking the cycad-bat hypothesis. As of the essay's writing date, they have largely succeeded.
Neil Swidey's essay What Makes People Gay? is almost equally fascinating. It presents the research on connection between genetics and sex orientation, but what really stands out is the clear illustration of the role of advocacy groups in influencing the flow of research money and even in determining which research projects should be condemned before any work has been done. Money and politics are at their ugliest again!
Politics, and specifically the politics of race, is also the backdrop of Jack Hitt's Mighty White of You, an essay that reflects on the theory about pre-Clovis people in North America. The abstract of the article states it bluntly:
Briefly about three other essays that I like a lot. H. Allen Orr's Devolution, about the so-called "intelligent design" theories nicely debunks the arguments used by the debunkers of theory of evolution. Paul Bloom's Is God an Accident? posits that religion may be a natural result of the way humans perceive the world. The author talks about the dualism inherent in human understanding of ourselves and our world, and it immediately reminded me of Nabokov's Invitation to a Beheading
Finally, the essay that could have easily been the best in the entire collection, Richard Preston's Climbing the Redwoods about the world of redwood canopy, the mysterious world over thirty stories above ground. But the author completely spoils the fascinating topic by focusing on climbing the tallest trees and by his utterly insane fetish for numbers, especially big numbers. What a waste!
Three stars.
(A pearl of wisdom)
About a year ago I reviewed here on Goodreads The Best American Science Writing 2005 , a marginally recommended read that includes unquestionable jewels such as Frank Wilczek's essay Whence the Force of F = ma or Small Silences by Edward Hoagland, a wonderfully lyrical piece about the beauty of nature. Here I am reviewing the next issue in the set, which presents the presumably best science essays from 2006. I like this set better, because not only does it contain fewer "meh" pieces, but mainly because it conveys a powerful and very scary message about the many ways science is manipulated.
Three essays in particular show the mechanisms of manipulation. The best essay of the set, The Tangle by Jonathan Weiner, is about attempts to solve the mystery of a neurological "disease that once afflicted people living on Guam." An outsider in the field, a botanist, developed a hypothesis that the illness was a result of the Guam Chamorros eating bats that fed on cycad seeds. The hypothesis, likely because of its simplicity, brought its author instant fame. However, it also resulted in government-supplied research money disappearing from other research projects on related topics, which in turn caused many other researchers to work on debunking the cycad-bat hypothesis. As of the essay's writing date, they have largely succeeded.
Neil Swidey's essay What Makes People Gay? is almost equally fascinating. It presents the research on connection between genetics and sex orientation, but what really stands out is the clear illustration of the role of advocacy groups in influencing the flow of research money and even in determining which research projects should be condemned before any work has been done. Money and politics are at their ugliest again!
Politics, and specifically the politics of race, is also the backdrop of Jack Hitt's Mighty White of You, an essay that reflects on the theory about pre-Clovis people in North America. The abstract of the article states it bluntly:
"...these new theories have less to do with science than with a distressing and not-so-subtle racism."What I probably like the most about the three essays is that their authors do not take sides in the argument (first two are more neutral than the third one). Science should not take any sides. One of the basic tenets of science is cultivating doubt. Expressing doubts about currently prevailing societal beliefs and attitudes should be an important goal of science.
Briefly about three other essays that I like a lot. H. Allen Orr's Devolution, about the so-called "intelligent design" theories nicely debunks the arguments used by the debunkers of theory of evolution. Paul Bloom's Is God an Accident? posits that religion may be a natural result of the way humans perceive the world. The author talks about the dualism inherent in human understanding of ourselves and our world, and it immediately reminded me of Nabokov's Invitation to a Beheading
Finally, the essay that could have easily been the best in the entire collection, Richard Preston's Climbing the Redwoods about the world of redwood canopy, the mysterious world over thirty stories above ground. But the author completely spoils the fascinating topic by focusing on climbing the tallest trees and by his utterly insane fetish for numbers, especially big numbers. What a waste!
Three stars.
July 29, 2019
One of the best of its kind
All the "Best American..." books are good because they are collections of the best writing, usually magazine writing, done in the year indicated. The series titles include Best American Science Writing, Best American Science and Nature Writing, Best American Essays, Best American Sports Writing, Best American Short Stories, even Best American Sex Writing. The essay choices are up to the person--always an illustrious figure, an expert--who edits each volume. For the year 2006 we have Dr. Atul Gawande, a famous surgeon and author of Complications: A Surgeon's Notes on an Imperfect Science (2002). Previous editors of the "Best...Science..." series have been James Gleick (2000), Timothy Ferris (2001), Matt Ridley (2002), Oliver Sacks (2003), Dava Sobel (2004), and Alan Lightman (2005).
I have read all or part of the entire series beginning in 2000, and while every collection has been interesting, even fascinating, this year's collection is particularly good. I say this because Gawande, in keeping close to his area of expertise, has chosen articles mainly in the fields of biology, medicine, computers and information theory, and evolution, and these happen to be fields that especially interest me. The emphasis in this volume then is on the so-called "soft" sciences rather than the "hard" ones, although not exclusively so. Moreover, Gawande has managed to find essays that are especially well-written. I was a bit dazzled at the wordsmithing ability of some of the writers to say nothing about the fascinating and informative content of their essays. In particular I want to point to Alan Weisman's "Earth Without People"; D. T. Max's "The Literary Darwinists"; Karen Wright's "The Day Everything Died"; Jack Hitt's "Mighty White of You"; and Paul Bloom's "Is God an Accident" as very impressive.
One of the reasons the essays are so good is that they first appeared in some of our best journals, including Harper's, The Atlantic Monthly, Discover, The New Yorker, et al. where they were scrupulously edited by some of the best editors working today. A good editor is a godsend for a writer, and a great editor can make the difference between a piece that is ordinary and one that is outstanding. Anyone wanting to improve their writing might read these essays for that reason alone.
Now just a few quick thoughts about some of the essays:
Alan Weisman achieves an eerie, sci fi mood in his "Earth without People" as he imagines how the planet might change if people suddenly disappeared. His insights come partly from recalling what the planet was like before humans came upon the scene, especially North America with its teeming mass of extinct large mammals.
Gardiner Harris and Anahad O'Connor point to the disconnect between scientific knowledge and the public's perception of what is likely true and what likely isn't in "On Autism's Cause, It's Parents vs. Research." It appears that there is almost no way that mercury in vaccines causes autism, yet there remains a hard core of parents of autistic children who believe otherwise. What I think this shows is that our personal experience--a sampling of one--is so persuasive that often we cannot put it aside regardless of the evidence.
H. Allen Orr demonstrates in his carefully composed essay "Devolution" that faith-based "intelligent design" might well be a sign of human devolution.
D. T. Max's "The Literary Darwinists" introduced me to a new slant on literary criticism, clearly a natural progression in postmodern thought: namely to subject literary works to examinations from Darwinian principles. Particularly delicious is evolutionary psychology as applied to Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, which begins with this irresistible first line, "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."
What struck me as most instructive in Karen Wright's "The Day Everything Died," which is about the Permian extinction and the controversy surrounding it, is just how much more difficult it is to study something that happened a quarter of a billion years ago than it is to study something (the K-T extinction) that happened a mere 65 million years ago.
I absolutely loved Jack Hitt's, witty, satirical take on being Charlemagne's direct descendant (he is and so are you!), as he muses on Kennewick man and some not so subtle racism among those touting pre-Clovis humans in the Americas.
But my favorite piece in the book is Paul Bloom's "Is God an Accident." Having recently read Sam Harris' The End of Faith (2005) and other works, I somehow felt in total understanding about why humans believe impossible (or at least very unlikely) things. Clearly religion exists in all societies because it is adaptive and contributes to tribal cohesion which helps the tribe defeat other tribes in warfare, etc. However Bloom's essay broadened my understanding. His argument is that religion is essentially a kind of hardwired dualism in our brains that came about because we have two simultaneous ways of perceiving the world, one physical and the other social. Our social perceptions result in a belief system based on minds, that is what others may think and what may be possible in manipulating the content of minds vis-a-vis real world objects, e.g., coming up with unicorns and holy fathers with bad tempers. Consequently it feels right for us to believe in things unseen, unheard, undemonstrated.
I also liked the last essay in the book, Frans B. M. de Waal's short piece on why "We're All Machiavellians," a "truth" he learned from watching chimpanzees. His asks why don't we just admit to our lust to power? It is so obvious. Instead we and especially our politicians pretend we are "public servants" and it is other people who want power.
In short, this is the most readable collection of science essays that I have read in recent years.
--Dennis Littrell, author of “The World Is Not as We Think It Is”
All the "Best American..." books are good because they are collections of the best writing, usually magazine writing, done in the year indicated. The series titles include Best American Science Writing, Best American Science and Nature Writing, Best American Essays, Best American Sports Writing, Best American Short Stories, even Best American Sex Writing. The essay choices are up to the person--always an illustrious figure, an expert--who edits each volume. For the year 2006 we have Dr. Atul Gawande, a famous surgeon and author of Complications: A Surgeon's Notes on an Imperfect Science (2002). Previous editors of the "Best...Science..." series have been James Gleick (2000), Timothy Ferris (2001), Matt Ridley (2002), Oliver Sacks (2003), Dava Sobel (2004), and Alan Lightman (2005).
I have read all or part of the entire series beginning in 2000, and while every collection has been interesting, even fascinating, this year's collection is particularly good. I say this because Gawande, in keeping close to his area of expertise, has chosen articles mainly in the fields of biology, medicine, computers and information theory, and evolution, and these happen to be fields that especially interest me. The emphasis in this volume then is on the so-called "soft" sciences rather than the "hard" ones, although not exclusively so. Moreover, Gawande has managed to find essays that are especially well-written. I was a bit dazzled at the wordsmithing ability of some of the writers to say nothing about the fascinating and informative content of their essays. In particular I want to point to Alan Weisman's "Earth Without People"; D. T. Max's "The Literary Darwinists"; Karen Wright's "The Day Everything Died"; Jack Hitt's "Mighty White of You"; and Paul Bloom's "Is God an Accident" as very impressive.
One of the reasons the essays are so good is that they first appeared in some of our best journals, including Harper's, The Atlantic Monthly, Discover, The New Yorker, et al. where they were scrupulously edited by some of the best editors working today. A good editor is a godsend for a writer, and a great editor can make the difference between a piece that is ordinary and one that is outstanding. Anyone wanting to improve their writing might read these essays for that reason alone.
Now just a few quick thoughts about some of the essays:
Alan Weisman achieves an eerie, sci fi mood in his "Earth without People" as he imagines how the planet might change if people suddenly disappeared. His insights come partly from recalling what the planet was like before humans came upon the scene, especially North America with its teeming mass of extinct large mammals.
Gardiner Harris and Anahad O'Connor point to the disconnect between scientific knowledge and the public's perception of what is likely true and what likely isn't in "On Autism's Cause, It's Parents vs. Research." It appears that there is almost no way that mercury in vaccines causes autism, yet there remains a hard core of parents of autistic children who believe otherwise. What I think this shows is that our personal experience--a sampling of one--is so persuasive that often we cannot put it aside regardless of the evidence.
H. Allen Orr demonstrates in his carefully composed essay "Devolution" that faith-based "intelligent design" might well be a sign of human devolution.
D. T. Max's "The Literary Darwinists" introduced me to a new slant on literary criticism, clearly a natural progression in postmodern thought: namely to subject literary works to examinations from Darwinian principles. Particularly delicious is evolutionary psychology as applied to Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, which begins with this irresistible first line, "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."
What struck me as most instructive in Karen Wright's "The Day Everything Died," which is about the Permian extinction and the controversy surrounding it, is just how much more difficult it is to study something that happened a quarter of a billion years ago than it is to study something (the K-T extinction) that happened a mere 65 million years ago.
I absolutely loved Jack Hitt's, witty, satirical take on being Charlemagne's direct descendant (he is and so are you!), as he muses on Kennewick man and some not so subtle racism among those touting pre-Clovis humans in the Americas.
But my favorite piece in the book is Paul Bloom's "Is God an Accident." Having recently read Sam Harris' The End of Faith (2005) and other works, I somehow felt in total understanding about why humans believe impossible (or at least very unlikely) things. Clearly religion exists in all societies because it is adaptive and contributes to tribal cohesion which helps the tribe defeat other tribes in warfare, etc. However Bloom's essay broadened my understanding. His argument is that religion is essentially a kind of hardwired dualism in our brains that came about because we have two simultaneous ways of perceiving the world, one physical and the other social. Our social perceptions result in a belief system based on minds, that is what others may think and what may be possible in manipulating the content of minds vis-a-vis real world objects, e.g., coming up with unicorns and holy fathers with bad tempers. Consequently it feels right for us to believe in things unseen, unheard, undemonstrated.
I also liked the last essay in the book, Frans B. M. de Waal's short piece on why "We're All Machiavellians," a "truth" he learned from watching chimpanzees. His asks why don't we just admit to our lust to power? It is so obvious. Instead we and especially our politicians pretend we are "public servants" and it is other people who want power.
In short, this is the most readable collection of science essays that I have read in recent years.
--Dennis Littrell, author of “The World Is Not as We Think It Is”
January 20, 2008
It's "popular" science writing to be sure; if you peruse the New York Times or Scientific American regularly then you may have already seen some of these articles.
The range is nice, one subject that was completely new to me was the value of autopsies in medical diagnosis. Despite all the new scanning technologies, the best way to really know the cause of death is still to cut people up; it's not done nearly as often as it was 40 years but it's still very useful for finding diagnostic errors and understanding the causes of our mortality. That's the argument; added to this is a graphic description of an actual autopsy that made me stop and ponder the slim margin of an error separating an active life from a de-animated corpse.
The range is nice, one subject that was completely new to me was the value of autopsies in medical diagnosis. Despite all the new scanning technologies, the best way to really know the cause of death is still to cut people up; it's not done nearly as often as it was 40 years but it's still very useful for finding diagnostic errors and understanding the causes of our mortality. That's the argument; added to this is a graphic description of an actual autopsy that made me stop and ponder the slim margin of an error separating an active life from a de-animated corpse.
January 4, 2019
Really cool concept. I happened to pick up this edition at a used book sale. My favorite essays:
"My Bionic Quest for Boléro" - Follows someone who lost their hearing and their ability to appreciate their favorite piece of music, then slowly gained it back as they moved to better and better hearing aids.
- "The Curse of Akkad" - Explores the possible role of climate change (e.g. drought) in the fall of ancient civilizations.
- "The Coming Death Shortage" - Speculates on possible consequences for society as life expectancy continues to increase.
- "Mighty White of You" - Discusses controversial evidence of Europeans who possibly reached the Americas before anyone crossed Beringea (evidence mostly gathered by white people).
"My Bionic Quest for Boléro" - Follows someone who lost their hearing and their ability to appreciate their favorite piece of music, then slowly gained it back as they moved to better and better hearing aids.
- "The Curse of Akkad" - Explores the possible role of climate change (e.g. drought) in the fall of ancient civilizations.
- "The Coming Death Shortage" - Speculates on possible consequences for society as life expectancy continues to increase.
- "Mighty White of You" - Discusses controversial evidence of Europeans who possibly reached the Americas before anyone crossed Beringea (evidence mostly gathered by white people).
January 31, 2011
The book did not disappoint. Every single one of the articles was entertaining and thought-provoking. "Your Move" by Tom Mueller was about a computer program that plays chess, that often uses strategies that surprise even its programmers. Alan Weisman's article entitled "Earth Without People" reminds one of how fleeting human existence is in the grand scheme of things, and how quickly it could be erased. W. Wyatt Gibbs provides a much needed counter-point to the obesity epidemic that many claim is sweeping the nation with his article "Obesity: An Epic Overblown". Neil Swidey examines the nature versus nurture argument in regards to homosexuality in his article, "What Makes People Gay". Though it seems natural for me to assume that homosexuality is genetic, I also felt that if it was a genetic trait then it wouldn't be beneficial to survival (because homosexuals could not reproduce). Swidley examines this question in depth.
In "The Coming Death Shortage" Charles C. Mann discuss the potential problems that lengthening the average life of a human being will cause. H. Allen Orr provides a scientific critique of Intelligent Design that is sorely needed in today's society. Unfortunately, he does make the point that as 80% of Americans believe that God guided our creation and progression that having come this far on faith alone does Creationism really need ID? Paul Bloom provides us with a window into why we assume a designer with his article "Is God an Accident?". Bloom posits that our belief in God is related to the belief that our mind is separate from our body, which he feels is innate within children. Robert Provine's article on Yawning was fun and definitely yawn invoking (not from boredom but from yawn contagion!) and I also really enjoyed Richard Preston's description of the little world contained in the canopies of Redwood Trees.
Remarkably enough, I left quite a few articles out of the above review. The rest of the articles were also good, however the ones mentioned above were ones that really got me thinking. I have several good leads on what books I will read next and I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in some good science reading. This book provides a nice breadth that I think includes something for everyone. I believe that The Best American Science Writing is a series I will have to make sure to read each year.
In "The Coming Death Shortage" Charles C. Mann discuss the potential problems that lengthening the average life of a human being will cause. H. Allen Orr provides a scientific critique of Intelligent Design that is sorely needed in today's society. Unfortunately, he does make the point that as 80% of Americans believe that God guided our creation and progression that having come this far on faith alone does Creationism really need ID? Paul Bloom provides us with a window into why we assume a designer with his article "Is God an Accident?". Bloom posits that our belief in God is related to the belief that our mind is separate from our body, which he feels is innate within children. Robert Provine's article on Yawning was fun and definitely yawn invoking (not from boredom but from yawn contagion!) and I also really enjoyed Richard Preston's description of the little world contained in the canopies of Redwood Trees.
Remarkably enough, I left quite a few articles out of the above review. The rest of the articles were also good, however the ones mentioned above were ones that really got me thinking. I have several good leads on what books I will read next and I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in some good science reading. This book provides a nice breadth that I think includes something for everyone. I believe that The Best American Science Writing is a series I will have to make sure to read each year.
March 31, 2008
A analogy with many strong ideas, yet quite boring for "the best American science writing". But science isn't that interesting anyways. Some of the ideas are quite appealing to me such as what life would be like if humans did not exist, or what makes people gay, etc. Many of the ideas are very controversial. I may not be very religious, but the heading, "Is God an Accident" just struck me hard. Interesting, yet maybe offensive. The writers talk about their beliefs and ideas from their own experiences. It is interesting to hear their biases. I, myself had many ideas about these topics. But I still can't help for start falling asleep every morning in the subway as i open the book. Preferably for people who enjoys science.
January 17, 2008
Ended up being kind of a mixed bag. The essays towards the beginning are a bit less compelling than the rest of the book.
Two essays stood out from the others. Paul Bloom's examination of the cognitive roots of religion, and Jack Hitt's essay on the controversy over who can claim to be real native americans. Close behind was "The Coming Death Shortage" by Charles C. Mann. But only a couple essays got skipped over because it wasn't really interesting in the subject matter (appropriately, an essay on yawning). Pretty good overall, and I'll hold onto it just to re-read the better essays.
Two essays stood out from the others. Paul Bloom's examination of the cognitive roots of religion, and Jack Hitt's essay on the controversy over who can claim to be real native americans. Close behind was "The Coming Death Shortage" by Charles C. Mann. But only a couple essays got skipped over because it wasn't really interesting in the subject matter (appropriately, an essay on yawning). Pretty good overall, and I'll hold onto it just to re-read the better essays.
May 21, 2009
I love this series of essay collections, and buy them every year. I prefer them to the similar Best Science and Nature Writing series, which organizes the essays in alphabetical order by the author's name, while this one, in the volumes I've read, actually organize by subject matter so that one essay flows nicely into the next.
I even ended up buying two separate books based on essays collected here. A World Without People, by Allan Wiseman, became the best-seller The World Without Us, and the essay by Elizabeth Kolbert (part of a trilogy of essays that I had previously read in The New Yorker) became Field Notes From a Catastrophe.
I even ended up buying two separate books based on essays collected here. A World Without People, by Allan Wiseman, became the best-seller The World Without Us, and the essay by Elizabeth Kolbert (part of a trilogy of essays that I had previously read in The New Yorker) became Field Notes From a Catastrophe.
Read
June 13, 2009A collection of twenty one articles on the topics of science. But, one particular article stood out for me. “Earth Without People” by Alan Weisman. Although, the title is self explanatory but, he only writes and explains what happens to New York City’s surroundings instead of the planet Earth. Such as, without people New York City will turn Lexington Avenue into a river. Domestic animals such as dogs wouldn’t exist because there are no human around. In addition, rats and pigeons wouldn’t also survive because they feed off the human resources around them.. “The world would start all over” (Weisman 36).
July 6, 2007
Consists of 25 articles drawn from various publications. The selection ranges from cutting edge research, medical issues, the effects of science and technology on people, human development, and more. Briane Green, the editor of the version I read, explains the need for science to be readable, and has thus chosen pieces that discuss scientific topics in an accessible manner. Not all of the essays/articles were accessible for me (as I'm scientifically challenged) but I applaud the concept. I'm going to try and pick up each year's addition.
February 16, 2010
A facinating collection of American popular science essays. It features a truely eclectic mix from biology to antropology, physics to geology.
For several I would really have like to see the response to the article - in particular "Obesity: An Overblown Epidemic?".
Expanding the scope could also be interesting... Why just American Science Writing? What about a similar series for the best (or maybe most influental) peer reviewed articles?
I'll be back to read the other years!
For several I would really have like to see the response to the article - in particular "Obesity: An Overblown Epidemic?".
Expanding the scope could also be interesting... Why just American Science Writing? What about a similar series for the best (or maybe most influental) peer reviewed articles?
I'll be back to read the other years!
September 27, 2007
I am really enjoying it so far, probably because I want to like whatever Atul Gawande likes (he is the editor of this year's "Best American Science Writing" and is the author of "Complications").
A couple of the articles I could do without - the one on cloning I thought was poorly written. The one called "Might White of You" is only passable. On the other hand, the one one homosexuality is written very well.
A couple of the articles I could do without - the one on cloning I thought was poorly written. The one called "Might White of You" is only passable. On the other hand, the one one homosexuality is written very well.
Currently reading
March 13, 2008I'm really enjoying this book, and since it's essays, I can continue to read other books and pick this one up when I feel like reading a good science essay. My favorite so far has been "My Bionic Quest for Bolero" from Wired magazine. Google it. It's a really great article dealing with cochlear implants with a wonderful story of one man's quest to hear Ravel's Bolero again as he remembered it before he lost his hearing.
May 7, 2008
I don't even pretend that I read science magazines, but I'm interested in science kind of at the Nova and Nature on PBS level. Well this annual collection of published articles is the Nova of science writings. They are readable, captivating and usually astonishing. These are not ground breaking papers and there are no equations and drab jargon. This collection is about "writing," and if you're quasi into science and like to read, make this collection part of your annual routine.
April 18, 2007
a great read. a collection of well-written science articles from various newspapers, such as the new yorker, washington post, etc. touches on subjects such as: the effect of measles vaccinations on autism, what makes a person homosexual, the so-called obesity ¨epidemic¨, global warming, among others.
December 6, 2007
Well 2007 is nearly over so I thought I should get started on the best of 2006. So far the articles and essays are terrific. I started with one about why belief in God is so prevalent; there was a very convincing evolutionary rationale so it made my day. The essay, "Nature's Bioterrorist" about flu epidemics was fascinating. Indeed nearly all the articles were really engaging.
Read
April 18, 2021Bought this book in Jaipur - mainly because its edited by Atul Gawande and looked like an interesting anthology.
Loved the piece on designing software for a hearing implant person to listen to Bolero - try, try and try again from 8 channels of sound to 16 and then to 112 - working with multiple researchers, advertising on Craigslist for a music geek .
Loved the piece on designing software for a hearing implant person to listen to Bolero - try, try and try again from 8 channels of sound to 16 and then to 112 - working with multiple researchers, advertising on Craigslist for a music geek .
June 22, 2007
I got this book to see if I wanted to use it in my Technical Writing course in the Fall and I'm impressed by the variation and the political topics covered from homosexuality to time travel to obesity.
August 3, 2007
I so rarely delve into non-fiction, let alone science writing, but this was a real treat. From a scathing critique of racist archaeology to a serious take on yawning to rancorous academic squabbling over the mass extinction of trilobytes, every article in here is totally compelling and funny.
November 25, 2008
Got this for Christmas from my brother Jack and loved it. Amazing stories from all different fields of science. Liked it so much I told my brother that I expect to get the next book in this series every Christmas.
February 9, 2010
Picked this up at my parents house over the holidays and got a kick out of it. I bought the rest of the series. Basically just all of the science writing that makes it into The New Yorker, The Atlantic, Harper's, NYT Magazine in a year in one place.
August 3, 2011
Very interesting! Collection of the best science writing essays from 2006 some of the nation's leading magazines and newspapers. Inspiring for my own desired career, but intimidating at the same time! Can't wait to read the best science writing from subsequent years.
May 26, 2007
It works, lively enough to keep the non-fiction pages turning though I would recommend www.scienceblogs.com for anyway wanting to expand their general scientific radar.
June 4, 2007
always fun.
July 12, 2007
Some boring topics (which one just skips) and some fascinating as well as disturbing articles.
The article on yawning was entertaining.
The article on yawning was entertaining.
May 8, 2009
Still reading, but already captivated. As the editor bluntly puts it, the coolest stories out of this great nations' popular science magazines.
July 10, 2007
Love science writing and loved this book. I want to read all of the years. Lots of interesting and provocative articles, all at your fingertips!
August 19, 2008
These were good to read over (under?) coffee in the AM. Polished writing, interesting topics, but no real art to it.
July 16, 2014
One of my favorite series for the high quality of the writing. Gawande appears in the New Yorker regularly.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews