The Best American Science and Nature Writing 2004 (Best American Science and Nature Writing)

Rating:
Summary: Way too much fluff
Review: I am not a scientist, but in past years I've enjoyed the stretch of reading the "best" series. I have counted on really good, meaty articles that offered up some of the most interesting and stimulating thinking about science and nature to be brought within the reach of readers like me.

Not so this year. The majority of the articles in this anthology are simply entertainment. A superficial personality piece about James Watson. An article about trends in baby names. Etc. This is waiting room material--good for passing time, but not for learning or provoking thought.

Normally, I only bother to write reviews when a book is so wonderful I want to encourage others to read it. But this one was such a letdown, I wanted to take the trouble to warn others away. I don't know if the editors just made bad selections this year, or if the material they included really WAS the best of 2004. If the latter, it's a scary thought!

Rating:
Summary: Showcases writing on diverse scientific topics
Review: If it's literary nonfiction essays you seek, look no further than the 2004 edition of Best American Science And Nature Writing as it showcases the finest nonfiction writing on diverse scientific topics published in 2004, from the psychology of suicide terrorism and the war on obesity to the diversity of DNA and medical pioneering efforts. A diverse collection which ranges through all scientific disciplines to provide only the best.



Rating:
Summary: A Peek is sometimes better than a Good Look
Review: The average science reader can not keep abreast of a dozen fields of science to any great depth. Skimming the best of this year's science and nature writing is often the only way to peek into other areas without being bogged down by the original work.
These books have become so popular simply because they fulfill the timesaver niche. Basically a science and nature "Reader's Digest" When presented with the opportunity to read portions of this book I found I was driven to read it completely. There is a littler here for everybody; the hilarious excerpts of Michael O'Connor's newspaper column "Ask the Bird Folks", to the serious societal problem of modern mind altering drugs in the pipeline with impacts way beyond that of Prozac that can produce "better" personalities and citizens.
Some articles are real eye-openers, a historical look at juvenile diabetes in the recent past, when the disease was considered a death sentence, the patient's stark choice, a starvation level Atkins type diet to prolong your life or an "enjoy life while you can splurge". Other thought provoking articles cover, parallel universe theory, the smarts of an octopus,surprising when compared to its station on the evolutionary tree. And some unsolved mysteries, how can a microbe that must be injested by a cat latch onto just the right circuitry of rat's brain to make it unafraid of cats.
This book is generally a fast read, no math and all the material is well explained. Kudos to the editors, they did a great job choosing material for this book. A lot of bang for the buck.


Rating:
Summary: Excellent writing and varied subjects make this a stand-out
Review: There are a lot of fine essays in this wide ranging collection, but my favorite is a piece from "Scientific American" by neuroscientist Robert Sapolsky, "Bugs in the Brain." In cogent, lively, humorous prose this short piece opens the reader's eyes to the marvelous and horrible ability of some microscopic parasites to infiltrate the host's brain and change its behavior.

The rabies virus, for instance. "There are lots of ways rabies could have evolved to move between hosts." Sneezing, for one. Instead it invades the brain, zeroes in on aggression, and stomps the pedal to the floor. Lots of scientists study aggression; there are whole conferences on various aspects of the phenomenon. But no one studies rabies to see how the trick works.

Even more beauteous is the diabolical specificity of the toxoplasma protozoan. The bug gets eaten by a rat where it creates cysts until the rat is eaten by a feline. The cat is the only animal taxoplasma can reproduce in; so it behooves the bug to make sure the right predator eats the rat. How does it do this? Simple. It deprives the rat of its congenital, hard-wired, instinctive fear of cats. Nothing else in the rat's behavior is affected.

As Sapolsky puts it: "This is akin to someone getting infected with a brain parasite that has no effect whatsoever on the person's thoughts, emotions, SAT scores, or television preferences but, to complete its life cycle, generates an irresistible urge to go to the zoo, scale a fence and try to French-kiss the pissiest-looking polar bear."

Expanding infinitely outward, Max Tegmark's "Parallel Universes" (also "Scientific American) argues quite reasonably for infinite versions of you on infinite earths. "If anything the Level I multiverse sounds trivially obvious. How could space not be infinite?" From Level I this elegant theory moves through physics, with some progressive changes in initial conditions, constants and particles (Level II), quantum mechanics (Level III) and different physical laws (Level IV). It's the kind of article that makes you aware of how limited our mental constructs and perceptions are.

Atul Gawande's profile of maverick doctor Francis Daniels Moore, ("Desperate Measures," "The New Yorker") inspired by the horror of Boston's Cocoanut Grove fire and an innovative treatment at his hospital, Mass General, to embark on a career of aggressive pioneering, is a dynamic, riveting view of a dedicated, driven, sometimes ruthless man.

Austin Bunn's "The Bittersweet Science," ("The New York Times Magazine") is an illuminating portrait of diabetes and early treatment, told through one patient's life story, and Ronald Bailey's "The Battle for Your Brain" ("The New York Times") discusses the pros and cons of neuropharmaceuticals. Other medical articles profile DNA's James Watson and discuss obesity in sympathetic terms of the biological imperative.

Genes crop up in Horace Freeland Judson's "The Stuff of Genes," ("Smithsonian), a celebration of its 50th anniversary and, more engagingly, in two "New York Times" articles from Nicholas Wade, "In Click Languages, an Echo of the Tongues of the Ancients," and "A Prolific Genghis Khan, It Seems, Helped People the World."

There are whimsical psychological musings, like Peggy Orenstein's "Where Have All the Lisas Gone," ("The New York Times Magazine") on changing fads in baby names, Virginia Postrell's "The Design of Your Life," on the personalization of design and Jonathan Rauch's "Caring for Your Introvert," ("Atlantic Monthly"), which is basically a justification for peace and quiet.

"We're All Gonna Die!" ("Wired") by Gregg Easterbrook reviews the latest doomsday theories and

Mike O'Connor's "Bird Watcher's General Store" (The Cape Codder") is a hilarious and informative selection of bird watcher columns, and other animal pieces include "Through the Eye of an Octopus" ("Discover"), a poignant portrait of a creature who doesn't live long enough to be as smart as it is, and anthropologist Meredith F. Small's contemplative "Captivated" ("Natural History") on visiting monkeys at the zoo.

Editor Steven Pinker's bias for clear, informative and entertaining writing serves us well. There's a bit of something for everyone in this balanced and eclectic collection and every piece is well written, many are witty, and a few are as funny as they are informative.

Rating:
Summary: Kissing a Polar Bear
Review: This issue of the yearly publication, The Best Science & Nature Writing of 2004 is as good as watching IMax with surround sound and getting all the popcorn you can eat, delivered to your easy chair.

My favorites are "Bugs in the Brain" (about how parasites direct hosts' behaviors) and "The Battle For Your Brain" (about the ethics surrounding psychotherapeutic drugs in development).

Excerpts from "Bugs...":

Certain parasites control the brains of their hosts. The rabies virus is one such parasite. Rabies causes its host to become aggressive so that the virus can jump into another host via saliva from the bite wound. "Scads of neurobiologists study the neural basis of aggression. Aggression has spawned conferences, doctoral theses, petty academic squabbles, nasty tenure disputes, the works. Yet all along, the rabies virus has 'known' just which neurons to infect to make the rabid victim aggressive."

The parasite called Toxoplasma gondii ideally uses only cats and rodents as its hosts. The rodent eats the cat feces, the cat eats the rodent. The infected rodent, previously instinctually terrified when it smells the cat pheromone, loses its fear of cats!! Everything else is pretty much intact. "This is akin to someone getting infected with a brain parasite that has no effect whatsoever on the person's thoughts, emotions, SAT scores, or TV preferences, but to complete its life cycle, generates an irresistable urge in its host to go to the zoo, scale a fence, and try to french kiss the pissiest looking polar bear - a parasite induced fatal attraction!"

Interestingly I counted at least 1/3 of the articles which were fairly light in science, but made great reading anyway. Out of 23 articles, I gave only 3 a thumbs down. I read Scott Atran's article first, not because it was first, but because I loved his excellent book "In Gods We Trust."

I look for this annual every year, along with its also superb rival by a similar name, "The Best American Science Writing of 200_", and recommend them both highly.