Comments: 5
Sounds like this is the book we *should* have read recently?
Elentarri's Book Blog 4 years ago
I don't know if everyone else would have liked it. It's not an "easy" read and doesn't deal with a particular disease per chapter. There are other books that do that. Other reviews compare it to Guns, Germs and Steel, but I've never read that so can't really comment on it.
I'm beginning to get the feeling that all too "easy" reads aren't what the majority in the group are looking for anyway ... A comparison to "Guns, Germs and Steel" is a recommendation in my view (OK, I'm biased, but even bias aside it is.)
Elentarri's Book Blog 4 years ago
Are you sure about the "easy" reads comment? The book at the top of the current flat book list is The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History by Elizabeth Kolbert. This is another piece of fluff. To be more accurate it's a bunch of magazine articles stuffed into a book, minus the pretty pictures.

In any case, Plagues and People is pretty old and should be floating around on the net somewhere or in the library if you are interested.
I think people look chiefly at the topics of the books on the list and just assume a minimum level of scientific contents. Which frankly is what I do, too, not knowing anything about the writing as such. But judging by how many (even if not all of us) reacted to, say, "Forensics" and "Get Well Soon" -- and given that most of those reactions stemmed from disappointed expectations about the lack of scientific detail --, and contrasting that with the overall favorable reactions to "Storm in a Teacup" and "A Is for Arsenic", I'd say we definitely have a number of people in the group who do look for actual science (albeit made accessible) in our group reads. Perhaps we ought to pay greater attention to whether the book is actually written by a scientist to begin with ... ?

I'm sure I'll be able to find "Plagues and People" whenever I am ready to consider the historic impact of diseases and epidemics ...