Craig A. Coppock 2007-11-18

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful:

This is a great series. Don't miss any of it. Back order old issues... it's worth it.

Stephen A. Haines 2006-07-10

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

Today's science writing is growing more interesting and timely in its presentation. These annual collections are nearly always a delight to own. Each essay presents an issue demanding reflection and sometimes action on the reader's part. Lightman introduces this series with a brief overview of the progression of science writing over the years. He cites such classics as "The Silent Spring" and "The Double Helix" as examples. Stephen Gould's and David Quammen's columns paved the way for a wider audience for science writing, he notes. Enough production of this sort has led the way to a variety of styles, formats and topics. He presents just such a spectrum in this collection. With more than two dozen articles offered by an excellent array of authors, Lightman aptly demonstrates how far science writing has come.

With such a span, the reviewer has the choice of summarising them all [see "Synaptic mogul's fine synopsis, below], or selecting a few favoured examples. Given the range of topics and high quality of the writers, that's no easy chore. Choosing Oliver Sacks to begin the series was a wise choice. Sacks, always an expressive narrator, returns with an account of the "creation" of "new" elements. Another "regular" in this series, Natalie Angier, portrays the work of Jacquiline Barton. A woman of remarkable abilities and dedication to further research in the properties of DNA, Barton may well be making substantial changes in our understanding of "the molecule of life". Another biology specialist, Jennifer Ackerman, offers us a story of the quest to save one endangered species, the North American whooping crane. The method of preserving these magnificent birds may seem bizarre, but past efforts have fallen short of expectations. Ackerman's subject, crane biologist Richard Urbanek, leads a programme in which young cranes never encounter humans. This technique, he avers, will make transforming the chicks into their regular environment more natural, enhancing their chances for survival.

Although atomic physics, cosmology and recovering animals into their natural environments are always enticing reading, most of us remain concerned about human affairs. In dealing with our species and its many aspects, Lightman proves at his best and worst in assembling this collection. A campaign to eradicate polio in India, related by Atul Gawande, portrays the paucity of resources available to the medical workers. While expensive wars continue to impede progress by diverting resources, dedicated technicians strive to overcome the limitations imposed on them. In protecting public health, artificial issues such as "bioterrorism" have diverted attention from more immediate and pressing concerns. Philip Alcabes tots up the funds and personnel used in combating a minimal threat in contrast to the real problems of natural epidemics. He finds the Bush administration's focus a medical boondoggle. A new, more socially challenging topic has emerged in recent years. Some health issues, Robin Marantz Henig reports, may deserve focus on your "ethnic" origins. Certain afflictions appear to attack blacks more often or virulently, than whites. The first "ethnic medicines" are already on the market, with more to follow. Is this "racism" on the part of the pharmaceutical firms, or is it a valid market niche that should be followed by other drugs? And who will determine how they should be prescribed?

Inevitably, "American Science Writing" collections must deal with evolution by natural selection. Darwin's great insight is still subject to challenge in that nation. Lightman turns to one of the great nature writers, David Quammen, to provide a case for the defense [why Darwin needs "defending" is left unsaid]. Quammen, in one of the leading articles here, provides an excellent overview of how natural selection works. Quammen's style clarifies many aspects of evolution and is readable by anybody's standards. The only problem seems to be in bringing those who need to read the article to it.

Natural selection in the animal kingdom must raise the question of where humanity fits in the scheme. Many commentators have resisted the inclusion of our species in the process. In this collection, Lightman inexplicably inserts one of these objectors. David Berlinski's article on evolutionary psychology is less an example of "science writing" and more of an assault on a nascent science. His approach is formulaic by now - decry the lack of "hard evidence" on the roots of human behaviour. Since nearly everything in behavioural studies is by inference and comparison with other species, his complaint is groundless. Unless he's indirectly advocating detailed, controlled experiments on a wide segment of the human population, the chances of providing for his demands is close to nil. Berlinski, who must know of studies in sociobiology and palaeoanthropology, steadfastly ignores these indicators. Why Lightman felt the need for this kind of polemical blather remains a mystery. It can't be from a paucity of available material. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Angela Boyter 2006-03-22

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

I look forward every year to the annual edition of this series and its competitor, Best American Science and Nature Writing. Since there are way too many good magazines published I gave up long ago trying to keep up with them, and this book/series serves two useful functions. First, it provides a delightful sampler of science-related writing of the past year, and, second, it often introduces me to some new writers as well as familiar names. It is the kind of book that has repercussions: I have never failed to follow up by buying additional books, either books by the authors represented or books referred to in the selections (WARNING: This book could be dangerous to your budget!)
The series editor provides a certain stability and may ensure some breadth to the selections, but each volume bears the stam of the interests of the guest editor. Given Alan Lightman's literary bent, it was therefore not surprising to see someone like Diane Ackerman included.
This was probably not the best of the series, but it nonetheless was not one I would want to miss.

Larry Kelley 2006-03-15

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

I am a scientist. U of Michigan. I am 61
I make synthetic gem and laser crystals for a living. I read many scientific journals weekly. I think this series of "The Best American Science Writing" is extremely good with always very up to date topics. An absolutely great selection of articles written by or about top people and topics each year. I use this series to help keep me up to date on everything scientific. I highly recommend the entire series.

M. R. Sheffield 2006-03-07

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

Every year these little anthologies deliver a wealth of essays and articles. Whether they are "best" or not is in the eye of the reader, but nearly all of them are always more than worth reading, and some of them can change the way you see the world. Not bad for a few bucks.