I was disappointed with the lack of science in the discussion of health concerns. For example, historically most cancer clusters have been a recognized statistical artifact (i.e. a sampling issue, not a health issue) in public health for many years. However, the author devotes many sentences itemizing these anecdotes and only a relatively brief allusion to the lack of causal association with CAFOs.
There is a legitimate argument to be made regarding pollution and the cost to society, but it is obscured by many pages of health effects innuendo.
He did not pronounce scientific names correctly.
Shorten family anecdotes in favor of a more thoughtful discussion of lack of health evidence, and legitimate debate on pollution, costs to society, and farm subsidies.
Great, balanced history of American agriculture with a little bit of everything, personal farm experience, economic history, science and technology, organic vs conventional foods. Particularly deep on policy history which may require re-reading to fully appreciate for this non-social scientist.
Interesting descriptive information about these populations, but compared to what? People with statistics background will likely be disappointed. On the other hand, it probably won't hurt to adopted many of the lifestyle activities identified in the book.
This was a good overview of how to begin thinking critically about expert advice. I was looking for a more in depth exploration and examples of problems with cognitive biases on the part of experts.
Author interview on the radio was more fascinating than book. Was looking for a little more history and a little less spice.
Report Inappropriate Content