Scan barcode
spacewhombus's review against another edition
funny
informative
reflective
fast-paced
4.0
Though in 2023 I am sure this is already outdated science, I found this super interesting. From the evolution and cultural history of breasts (surprise! they are for breastfeeding, not men's sexual fantasies), to the make and benefits of breastmilk and its increasing toxin content, to the history of breast implants, to the role of hormones in breast development all the way from puberty to old age- this book covered nearly everything I never knew I wanted to know about breasts. The most surprising thing was probably how little is known about them in the first place, at least in the scientific community of 2012.
leslielikesthings's review against another edition
3.0
I think going with the audio version of this one was a mistake. It was too easy for my mind to wander through the more science-y bits, and there were a lot of science-y bits. It didn't help that I was listening to this in a period of personal distraction. Not the book's fault, but I really didn't put much of my brain into it, and it needed a lot more of my attention for me to get much out of it.
What I did manage to absorb had me pretty much convinced that I'm going to die early because my body is thoroughly polluted with nasty chemicals, so that's fun.
What I did manage to absorb had me pretty much convinced that I'm going to die early because my body is thoroughly polluted with nasty chemicals, so that's fun.
simlish's review against another edition
4.0
Reminded me strongly of Mary Roach (and that's a good thing). The sort of deep dive journalism I really enjoy, with a conversational tone and strong narrative voice balancing out the nitty gritty scientific details. I would be interested in an update with the effects of HRT on trans people, going both directions, but otherwise no complaints
emgusk's review against another edition
3.0
I should know better than to read a 10 year old pop science book in a field that’s constantly evolving, but it was on the shelf and it’s a subject I’m interested in. Too much about chemicals, BPAs (most of that appears to be unfounded at this time) and others and not enough about breast cancer. Yes, as the author repeated several times, only 10% of breast cancers are genetic, but why not talk about genetic cancers more? The author did a good job at weighing the pros/cons of breast feeding; even though she says she’s “granola” several times, she doesn’t claim that breast feeding is definitely superior. A few very early trial studies made it into this book that a layperson might put trust into, but findings aren’t there yet. Why the emphasis at keeping breasts? If they’re WAY more likely to kill you even if you want to feed a kid with them some day, preventative mastectomy might be your best option, you can get rid of them and move on. Weird to not include that in the book but several early trials that don’t seem to have amounted to much. This book is about breasts as they exist to feed babies. I should stick to breast cancer books!
Despite this book’s flaws, it was a well-written and quick read. I read it in a day. Journalists are good at writing books!
Despite this book’s flaws, it was a well-written and quick read. I read it in a day. Journalists are good at writing books!
muheb's review against another edition
3.0
Throughout, Williams discusses research into the impact of our environment on breasts. The chapters on the human evolution of breasts and the history of breast implants were fascinating . I was not so keen on the rest of the book.
Williams writing measures up to the positive qualities of a good journalist, however, I think some of her conclusions could have been a little more carefully drawn.
I wanted more about the history of breasts, about bra industry, the plastic surgery industry, more about boobs rather than the toxins that lurk in the breasts.
The biological and paleological story of the breast tended to get set aside. Also, at times she tried for a Mary Roach style of humorous science reportage, but it came across as forced.
Williams writing measures up to the positive qualities of a good journalist, however, I think some of her conclusions could have been a little more carefully drawn.
I wanted more about the history of breasts, about bra industry, the plastic surgery industry, more about boobs rather than the toxins that lurk in the breasts.
The biological and paleological story of the breast tended to get set aside. Also, at times she tried for a Mary Roach style of humorous science reportage, but it came across as forced.