Scan barcode
feralforestgoblin's review against another edition
dark
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
relaxing
medium-paced
4.5
sfletcher26's review against another edition
4.0
An authoritative review of blood and its importance in the culture.
Along with Randy Shilts' And the Band Played On an important review of the contaminated blood enquiry.
Could have been improved by a wider review of the meaning of Blood from a religious perspective.
Along with Randy Shilts' And the Band Played On an important review of the contaminated blood enquiry.
Could have been improved by a wider review of the meaning of Blood from a religious perspective.
simlish's review against another edition
3.0
Blood: An Epic History of Medicine and Commerce is much more narrowly focused than I expected, based on the title. In actuality, it's a history of transfusion. It's also older than I realized (published in 2000) and a little dated due to that. It's also one of the driest books I've ever managed to make myself complete. At 496 pages, it feels like a lot more. Even in the final chapter and epilogue I had trouble pushing myself through to the finish line. I stuck with it because it truly is an interesting topic, incredibly well researched, and definitely intended to be accessible, if not quite actually there.
My other biggest problem with Blood is the homophobia -- it's clearly not intentionally homophobic, but the author refers to "gays," constantly uses the term '"innocent" victims of AIDS,' and is a proponent for screening gay men out of the donor pool, even with a reliable test for AIDS, and even with the shifting demographics of who's most likely to have AIDS (which is not mentioned within the book).
On the positives, the book is well arranged around eras of blood, starting with early attempts at transfusion (terrifyingly misguided, how on earth did humanity survive to this point), cultural beliefs around blood, underlying social factors that affected later donor pools and comfort around transfusion. The second section is largely about World War II and the leaps forward made in transfusion technology around it. The third section is about the effect of AIDS on the blood industry.
It's not a book I would recommend to anyone who isn't interested in blood and the transfusion industry, but I definitely learned a lot, about blood, transfusion, and hemophilia.
My other biggest problem with Blood is the homophobia -- it's clearly not intentionally homophobic, but the author refers to "gays," constantly uses the term '"innocent" victims of AIDS,' and is a proponent for screening gay men out of the donor pool, even with a reliable test for AIDS, and even with the shifting demographics of who's most likely to have AIDS (which is not mentioned within the book).
On the positives, the book is well arranged around eras of blood, starting with early attempts at transfusion (terrifyingly misguided, how on earth did humanity survive to this point), cultural beliefs around blood, underlying social factors that affected later donor pools and comfort around transfusion. The second section is largely about World War II and the leaps forward made in transfusion technology around it. The third section is about the effect of AIDS on the blood industry.
It's not a book I would recommend to anyone who isn't interested in blood and the transfusion industry, but I definitely learned a lot, about blood, transfusion, and hemophilia.
dajna's review against another edition
3.0
I read the book in three big steps, enjoying each one in a different way.
The first part is the historical one, and the funniest one. You'll travel from the French court to the Russian empire with some mad doctors, pioneers who experiment with blood. Disclaimer: I said "mad" in a benevolent way, but please keep in mind you can't apply today ethics, moral standards and hygiene practices to those times. Yes, you'll read about some Frankenstein-like experiment. Yes, you'll read about experimenting on and with animals. You could be grossed out.
The second part is the one that went slower for me. Again, this is how I perceived the book and for you the reading could be smoother, as intende by the author. I realized I was less engaged when I was reading about the downing of the modern understanding of blood, mainly from WWI to WWII. As often the case, necessity is a strong motivator. Doctors had to deal with mass losses of blood and tried to come up with new techniques to save their patiences, even if it means putting themselves in danger on a battlefield. We also read about the genesis of blood banks and their competition in the free market.
The last part is pretty much devoted to hepatitis and AIDS, focusing on those hemophiliacs around the world whose lives has been vastly improved by clotting factors and then tainted by a new, deadly and devastating disease. Some notable cases of transfusion-induced aids are presented, but the chronicle never appeal to the emotions of the reader. Although reading about Ryan White is emotional per se, Starr focused on telling us how the tainting of blood happened (and, due to the limited knowledge, I think it was not avoidable in the beginning), to the usual quest for profit. Yes, money is pretty much the reason why we let contaminated blood travels freely around the world way too long after the first signs of issues. Starr retold the story of the virus, from GRID to AIDS, and how the people in charged let it spread. Again: we're in 2015, HIV is no longer a short term death sentence, so it's easy to get enraged by some of the things these bureaucrats did or did not. In my experience though, human being tend to underestimate perils that are theoretical, not in-your-face. At the time, when knowledge was scarce, the virus was a statistic in progress. But as soon as more and more data or feedback came in those people were just reckless, and when they were finally brought to court is was too late, and the sentence too mild.
The first part is the historical one, and the funniest one. You'll travel from the French court to the Russian empire with some mad doctors, pioneers who experiment with blood. Disclaimer: I said "mad" in a benevolent way, but please keep in mind you can't apply today ethics, moral standards and hygiene practices to those times. Yes, you'll read about some Frankenstein-like experiment. Yes, you'll read about experimenting on and with animals. You could be grossed out.
The second part is the one that went slower for me. Again, this is how I perceived the book and for you the reading could be smoother, as intende by the author. I realized I was less engaged when I was reading about the downing of the modern understanding of blood, mainly from WWI to WWII. As often the case, necessity is a strong motivator. Doctors had to deal with mass losses of blood and tried to come up with new techniques to save their patiences, even if it means putting themselves in danger on a battlefield. We also read about the genesis of blood banks and their competition in the free market.
The last part is pretty much devoted to hepatitis and AIDS, focusing on those hemophiliacs around the world whose lives has been vastly improved by clotting factors and then tainted by a new, deadly and devastating disease. Some notable cases of transfusion-induced aids are presented, but the chronicle never appeal to the emotions of the reader. Although reading about Ryan White is emotional per se, Starr focused on telling us how the tainting of blood happened (and, due to the limited knowledge, I think it was not avoidable in the beginning), to the usual quest for profit. Yes, money is pretty much the reason why we let contaminated blood travels freely around the world way too long after the first signs of issues. Starr retold the story of the virus, from GRID to AIDS, and how the people in charged let it spread. Again: we're in 2015, HIV is no longer a short term death sentence, so it's easy to get enraged by some of the things these bureaucrats did or did not. In my experience though, human being tend to underestimate perils that are theoretical, not in-your-face. At the time, when knowledge was scarce, the virus was a statistic in progress. But as soon as more and more data or feedback came in those people were just reckless, and when they were finally brought to court is was too late, and the sentence too mild.
venturecrapitalism's review against another edition
adventurous
informative
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
Split into three sections covering blood in pre-modern history, early modern discovery of blood properties, and blood in the modern era. The science parts were detailed enough to be satisfying and remained intelligible. Starr tended to leave the decision makers’ reasoning and responsibilities unexamined and the victims’ concerns overlooked, but I’m weird like that. Broadly speaking, a good and highly informative book that I enjoyed reading. I would recommend to a nerdy friend.
ash3's review against another edition
4.0
This was an incredibly dense overview of the history of blood. From the Middle Ages to the AIDS epidemic - especially highlighting how little to no precautions were taken when collecting blood and the denial of AIDS but it was fascinating.
cspiwak's review
5.0
Fantastic. The early history of blood transfusion was interesting, but I was afraid I 'd lose interest when he started talking about blood as a commodity. I was wrong. Thoroughly engrossing and important
More...