You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.3 AVERAGE
4.3 AVERAGE
As one of the blurbers on the cover says, "I would read a 800 page book by Michael Lewis on the history of the stapler". It does appear that he can make almost anything interesting. This book is quite short and feels like the leftovers from research he did for another book or a long magazine article. However, in Lewis' hands, leftovers make for a fine meal. He takes a look at the recent history of pandemic response in the USA, starting in the Clinton administration and reaching our current plight. If you are already convinced that government is useless, you will find much to bolster your beliefs. The worst revelations had to do with how completely ineffective the CDC has become due to political pressures... very disappointing. And, there is much outrage to be created over how little many people in power seem to care about taking care of the citizens in their districts. This was a quick read and very interesting... highly recommended.
This book is my catnip. It is a brilliant work of narrative journalism, plus it's about public health, which I love. I couldn't put it down. (Lewis is the author of Moneyball and The Big Short, so we know he's a talented journalist.) Just a few weeks ago I was appalled and astonished and naively dismayed at the CDC's apparent "giving up" of fighting the pandemic, as it announced that masks are no longer warranted for vaccinated people and it's basically on the honor system — they announced a policy based only on science, while ignoring human nature and, more specifically, the way American society has behaving throughout this pandemic. Were it not for my sudden lack of faith in the CDC, I might have been surprised by Lewis' findings. His book is a scathing account of the CDC, not necessarily the public health workers on the ground, but the system and so-called leadership. It wasn't just the CDC in the Trump administration that was so ill-equipped to fight the pandemic, but decades of a weakened CDC that focuses mostly on tracking and reporting, but seems to know nothing on how to actually have courage, stand up and fight diseases. Lewis tells the story, in unputdownable and fascinating detail, of various doctors, administrators and public health workers who were well-prepared to recognize and fight the pandemic for what it was — and knew earlier than most Americans how devastating this would be. He tells how they worked behind the scenes trying to save our country and get people to act. Sometimes it worked; sometimes it didn't. As a journalist, I was also astonished at his storytelling ability; I could tell the hours he must have spent interviewing and digging for stories to get at some of the details and background of the people he featured. It's a fascinating look at the failure of the CDC and the U.S.'s pandemic response, but it's also a remarkable tale of a group of heroes doing what they can, despite the odds. I cannot believe I haven't heard more about this book and just stumbled across it.
Michael Lewis is able to tell any deeply complex story and make it understandable to readers from any background. This book really sheds a light on how inefficient and ineffective the US government was in reacting to the pandemic until it was too late.
I guess Michael Lewis books are hit or miss to me, and this one was a big miss. Maybe my expectations were too high, and maybe this was rushed, but the focus was too narrow to me - I guess the approach of focusing on individuals, especially those profiled here, just wasn't intriguing to me. I was surprised by this since I really enjoyed [b:The Fifth Risk: Undoing Democracy|46266188|The Fifth Risk Undoing Democracy|Michael Lewis|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1562687004l/46266188._SY75_.jpg|62158447].
I have to admit that one part that irritated me was the gratuitous vulgarity. The pandemic had many situations where vulgarity or profanity would be appropriate, but in this book it just came across as crass:
“Men like that always underestimate me,” she said. “They think my spirit animal is a bunny. And it’s a fucking dragon.”
There's weird sexism throughout too (like the above quote) - which may just reflect a sexist society, but things like:
"It emerged that in that brief period, the infected woman had treated herself to an astonishing number of possibly infectious procedures. An improbable number of manicures and pedicures. Botox treatments. Dental work. Some kind of stem cell procedure."
What is an "improbable" number of manicures? What would be an "improbable" number of games of golf?
Or more so:
"They kept lists of what they’d found inside when they brought Agustin his meals and medicine. One day it was a pair of high heels; another, the hooker to whom they belonged"
(note that the "hooker" (I don't think the phrase "sex worker" was ever used in this book, but "prostitute" was) is a "what" not a "who"))
Maybe the author accurately portrays some of the people in the book, but I'm not sure of some of the assumptions being made:
“I just liked him instantly,” she recalled. “He wasn’t some slick White House dude. He was like a guy in a t-shirt with motor oil under his fingernails. He wasn’t a bastard.”
Do we still/ever associate the White House with being "slick"?
There's also such weird assumptions or extreme continuations of logic applied:
"would insist that if you closed schools, all sorts of bad things would happen: crime would rise with kids on the streets; the thirty million kids in the school-lunch program would lack nutrition; parents wouldn’t be able to go to work; and so on. American society now leaned on schools to care for children in a way that would have bewildered Americans of an earlier age, as that other institution, the family, was failing at the job. “The sub-rosa conversation was that families weren’t safe places for children,” said Lisa."
This type of writing was very frustrating to me. I think the decision to close or open schools was fascinating and nuanced, and I hope we have good data from different experiences. But was the conclusion from the above that 'families aren't safe for children'??? I also think the line about "an earlier age" is really funny - was this possibly from an age where fewer women worked outside the home? Was that possibly an aspect, which is totally ignored here??
And what does this mean: "That was a very Joe moment. A twofer, like the double helix. He now had not only the chunk of human lung but a funny story about how he got it." I understanding that DNA is present in a paired strand, but that's not a "twofer"... the science writing is this book was generally poor, I thought.
I understand that a lot of my issues were nit-picky, but this book started bothering me quite a bit. Sure, some of this could have been from misdirected frustration with the handling of the pandemic. But I look forward to better accounts in the future.
I have to admit that one part that irritated me was the gratuitous vulgarity. The pandemic had many situations where vulgarity or profanity would be appropriate, but in this book it just came across as crass:
“Men like that always underestimate me,” she said. “They think my spirit animal is a bunny. And it’s a fucking dragon.”
There's weird sexism throughout too (like the above quote) - which may just reflect a sexist society, but things like:
"It emerged that in that brief period, the infected woman had treated herself to an astonishing number of possibly infectious procedures. An improbable number of manicures and pedicures. Botox treatments. Dental work. Some kind of stem cell procedure."
What is an "improbable" number of manicures? What would be an "improbable" number of games of golf?
Or more so:
"They kept lists of what they’d found inside when they brought Agustin his meals and medicine. One day it was a pair of high heels; another, the hooker to whom they belonged"
(note that the "hooker" (I don't think the phrase "sex worker" was ever used in this book, but "prostitute" was) is a "what" not a "who"))
Maybe the author accurately portrays some of the people in the book, but I'm not sure of some of the assumptions being made:
“I just liked him instantly,” she recalled. “He wasn’t some slick White House dude. He was like a guy in a t-shirt with motor oil under his fingernails. He wasn’t a bastard.”
Do we still/ever associate the White House with being "slick"?
There's also such weird assumptions or extreme continuations of logic applied:
"would insist that if you closed schools, all sorts of bad things would happen: crime would rise with kids on the streets; the thirty million kids in the school-lunch program would lack nutrition; parents wouldn’t be able to go to work; and so on. American society now leaned on schools to care for children in a way that would have bewildered Americans of an earlier age, as that other institution, the family, was failing at the job. “The sub-rosa conversation was that families weren’t safe places for children,” said Lisa."
This type of writing was very frustrating to me. I think the decision to close or open schools was fascinating and nuanced, and I hope we have good data from different experiences. But was the conclusion from the above that 'families aren't safe for children'??? I also think the line about "an earlier age" is really funny - was this possibly from an age where fewer women worked outside the home? Was that possibly an aspect, which is totally ignored here??
And what does this mean: "That was a very Joe moment. A twofer, like the double helix. He now had not only the chunk of human lung but a funny story about how he got it." I understanding that DNA is present in a paired strand, but that's not a "twofer"... the science writing is this book was generally poor, I thought.
I understand that a lot of my issues were nit-picky, but this book started bothering me quite a bit. Sure, some of this could have been from misdirected frustration with the handling of the pandemic. But I look forward to better accounts in the future.
informative
reflective
fast-paced
So, here's where the people who ought to have been in charge were hiding.
If you need a detailed explanation of how messed up the health care system is in this country or the role bureaucracy can play in messing shit up, read this.
Another engrossing, character-driven story from Michael Lewis that clearly illustrates the underlying issues in our current system of governance. Namely, with respect to public health, the utter lack of clear norms and pathways for tackling national/global biological threats. I was completely fascinated by Carter Mecher, Charity Dean, and Joe DiRisi -- if any one of these people called me, I'd drop everything to go to work for them immediately. They're brilliant, clear-headed, and motivated to do the most good they can. MY PEOPLE! I am so grateful for Michael Lewis's exceptional storytelling and eye for a great story. HIGHLY recommended.