Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.33 AVERAGE
4.33 AVERAGE
Um livro recomendadíssimo para qualquer um que quer entender mais sobre genética e DNA. Uma mistura de histórias pessoais e histórias de figuras importantes na descoberta do que são os genes e quais os papéis deles que torna o livro interessante para leigos e entendedores. A mesma receita que ele já deu muito certo em [b:O Imperador de Todos Os Males|16084197|O Imperador de Todos Os Males|Siddhartha Mukherjee|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1350152572s/16084197.jpg|7580942], do mesmo autor, que ganhou o Pulitzer. Para leigos, boa parte das explicações são novas e (acredito) compreensíveis. Ele descreve grande parte dos exemplos que vi durante meu curso de biologia molecular, o livro poderia ser material de curso de biomol sem muitas perdas e sem ser nada cansativo como o material tradicional costuma ser. Para quem já entende, a perspectiva histórica, relatos de quem foram ou como eram as pessoas por trás das descobertas que conhecemos e as discussões sobre ética são excelentes.
Descobri muita coisa nova apesar de gostar e entender da área. Ponto mais forte: o [a:Siddhartha Mukherjee|3032451|Siddhartha Mukherjee|https://d2arxad8u2l0g7.cloudfront.net/authors/1461962032p2/3032451.jpg] tem formação médica e sua preocupação com os caminhos da eugenia e com as implicações e complicações da modificação genética de humanos, de testes de propensão para doença e outros são ótimos pontos para discussões de ética. Ponto mais fraco: talvez pela formação mais médica, alguns pontos históricos ou biológicos ficaram um pouco errados. Ele afirma que Darwin teve acesso aos textos de Mendel, mas até onde sei eram textos sobre cruzamento de plantas, não sobre os princípios da genética. E o único ponto conceitual que realmente me pegou, quando ele fala sobre epigenética, foca muito mais em uma noção já bem deixada de lado, a da regulação através das histonas, e não discute modificações que realmente ocorrem mais como a metilação do DNA. Nesse sentido, o Sobrevivência dos Mais Doentes ([b:Survival of the Sickest: A Medical Maverick Discovers Why We Need Disease|119837|Survival of the Sickest A Medical Maverick Discovers Why We Need Disease|Sharon Moalem|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1442418206s/119837.jpg|1401163]) trata melhor, apesar de ser mais antigo.
Descobri muita coisa nova apesar de gostar e entender da área. Ponto mais forte: o [a:Siddhartha Mukherjee|3032451|Siddhartha Mukherjee|https://d2arxad8u2l0g7.cloudfront.net/authors/1461962032p2/3032451.jpg] tem formação médica e sua preocupação com os caminhos da eugenia e com as implicações e complicações da modificação genética de humanos, de testes de propensão para doença e outros são ótimos pontos para discussões de ética. Ponto mais fraco: talvez pela formação mais médica, alguns pontos históricos ou biológicos ficaram um pouco errados. Ele afirma que Darwin teve acesso aos textos de Mendel, mas até onde sei eram textos sobre cruzamento de plantas, não sobre os princípios da genética. E o único ponto conceitual que realmente me pegou, quando ele fala sobre epigenética, foca muito mais em uma noção já bem deixada de lado, a da regulação através das histonas, e não discute modificações que realmente ocorrem mais como a metilação do DNA. Nesse sentido, o Sobrevivência dos Mais Doentes ([b:Survival of the Sickest: A Medical Maverick Discovers Why We Need Disease|119837|Survival of the Sickest A Medical Maverick Discovers Why We Need Disease|Sharon Moalem|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1442418206s/119837.jpg|1401163]) trata melhor, apesar de ser mais antigo.
Though I have no particular interest in genetics, I read this book for two reasons: I wanted to learn about CRISPR technology and the book made a number of "year's best" lists.
Does this book deliver on its promise? Yes. It is a history of genetic research (as well as its dark counterpart, eugenics) that begins in the Middle Ages and carries all the way through to the present day. Is it well-written? Sure. Mukherjee has sufficient grasp of his subject matter to make it comprehensible to the layman - no easy feat!
Why two stars, then? This is more an indication of my personal response to the book than the quality of the book itself. I'm interested in genetics the same way I'm interested in many subjects: as part of my ambition to gain a general knowledge of the world. However, I'm not fascinated by biology. I suspect that my relatives in the health sciences would devour this book. Personally, it was the literary equivalent of eating my vegetables: something I endured because it was good for me.
Does this book deliver on its promise? Yes. It is a history of genetic research (as well as its dark counterpart, eugenics) that begins in the Middle Ages and carries all the way through to the present day. Is it well-written? Sure. Mukherjee has sufficient grasp of his subject matter to make it comprehensible to the layman - no easy feat!
Why two stars, then? This is more an indication of my personal response to the book than the quality of the book itself. I'm interested in genetics the same way I'm interested in many subjects: as part of my ambition to gain a general knowledge of the world. However, I'm not fascinated by biology. I suspect that my relatives in the health sciences would devour this book. Personally, it was the literary equivalent of eating my vegetables: something I endured because it was good for me.
challenging
informative
slow-paced
informative
medium-paced
I had my mind blown by Mukherjee's deft use of personal history, cultural history, and ability to explain technical scientific details to laypeople without boring us senseless in his oncology masterpiece, The Emperor of All Maladies.
He does it again, here, with The Gene. Embedding the history-- both scientific and cultural-- of human involvement with genetics within his own familial history of mental disease, Mukherjee portrays a powerful, troubling, thought-provoking strain of human science-- our quest to understand why we are who we are as well as the ethical/moral pitfalls of any attempt to control that.
Through Mendel and Darwin, traveling on to Eugenics both in the US and Nazi, then the moral trajectory of stem cell research and the politically influenced Human Genome Project, and also touching on the highly publicized death of a first recipient of gene therapy, Mukherjee ends with implications about our current technological ability to use human embryonic cells and insert genetic changes via CRISPR technology that can affect the germ line (ability to pass on changes via egg and sperm cells to the next generation).
By the end of reading this book, I had so many sticky notes on the "good parts" that it was ridiculous, and all of those were a personal lens focused on the how this book framed the development of genetics in a way that either made lots of sense to me or made me rethink certain assumptions.
First, the way that "mutants" are defined. He reminds us that the opposite of "mutant" isn't "normal", but 'wild strain.' This has implications on our definitions of normal and how evolution is perceived. In talking about how gross-beaked variants of Galapagos finches survived famine and then "..a new species of finch began to appear. The freak became the norm. As new Malthusian limits were imposed-- diseases, famines, parasites-- new breeds gained a stronghold, and the population shifted again. Freaks became norms, and norms became extinct. Monster by monster, evolution advanced."
This theme that what to our current sensibilities might seem monstrous, is truly just a biased perception that may not fully appreciate how a mutant might better fit an environment is a theme throughout the book, culminating in implications for genetic therapy treatments for mental and physical diseases. He constantly underlines that "It is not mutation that ultimately causes disease, but mismatch" where the mismatch is in specific disabilities caused by an incongruity between an individual's specific genetic makeup and his or her current environment. Some poignant implications for parents who can envision themselves deciding on abortion of a genetic survey of their fetus resulted in a diagnosis for risk of schizophrenia, autism, hemophilia, and Down's syndrome.
And Mukherjee does all this with a tender, compassionate touch. He references King Lear, Sanskrit poetry, and other literary/cultural images to help us humanize the science. And while there was a bit of needless repetition of scientific concepts at times, I forgave that in the face of the excellent way he can take complex, lengthy history and distill it into fundamental questions and personal anecdotes of what it means to be human. Bravo.
He does it again, here, with The Gene. Embedding the history-- both scientific and cultural-- of human involvement with genetics within his own familial history of mental disease, Mukherjee portrays a powerful, troubling, thought-provoking strain of human science-- our quest to understand why we are who we are as well as the ethical/moral pitfalls of any attempt to control that.
Through Mendel and Darwin, traveling on to Eugenics both in the US and Nazi, then the moral trajectory of stem cell research and the politically influenced Human Genome Project, and also touching on the highly publicized death of a first recipient of gene therapy, Mukherjee ends with implications about our current technological ability to use human embryonic cells and insert genetic changes via CRISPR technology that can affect the germ line (ability to pass on changes via egg and sperm cells to the next generation).
By the end of reading this book, I had so many sticky notes on the "good parts" that it was ridiculous, and all of those were a personal lens focused on the how this book framed the development of genetics in a way that either made lots of sense to me or made me rethink certain assumptions.
First, the way that "mutants" are defined. He reminds us that the opposite of "mutant" isn't "normal", but 'wild strain.' This has implications on our definitions of normal and how evolution is perceived. In talking about how gross-beaked variants of Galapagos finches survived famine and then "..a new species of finch began to appear. The freak became the norm. As new Malthusian limits were imposed-- diseases, famines, parasites-- new breeds gained a stronghold, and the population shifted again. Freaks became norms, and norms became extinct. Monster by monster, evolution advanced."
This theme that what to our current sensibilities might seem monstrous, is truly just a biased perception that may not fully appreciate how a mutant might better fit an environment is a theme throughout the book, culminating in implications for genetic therapy treatments for mental and physical diseases. He constantly underlines that "It is not mutation that ultimately causes disease, but mismatch" where the mismatch is in specific disabilities caused by an incongruity between an individual's specific genetic makeup and his or her current environment. Some poignant implications for parents who can envision themselves deciding on abortion of a genetic survey of their fetus resulted in a diagnosis for risk of schizophrenia, autism, hemophilia, and Down's syndrome.
And Mukherjee does all this with a tender, compassionate touch. He references King Lear, Sanskrit poetry, and other literary/cultural images to help us humanize the science. And while there was a bit of needless repetition of scientific concepts at times, I forgave that in the face of the excellent way he can take complex, lengthy history and distill it into fundamental questions and personal anecdotes of what it means to be human. Bravo.
This book is very difficult in places,it helps to have some khan academy videos of how DNA and management work. It's a good history of the people & ideas in genetics. It also covers some of tge complex ethics, which is really important and im glad it's such an interesting part of this book.
adventurous
informative
inspiring
medium-paced
Saya menyukai tulisan Siddhartha Mukherjee di Gen. Secara alur komprehensif, dari awal penemuan hingga sekarang. Kemungkinan juga bagaimana masa depannya dari gen dan genom.
Menarik bagaimana manusia mencoba membaca dirinya sendiri, secara harfiah. Mencari potongan terkecil dalam dirinya dan berkembang bagaimana memodifikasinya.
Sebuah buku yang nggak bisa dibaca sekali duduk (bagi saya) sebab butuh tercengang berkali-kali dengan informasi yang baru saya baca. Padahal buki sudah terbit dari 2015.
Dari buku ini juga membuat saya ingin membaca buku-buku lain seperti tentang penelitian Darwin dan buku-buku Richard Dawkins (meskipun gara-gara Humankind saya skeptis dengan buku beliau)
Menarik bagaimana manusia mencoba membaca dirinya sendiri, secara harfiah. Mencari potongan terkecil dalam dirinya dan berkembang bagaimana memodifikasinya.
Sebuah buku yang nggak bisa dibaca sekali duduk (bagi saya) sebab butuh tercengang berkali-kali dengan informasi yang baru saya baca. Padahal buki sudah terbit dari 2015.
Dari buku ini juga membuat saya ingin membaca buku-buku lain seperti tentang penelitian Darwin dan buku-buku Richard Dawkins (meskipun gara-gara Humankind saya skeptis dengan buku beliau)
