This book is, judging by content and structure, the European twin of "National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mushrooms" by Gary A. Lincoff, Gary H. Lincoff. It is very exhaustive and easy to use, has excellent description and photos. It also came with a vinyl jacket, a very useful thing for a field guide. I took away one star because it does not state the edibility of each species, a crucial feature of every mushroom guide for mushroom hunters. Comments about edibility are sparse and sometimes refers to vague groups of species. If the author considers this for the future editions (mine was published in 1999), this will make the perfect field guide of European mushrooms.

This book tells the stories of a few doctors in America, and the ups and downs of either going into private practice, or joining a group with other doctors. I hope to become a doctor one day, and I never thought about half of the stuff that they have to deal with. If you want to learn about what it is like in the real world, after schooling, this book is for you.

When I was 20 years old I was diagnosed with Juvenile Rheumetoid Arthritis. A rare form of arthritis (1 in 60,000) that begins in childhood. In a matter of 2 months I saw 5 different doctors, and went from a perfectly healthy college student to someone who could hardly stand up long enough to brush my teeth. I tried everything medication wise and found no true results. Then my mom found this book. I read it and bought the cookbook too. I found that changing my diet worked. Dr. Dong explains how our diets and lifestyles affect us and how to adjust them for better health. It's especially good because Dr. Dong has experienced exactly what he writes about and you can tell.

I don't know if this is the same guide to New Orleans restaurants by Richard Collin that I checked out from a library a few years ago, but if it is, than it qualifies as the funniest restaurant review guide ever written. It was written in the 1970's so, other than the famous Brennans, Galatoires, etc., it would be dated now. However, the sections worth reading are where Collin describes the mediocre and downright terrible places- it is absolutely side-splitting. He describes one place ("The Paul Gross Chicken Coop" as I remember, I believe), as "quite possibly the foulest smelling restaurant in the city." Another is condemned for the total ineptitude of its' staff (one waiter accidently set his own apron on fire while at Collins' table). One sandwich shop serves "watery Northern coffee." This is wonderful.

An excellent reference book, especially for us newer practitioners. The SOAP format is especially useful, and is the accepted format in my area. However, some of the guidelines seem more specific for California practice standards.

"NYPD Blue: Blue Begining" is a worthy supplement to the series. Designed as a prequel to the series, it retains the gritty flavor of the show. Collins knows the characters inside and out, and as the novel progresses one can visualize the "episode" of the novel perfectly. There is a nice blend of humor, emotion and toughness here that fans of "NYPD Blue" have grown accustomed to. It's a must-read for fans of the show as well as the uninitiated.

I was anxious to receive this book since my own son has been diagnosed with Kawasaki Disease twice. Ms. Collins story about her grandson is a touching one. She does a nice job describing the impact this devestating disease can have on an entire family. She is obviously a very devoted and caring grandmother, and the story she paints of her grandson's life is moving and inspirational. She is the first of thousands of families in the United States to express the horrifying impact of this disease and I applaud her for her efforts. The information about the disease and the consequences of not receiving treatment contained in this book is something that should be readily available to every parent in the United States. Sadly enough, however, there are still millions who have never even heard of Kawasaki Disease.

In the late 20th century we began to see a number of books and journal articles out of some academic disciplines that criticized the positivist approach to science and its claims to authority. Many of these have been themselves brutally criticized with such characterizations as "fashionable nonsense," "anti-science" and "higher superstition." This has been variously associated with such terms as "confused academic left," postmodernist philosophy, and social constructionism.

At their most dramatic, the so-called wars seem to revolve around a core of scientists, such as Norm Levitt, Paul Gross, Alan Sokal, and Stephen Weinberg, and their reaction to the way science is being characterized by people outside their fields. They present a largely united front in expressing that some pure and essential form of science and clear human reasoning is under siege from several fronts.

The opponents of the hardcore scientists are more varied and thus harder to characterize. The most persuasive criticisms come from people who study science and scientists and publish in academic journals: historians of science, philosophers of science, and sociologists of science. It is this sub-group of critics, and especially the people considered sociologists of science, that are the antagonists for the hardcore scientists in The One Culture.

_The One Culture_ is not (quite) another salvo in these wars, it is an uneasy and often difficult attempt at an open dialog between the sides. Notably, the participants here don't even agree on whether there is a war going on, or if there is, whether it makes sense to be declaring a truce. In spite of the confusion, a number of important concessions are declared and I learned an awful lot about the variety of perspectives on each side, and how fuzzy the boundaries between the sides really is.

It is quickly apparent from this book that the extremes often presented in popular accounts are not accurate. The people studying science are not necessarily trying to undermine it, nor are they necessarily contributing to an unhealthy or unrealistic view of science. It is a legitimate topic of academic study to observe scientific research and study the effects of various factors on its conduct and its results. Also, the scientists here are not necessarily trying to present science as a great bolt of Truth from Mt. Olympus, and recognize that there are social forces that do influence their work, at least when controversies arise.

At times, I got a real sense from this book that people were almost deliberately misinterpreting each other, but then would concede that they may not quite be representing their opponent fairly. The result is ironically and strangely confusing. Reading these essays I felt like I wanted to accept one of the views as true and just be done with the whole thing. It was confusing because the concessions made helped me realize that the sides were seeing things differently, and I think our
instinct is to want to choose a side to agree with. Rather than feeling more certain about the importance of science education, and the tragic decline of scientific literacy, I began to consider some of its limits, and even the limits of critical thinking and scientific thinking in daily life problems. In that sense, this is a mind-expanding book in some ways, if read deeply.

This is not the most exciting or immediately satisfying book about the so-called "Science Wars" because it it is structured as a serious attempt at a dialog rather than a pitched battle or clear presentation of any one perspective. However it is one of the most educational books on the subject for the same reason. You can actually begin to see areas of significant agreement between sociologists studying science and the scientists themselves, and consequently you begin to see the real areas of disagreement as well.

A Lesson About Language

One gem in this book is a remarkable essay by theoretical physicist David Mermin where he recalls his published arguments with sociologist of science Harry Collins over Collins' interpretation of the construction of the theory of relativity. Although their debate was heated and even rancorous at times, Mermin eventually recognized that the two weren't saying anything radically different, they were making different assumptions about each others' motives, they were using language differently, they were emphasizing different aspects of the process of theory building, and they were looking at human belief from different perspectives. Mermin ends the essay with a set of simple "lessons learned" from the debate:

1. Focus on the substance not on the assumed motives
2. Don't assume that people in other disciplines are using specialized terms in the same way or that they understand the nuances of your own disciplinary language
3. Don't assume that you have penetrated the nuances of the disciplinary language of another field just because it appears to be easy.

Many of the essays contain similar (seemingly obvious in retrospect, but often forgotten) insights into inter-disciplinary communication. Several of the hardcore scientists represented here seem to concede that they gave some of the sociologists of science too little credit and misunderstood them, and several of the sociologists of science concede that they didn't clearly state that observations are "experiment bound" as well as "theory bound."

The final lesson seems to be that the development of theories is neither arbitrary nor inevitably takes a single final form, and that theories come from a web of interlocking evidence rather than being decided by one or two critical experiments. Sociologists of science care more about the social aspects of that process and scientists themselves care more about the conceptual aspects, but both, when pressed, admit to the central points made by the other side. One of the remaining sticking points concerns education, whether science and critical thinking should be consistently in the forefront, or whether education should be more rounded. In this sense, C.P. Snow's "Two Cultures" are still alive and well, even though they needn't fight over science.

Richard Adams set the bar pretty high when he published his first novel, Watership Down, over 25 years ago. His novels since then (Shardik, Plague Dogs, Girl in the Swing, Maia, and Traveler) have not lived up to the promise of that first book, which ranks among the most beloved novels of the 20th century and will surely be among the handful of books to survive the century.

It is with great pleasure, therefore, to note that with The Outlandish Knight Adams has crafted a lyrical novel rich in historical detail. It follows the fortunes of 3 generations of "common" folk in England and their relationships with the Tudor aristocrats.

The novel opens in the year 1485, the action concentrating on the Battle of Bosworth Field, where Henry VII, the first of the Tudor dynasty, brought an end to the Wars of the Roses. The central narrative focuses on Henry VIII's divorce from Katherine of Aragon, while the third portion is concerned with the fate of those implicated in a plot in support of Mary, Queen of Scots, during Elizabeth's reign.

The overriding theme is one of unwavering loyalty and devotion in the face of intense pressure. While Adams is faithful to the historical detail the reader cannot help but get caught up in the events as if they were happening today. Most impressively, Adams' characters speak the English of their day, not 20th century vernacular, a device which other writers of historical fiction would do well to employ. The historical figures that appear as characters are believable, as well.

Adams' first foray into historical fiction came with his last novel, Traveler, but here he is on surer ground, writing about his native England. As a special bonus, the text is sprinkled liberally with excerpts of English folk song, including the actual musical notation.

Although lacking an animal protagonist, this is Adams' best novel since Watership Down. Readers should also check out his two collections of tales, The Unbroken Web and Tales from Watership Down. Also in a similar vein is a historical novel by Alan Garner, Strandloper, and various works of history of this period, such as Antonia Fraser's Faith and Treason.

The words "based on a true story" have become all too automatic in this visually-oriented age, but it is comforting to know that there are still instances when the phrase actually has meaning.