Product Description
As the world finds itself faced with common problems that affect most of the planet's population--climate change, increasing poverty, escalating violence, international conflicts, illness--a growing sense of empathy and connection with those in remote parts of the world has caught hold and is spreading. This book presents a unique approach to what it means to belong to one human family and how it can help us address the problems that affect us all. ... Read more

Product Description
Why do we behave the way we do? Biologist Paul Ehrlich suggests that although people share a common genetic code, these genes "do not shout commands at us . . . at the very most, they whisper suggestions." He argues that human nature is not so much the result of genetic coding; rather, it is heavily influenced by cultural conditioning and environmental factors. With personal anecdotes, a well-written narrative, and clear examples, Human Natures is a major work of synthesis and scholarship as well as a valuable primer on genetics and evolution that makes complex scientific concepts accessible to lay readers.

"I doubt whether anyone will write as good a book of this sort on [human evolution] for another two or three decades." (Science)

"Ehrlich's book is so well researched and so elegantly presented that it stands as one of the best introductions to human evolution in recent memory." (Publishers Weekly, starred review)Amazon.com Review
It's common to blame "human nature" for some of the unpleasantfacts of life--road rage, say, or murder, or war. The problem withthis convenient out, argues the distinguished scientist Paul Ehrlich,is that there really is no single human nature. Humans, it's true,share a common genetic code with remarkably few large-scaledifferences (if all but native Africans disappeared from the planet,he notes, "humanity would still retain somewhat more than 90 percentof its genetic variability"); and evolution has endowed us withcapabilities shared by no other species. But for all that, he adds,our separation into haves and have-nots, weak and strong, and othersuch categories is more often than not a product of culturalevolution, a process far more complex than the mere mutation andadaptation of a few genes. And, in any event, those genes "do notshout commands to us about our behavior," Ehrlich says. "At the verymost, they whisper suggestions."

In this wide-ranging survey of what it is that has made and thatcontinues to make us human, Ehrlich touches on a number ofthemes--among them, his recurrent observation that science has taughtus little about how genes influence human behavior. (Instead, he noteswryly, "science tells us that we are creatures of accident clinging toa ball of mud hurtling aimlessly through space. This is not a notionto warm hearts or rouse multitudes.")He urges that scientists take alarger, interdisciplinary view that looks beyond mere genetics to thelarger forces that shape our lives, a view for which HumanNatures makes a handy, and highly accessible, primer.--Gregory McNamee ... Read more

Customer Reviews (23)

A supurb text
"Human Natures" is a wonderful book for the individual seeking to understand evolution, particularly the evolution of humans and their behaviors.In the first couple of chapters Professor Ehrlich covers a lot of ground that helps the reader to understand the principles at work, beginning with an overview of the theory of Evolution itself, how it works and illustrations of it at work in the laboratory drawn from his own research.Most importantly and interestingly, he clarifies the mistaken notion that what and who we are as a species can be answered as a matter of "nature" OR "nurture."It is an inextricable combination of both, the product of which is always greater than the sum of the parts.To neglect this fact by championing one or the other is to miss some very salient points about human behavior at any given point in history and about its possible trajectory into the future.

After providing the reader with the basics, the author looks at the legacy of early hominids to humankind, examining things like upright posture, tool use, art, religion, language, brain development and other aspects of humanness.Remarking on what he terms a "gene shortage," he points out the error in thinking that individual genes can direct specific behaviors, noting also that to have "wired" in sonmthing like language would require more genes--and more neurons--than actually exist.By looking at the reality of the biochemistry and physiology of the human, particularly the capacity of the brain, he seeks alternative answers to the question of art, language, male aggression, intra and inter group violence, etc.

The author seems at once optimistic and pessimistic about the future of mankind on the planet, noticing throughout that our technology has outstripped both our capacity to physically and culturally adapt.Like Jerod Diamond in his books Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed and Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies, the author points to examples of remarkable lack of foresight by human populations exploiting the environment beyond its capacity to continue to support unrestrained population growth.Certainly some of his examples seem to support Malthus's pessimistic statistics regarding boom and bust ecologies.On the other hand, he also seems to feel that human culture can evolve, at least in certain environments, in the face of challenges.

The book is replete with an extensive set of footnotes regarding specific entries and a very large and complete bibliography of further resources for anyone looking to follow up on both the author's own primary and secondary research and the reader's specific topics of interest.Anyone WRITING PAPERS on anthropology, archaeology, evolution, human physical and cultural evolution, and ecology will find this a great text with which to start.

A supurb text.

Interesting and comprehensive but simplistic about influence of genes
Frost, P. 2003. Review of Human Natures. Genes, Cultures, and the Human Prospect by P.R. Ehrlich, Reports of the National Center for Science Education 23(2): 33-34.

Genetics or culture --which has done more to shape our human nature? This age-old debate is central to Paul Ehrlich's tome on the evolution of human behavior, society, and civilization. Although he treats both sides of the debate fairly, often confessing his own uncertainty, Ehrlich clearly comes down on the side of culture. Hence the title, Human Natures, which stresses the diverse ways we've developed from a common blueprint.

In our species, cultural evolution has certainly taken over from genetic evolution. Culture can pass on and create adaptations without being constrained by generation time and the long wait for useful mutations. Yet genes still have some advantages. If a situation arises often enough, we are better off with a genetically preprogrammed response. "Hardwiring" avoids the delays of learning how to respond to a situation that may have serious consequences the first time. The "ouch!" response doesn't have to be learned. Although Ehrlich does give hardwiring some role, he generally discounts it for two reasons.

His first reason is "gene shortage." Our genomes have less than 100,000 genes and our brains 100-1,000 trillion synapses (p. 124). That's at least 1 gene for every 1 billion synapses. Ehrlich concludes from this, on the assumption that one gene has one effect, that relatively few synapses are hardwired. Actually, a single gene can have many effects. It may produce different amounts of protein for different purposes, or even different proteins, depending on the way it is regulated by other genes and the way these other genes are regulated. So the number of hardwired synapses could be much higher than 100,000 -- in theory, as many as there are ways of combining 100,000 genes with each other. Furthermore, if gene shortage had indeed prevented hardwiring, even when advantageous, wouldn't natural selection have expanded the genome and reduced the proportion of junk DNA? Such selection has occurred in other species. The pufferfish packs the same genetic information into one-eighth the DNA that we do (Lewis 2002). Given our genome's unused capacity, new genes should have been easy to create when needed.

Ehrlich's second reason is "imprecision of selection" (p. 127). If a desirable effect is selected, the result is selection for a lot of other effects, most of them undesirable. So a behavior won't be hardwired unless it is really critical to survival. Ehrlich has certainly put his finger on a problem in evolution (and it is heartening to see him acknowledge that a single gene can have many effects). But the problem isn't insuperable. Typically, natural selection will bring about duplication of the gene, with one copy specializing in one set of effects and the other in another. Or it will adjust regulator genes that are associated with any undesirable effects. Such fine-tuning has made possible the evolution of anatomy from one-celled ameba to many-celled humans. Why not the evolution of behavior?

In the genes vs. culture debate, Ehrlich confesses no uncertainty on one point: Human races don't exist. He presents two undisputed facts. First, there is much more genetic variability within populations than between populations. "If all human beings except native Africans were wiped out, humanity would still retain somewhat more than 90 percent of its genetic variability" (p. 52). Second, genetic variability is largely discordant. "Whether we plot skin color, height, indices of nose or face shape, frequencies of genes controlling blood groups, or any other characteristic, the resulting maps are in most cases utterly different from one trait to the next" (p. 291). Human races are thus arbitrary: "Pick a different set of characteristics and you get a different set of 'races' ." (p. 292).

These two facts deserve closer scrutiny. First, it is true that genes vary more within human populations than between them. But we see the same thing when comparing many species. Genes vary more within single dog breeds than between dogs and wolves (Coppinger and Schneider 1995:33; Vila et al. 1997). Genes vary more within species of Lake Victoria cichlids than between them, despite clear interspecific differences in morphology and behavior (Klein et al. 1998). Genes vary so much within Lycaeides butterfly species, and so little between them, that we cannot tell these species apart by examining their mitochondrial DNA or allozyme alleles, again despite clear differences in morphology (Nice and Shapiro 1999).

Second, it is true that genetic variability is discordant across human populations. But the same discordance exists across many species. All six species of Darwin's ground finches form a genetically homogeneous genus with very little concordance between mitochondrial DNA, nuclear DNA, and morphology (Freeland and Boag 1999). Let's go back to those traits that concord so poorly within our species. How well do they concord across the species boundary between us and our primate cousins? ABO blood groups exist not only in humans but also in other primates (Klein et al. 1998). According to this trait, I probably have more in common with certain apes than with Dr. Ehrlich. Height and skin color? Again, many of us are closer to some apes than to other humans. How about dental traits? Our species would still be indistinguishable: a large suite of dental traits exists in sub-Saharan Africans and non-human primates but not in humans outside Africa (Irish 1998).

If a single-trait approach is so poor at distinguishing species, it could hardly be better at distinguishing races. The only sensible approach is a multi-trait one. In other words, we should aggregate information from many different characteristics by superimposing maps of their variability on top of each other. If we do this for humans, the resulting composite map unmistakably reveals four regional groups: 1) sub-Saharan Africans; 2) Europeans and West Asians; 3) East Asians and Amerindians; and 4) Australian Aborigines (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994; Mountain and Cavalli-Sforza 1997; Nei and Roychoudhury 1993).

But why must we aggregate so much to filter out the fuzziness in the data? The answer is that only a fraction of the genome changes when one population differentiates from another in response to differences in natural selection. The rest remains unchanged, either because the genes have little selective value or because they handle adaptive problems that are common to both populations. Over most of the genome, then, variability consists not of adaptive differences created by different selection pressures but rather of non-adaptive variations that similar selection pressures (or none at all) have left in place.

As the two populations become reproductively isolated, they no longer accumulate the same non-adaptive variations and so their genomes drift steadily apart. But this takes time. For instance, the two species of redpoll finches diverged some 50,000 years ago and clearly have distinct phenotypes, yet their mitochondrial DNA reveals a single undifferentiated gene pool (Seutin et al. 1995). It is no surprise, then, that so much genetic overlap exists among human populations. The earliest split among them -- the Out of Africa event -- is on the order of 40,000 years ago (Pritchard et al. 1999).

What about the fact that 90% of all human genetic variability lies in Africa? All that means is that the African gene pool is older and has accumulated more "junk" variability, a mere fraction of which was carried out of Africa by the small founder groups that peopled the rest of the world. The absurdity of drawing further conclusions is illustrated by another fact: a single chimpanzee subspecies has more genetic variability than all humans taken together (Gagneux et al. 1999). So what? All that means is that chimps have stayed put with the same gene pool for a longer time.

Has Ehrlich failed, then, in his quest to merge culture and genetics into a common understanding of the human prospect? Yes, but in this he is no worse than others. Such a quest, by virtue of the many areas it must cover, will enter some that lie beyond the limits of normal debate. In another age, these areas were sex and religion. Are we more enlightened today?

We Humans are Guided like Missiles to Behave Certain Ways
What a surprise to be writing comments on a book I read more than eight years ago.

As footnotes for a recent leadership course for some middle level executives, I placed Enrlich's book-Human Nature, Genes, Cultures and the Human Prospect -on the reading list and used some references in the morning session of the training called, " Understanding Leadership and Human Nature, Decision-making and Social Behavior: Emotional-wired, or Taught?; Culture or Biological? ".

This was done in material mailed out six weeks before holding this company-sponsored week-end course, I was shocked to discover that several of these tough minded business executives had purchased the door stopper weight and size book-544 page book. And that they had been discussing some themes in the book over the past weeks. In the hour open discussion-thinking session before lunch after exposing them to several theories, the participants wanted to talk more about how humans moved from group forming to group leadership over the centuries.

The centeral point of our discussion was the comment where Enrlich stated "the ways we act as humans are whispered to us when we are emotional and all human decisions are more emotional than rational". The discussion carried through lunch and helped jumpstart the afternoon session on leadership styles. I recommend this book without any reservation even tho a few years late.Dr. Errol D. Alexander, Sr. author of " Hourhand Leadership" Arrowhead Institute, Tacoma, Wa.

Human Natures: Genes, Cultures and the Human Prospect
This is an excellent book from my point of view. It contains information that even I can decipher. A bit of wit and humor included within the pages certainly helps with the digestion of a very great deal of information. Very well written by an author with credentials and experience,I recommend this book to anyone interested in evolution, genetics, and mankind's own developement.

Momintum

Excellent exploration of evolution
Detailed tour of biological evolution as well as cultural evolution, how they are different and how they interrelate.

Some of the interesting topics:

- Nurture vs. Nature
- What we can learn from animal evolution
- The brain and evolution
- Language and evolution
- The progression from hunter-gatherer to agriculture to social stratification to towns, etc
- Sexual identity, incest taboos, sexual privacy
- Roots of war
- Roles of religion and art
- Genocide
- "Unhappily, our use of pesticides has proceeded largely as if Charles Darwin had never lived"
- Humans are sight animals - why and what that means
- What it means to be a small group animal living in a big group world - the search for community ... Read more

Customer Reviews (43)

THE CLASSIC ON POPULATION CONTROL
Paul Ehrlich
The Population Bomb

(New York: Ballantine, 1968 and later editions) 223 pages

A classic source of thinking about over-population.

If you would like to explore other books on similar themes,
search the Internet for this bibliography:
"Books Exploring the Decision to Have Children".

One book made silly by hindsight
Paul Ehrlich's "The Population Bomb" is a book that has been in my mind ever since Intercollegiate Review and Human Events listed it as one of the worst books of the twentieth century. Phillip Longman also made me think about this book as something that has really been proven terribly wrong in most of the world, even though it is still (and - though unconsciously for lecturers - for a really special reason) used in classes in Australia.

Actually reading "The Population Bomb" does little to contradict the criticisms made by the far right of its claims. In the period since it was written, fertility rates throughout the world have declined precipitously and even developing nations Ehrlich thought would face ecological disaster from overpopulation are now facing the same "demographic winter" of Europe, Canada and Japan. His predictions of a Stalinist takeover of East Asia or Latin America and of the US having to reduce its feed of grain to livestock never came true and improved farming practices allowed for the support of large populations at higher living standards. Also, even without the use of birth control, the advent of certain modern technologies (notably television) has clearly been shown an important factor in the lowering of birth rates though changing cultural values. He also fails to grasp that except in Australia, values that lead to extremely low birth rates were already entrenched in the developed world when "The Population Bomb" appeared.

Ehrlich does not sufficiently understand that, with the crucial exception of Australian and Red American exurbs where families have a spacious block, children in urban areas are very much a liability and lowest-low fertility a natural result. His inability to grasp the unusual character of the 1950s "baby boom" similarly shows him a social scientist of very limited ability. Similarly, his analysis of the pesticide problem is incredibly derivative of Silent Spring.

Whilst the planet may have major population problems, any overpopulation is very localised and related to social and ecological peculiarities whose understanding and remedying seems beyond even the best social scientists. Claiming that the whole world ever was likely to experience the sort of population crisis Ehrlich envisions is unlikely: in more fertile regions, living standards can only be made high via means that turn values to a highly antinatalist perspective.

Brave, Caring, Prophetic
By now, late 2007, one can hope that the anti-Ehrlich voices have gotten fewer in number.Our skyrocketing world population should be recognized by everyone as partly or largely responsible for many of our recent worldwide social crises and environmental disasters - global warming, the widespread water shortages, the disappearing arctic ice sheets, the global fish shortage, the extinction of the great apes, the exhaustion of ancient aquifers, uncontrolled urban sprawl, mega-cities, mega-slums, mega-smog, monster hurricanes and typhoons, unprecedented wildfires, disappearing wilderness, longer commutes, massive traffic jams, massive illegal immigrations, multi-millions of refugees, various genocides, etc., etc.

Here is the basic history of the overpopulation problem, a history that most people are shockingly ignorant of (and kept ignorant of by the powers that be).The entire human population of the world at the time of Julius Caesar and Jesus of Nazareth, that is, in the 1st centuries B.C. and A.D., was only about 300 million.(It had been merely 10 million in about 10,000 B.C.).It then grew slowly to about 1 billion by 1850.Then, due to the Industrial Revolution, better sanitation, and modern medicine, it grew very fast to 2 billion by 1930.Then superfast to 3 billion already by 1950 (WWII, with its 55 million dead, was a minor pothole in the road), then very fast again to 4 billion by 1975.Let's skip the whiz-by dates for the 5 and 6 billion figures.We are now, in 2007, approaching 7 billion and will reach it within a few more years.By 2050, according to almost all projections, we humans will number 9-10 billion.Most projections I have seen deceptively stop there in 2050, as if that magical year will suddenly cause all couples throughout the world to stop having any more than 2 or 3 children, without even thinking about the subject.Alas, history and human population will not so conveniently stop.The latter will keep growing until it comes to a horrific halt, and long before that halt the majority of people will live in crowded misery and daily hunger, unless action in the form of worldwide public policy (incentives and penalties to keep population limited) is taken very soon.

Surely most people, if they don't recognize that the world has an overpopulation problem now, would accept the idea that eventually we will have one.If 6.5 billion people are not too many for them, the prospect of 16 billion should be.Or finally 60 billion, assuming they can count (which may be assuming a lot, in some cases).

Paul Ehrlich's understandably frightened 1967 perspective looked out upon the U.S. Baby Boom, that 20-year population explosion 1946-64, when couples had big, healthy families in prosperous times.By 1967, the U.S. population had grown from 150 million to 200 million within a mere 20 years.That growth was phenomenal - but worrisome.And while our U.S. population was reaching its worrisome milestone of 200 million, India reached its own scary milestone of 500 million (today it seems so quaint, merely 500 million in India).The entire world population in the late 1960s was rapidly approaching 4 billion, and truly responsible people like Ehrlich were reflecting on the implications of it all.

Ehrlich's critics rarely if ever acknowledge that his working statistics were taken from the years preceding 1967, when India, for example, was on the brink of mass starvation.The Green/Food Revolution, which prevented (postponed by some decades?) Ehrlich's dire predictions of catastrophic starvation from coming true, actually began, very belatedly, in 1966.India first imported the remarkable dwarf wheat seeds, specially bred by Norman Borlaug, in 1966.Those seeds arrived not one moment too soon.Ehrlich briefly and hopefully alludes to them in his book, but he finished writing it in 1967, and it was published in early 1968, before that new technology's beneficial effects were confirmed.

In any case, the Green/Food Revolution that started in the late 1960s has since exacted a heavy toll on soil fertility and other resources.The extensive use of water and fertilizers and pesticides also demanded by that technology has depleted precious aquifers and poisoned vast amounts of farmland.India is now once again in dire shape, as are many other countries.Up to a billion people in the world go to bed hungry or malnourished every night.

In 1960 (just yesterday), the population of India was 443 million; by 1970, only ten years later, it was 553 million; by 1980, 684 million; by 1990, 838 million; by 2000, 1 billion; and now, in 2007, it approaches 1.2 billion.Isn't it obvious where this awful Juggernaut is heading?Toward the rapid meltdown and starvation of India soon (and disastrous side-effects for many other nations), all because the people of India persist in having 3, 4, 5 or more babies per couple.

Ehrlich's critics (pro-growth capitalists, weak-kneed liberals, religious fundamentalists) have criticized him for a few predictions he made (on a few pages of his book) that did not come true.But those predictions were prevented from coming (immediately) true not only due to the (temporary) effects of the Green/Food Revolution, but also due to the success of the very movement Ehrlich helped to lead, a conscious effort to slow population growth.In the USA and much of the rest of the developed world, native population growth slowed considerably thereafter, partly due to people taking heed of Ehrlich's cautionary book.Legalized abortion and the Pill have also prevented many hundreds of millions of births around the world.In 1979, China instituted its famous "one child only" policy.It has caused serious social problems in China, but has prevented far more horrendous problems in China and the rest of the world.Without that policy, China today would have 400 million more people than it actually does.China today has a terrible system of sweatshop labor - virtual slave labor.But imagine the extent of the problem if China had 400 million more people to feed, in addition to its current 1.3 billion.

Another point: Does anyone believe that the Arab-Israeli conflict and all the other ethnic conflicts around the world will be peacefully resolved by the people in those warring regions having more and more children, creating more and more crowded conditions?

71% of the earth's surface is covered with water and is thus uninhabitable.Of the 29% that is land, the great majority of it is insect-infested jungle, oven-like desert, sub-arctic tundra, or desolate mountain ranges, all uninhabitable in the long term for any but a few hardy people.If some of Ehrlich's many comfortable critics would kindly volunteer to play pioneer for a decade in the Yukon, the Congo, the Sahara, or the high Andes, as role models to us all of the glorious adaptability of humankind and the wonderful possibilities of modern technology, one could be more sympathetic toward their views, or at least respect their sincerity.Not until then.

The double edged sword
I think this guy was a little premature with some of his predictions but overall I agree that the world needs to be depopulated if you want avoid turning it into a total living hell for all who dwell here. The problem is the only group of people who they have been able to convince to stop having so many kids are white people, who are also the only people that at least a segment of care one way or another about the environment.

I know a lot of people read the stuff from the Club of Rome, think the global elites have this plan to depopulate the planet and think of this book as a propaganda piece to justify culling the herd. Well if this is the case excluding white people they sure aren't doing a very good job of it. I believe in the short term they do want to exterminate whites and in the long term they want to get rid of blacks but overall excluding killing off whitey they have other fish to fry in the short term. Of course this is not to say that they place any value whatsoever on the other human life that will be left. Your a commodity. The term "human resources" is called that for a reason. Also in spite of what that phony Al Gore is spouting off, they don't care about the ecology either. They just want all the so called "white" countries to pay a "global warming tax" into the central banks while conveniently neglecting to do anything about their slave plantations in China and India spewing out pollution.

We are more or less expendable to them but as long as the masses of humans are needed to consume and work as slaves to keep the machine chugging along they will be keeping at least some of us around just so long as we take our prozac, don't act up and allow ourselves to be microchipped. Enjoy your new world order!

What Is Wrong With These People?
I won't repeat what Alan Lewis said below, but I completely agree with him.It sounds, to me, as if the other reviewers are in denial of what's actually happening in the world.

... Read more

Product Description
The Population Explosion vividly describes how the Earth's population, growing by 95 million people a year, is rapidly depleting the planet's resources, resulting in famine, global warming, acid rain, and other major problems. Paul and Anne Ehrlich also clearly and concisely point to immediate action that will lessen the threat of ruin and begin to build a more peaceful, sane, and secure world. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

Clock Is Ticking, The Message Is Getting Ever More Urgent!
"Population Explosion" is a follow-up to the Ehrlich's 1968, "Population Bomb" when there were over 3.5 billion humans on the planet- that number was considered by many to be vastly beyond the carrying capacity of our Earth and it's finite resources. By the time this book was published in 1990, the population had increased to 5.3 billion. The current population is well over 6 billion. Because of the now virtually straight-up growth curve, we are breeding ourselves off the planet. Match this curve with the increasing consumption of fossil fuel and resulting carbon dumping, ozone depletion, rain forest destruction, sewage pollution in the land and oceans- all contributing to global warming; toxic chemicals seeping into ground water supplies; accelerated depletion of fish stocks; widespread famine, etc., and we now have a real environmental pan of worms on our hands. What commentary is it on major governments (esp. the supposedly civilized U.S.) and religious groups to resist human population management and education? Is this their idea of love, compassion and wisdom?

The extremeconditions of poverty, pollution, crime and poor health, all resulting in global human/flora/fauna suffering and misery, one would think, should motivateglobal efforts to inform on and correct this mess. Or are we humans just not intelligent enough to heed the loud and compelling warnings ofthe Ehrlich's and others that we need to take seriously our "Population Bomb"? The data and message in this fine book is as timely now as when it was first published- just more urgent!

In 1970 the Ehrlich's published one of the finest textbooks on human ecology: "Population, Resources, Environment". It is still relevant and informative today- just add more people and pollution to the mix and you've brought it up to speed.

As many others have observed, by not taking any constructive action we are letting naturetake it's course. Is this our legacy? Will the cockroaches and fleas, who have managed to flourish in our human mess and who will probably be here long after we're gone, write our epitaph: Those stupid humans sure were fun while they were here. And, as cartoonist Walt Kelley`s "Pogo" so aptly said, "We have met the enemy and he is us".

Timely but oversimplified
The book is a sequel to an earlier, very successful discussion of population pressures. Key to the Erlichs' approach here is the formula I=PAT, which stands for Impact equals Population times Affluence timesTechnology. The larger any one of these factors, the higher the product,i.e. the impact - all other factors remaining equal. By"technology" and "affluence", the authors presumablyintend the environmentally destructive types of each, though howqualitative differences can be expressed qualitatively is left largelyunexplained. Clearly the equation aims at a very generalized and impreciselevel of abstraction, more suitable for detecting trends than settingpolicy. Whether such streamlining conceals more variability than it revealsis not really discussed and clouds the work as a whole.

Central to thebook is the impact of one particular factor, namely P or population. Growthincreases in this category alone, as I=PAT shows, can undo strides in allother categories combined. At bottom, the book represents an assessment of these far-reaching population impacts plus specific projections based oncurrent figures in all categories. In that topical sense the work is notstrictly theoretical and though certain Malthusian themes are sounded, thework is not a gloomy updating of unavoidable doom. Changes in growthpatterns can make a lasting difference, the authors are anxious toinform.

Sheer numbers of people, however, do not tell the whole impactstory, which is why the Erlich's have included the factor of"affluence" in one of their better sections. In the role ofaffluent consumers, not all people count the same. Because of their greaterconsuption level, citizens of richer nations, for example, have muchgreater impact on world resources than people in poorer countries. Thus, astheir equation shows, population reductions among the industrialized have adisproportionately helpful effect on world resources. Promisingly,population growth rates in richer areas such as western Europe and the U.S.have slackened with increasing levels of affluence, which indicates animportant correlation between birth-rate and material well-being. Thuseconomic class emerges as an important factor to gaining a sustainableenvironment and I wish the authors had spent more time emphasizing this.

The book has many good points, but unfortunately lacks impact and realanalytic depth. Probably, as a work aimed at a mass audience, analyticdepth was not intended. Moreover, being a sequel to a widely discussedfirst book creates a tough act to follow. Nevertheless, aside from someuseful statistics, more questions are posed than answered.

It might make you think about what we are doing to the Earth
This book provides an excellent synopsis of the state of our environment. Using more than just apocalyptic rhetoric, Ehrlich presents the subject matter with a keen sense of humanity and provides suggestions as to how wemust change our society to avoid the dire consequences of uninhibitedgrowth.

A great introduction for those who are concerned about thepollution next door or the pesticides on the fruit we eat or in theenvironment in general.

READ...READ...READ..Then pass it on.

A rational explanation of a frightening problem.
The Population Explosion is the follow-up to The Population Bomb (written by the same author twenty years ago). In this book he examines the results of the issues he raised in the first book as well as some of the newdangers of overpopulation created by contemporary reproductive science andecological damage.

Early in the book he explains why overpopulation issuch a pressing, but invisible problem. Occasionally his frustration withthe problems he describes comes through but despite this the book comesacross as an even-handed and rational examination of the facts.

In anage when women are giving birth to seven or eight children at a timebecause they're taking fertility drugs in a mad effort to procreate thereis no better time to learn about the consequences. ... Read more

Product Description
From two pediatric allergy and asthma specialists comes an important book that explains how to diagnose and treat your child's allergy and asthma problems.Allergies and asthma- particularly in children-are serious health problems in the United States. Over 15% of the population suffers from allergies and/or asthma, almost all of which have their beginnings in childhood. In this timely and informative book, parents will learn: why children with allergies are sometimes misdiagnosed as having other ailments; how to use alternative treatments and holistic remedies; simple methods to allergy-proof their homes and pets; the 10 things parents do that make their children's allergy symptoms worse; and much more. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (8)

informative, but quickly outdated
As a general practice pediatrician, it pretty much tells you a lot of what I have often shared with my patients already. The book is informative, reviewing a lot of detail you would not otherwise get from your physician in even a few appointments.
While a catchy title, the book sounds like it will offer some sort of countercultural message. The book does not do this, for those who are looking for that sort of information.
Most importantly, the information we have learned over the last 7 years or so has changed and some of the information in the book has quickly become outdated (e.g., a more nuanced view of maternal allergen avoidance, or highly allergenic food introduction in infants). Let's hope a newer edition of the book is in the works, perhaps with a more straightforward title.

One of the better books on this subject
This is one of the better books on this topic. They prefer that you see an allergy specialist rather than a GP."The incidence of food allergy is much higher for children than for adjutls - 8 percent of those under three, and rising." The author claims that adults have outgrown food allergies which lowers it to 2% for the general population. The best part of the book was where he told parents if other people don't consider you "neurotic" then you are not being vigilant enough protecting your allergic child. The only "fault" the book may have is there is nothing offered as a reasonable cause for the epidemic of food allergies. Science can now look at live blood, we have so much research that has been done, but no one really knows what causes food allergies? Why is it that undeveloped countries have almost no food allergies?

Water Downed Doctor version
I agree with the other reviewers this is things I already know and have heard over and over.I was looking for something with more of a natural approach and this is not that.So if that's what you have in mind(natural approach) do not buy this book.

This is EXACTLY what your doctor tells you
I found this book to be a regurgitation of what I had already been told by two pediatricians regarding my 4 year olds recently diagnosed asthma. Nothing new here at all. I was surprised that the doctors do not seem to acknowledge the large role diet plays in a condition such as asthma. I am not a doctor, however, even I can see the significant link between diet and health. Since my son's asthma diagnosis a month ago, I have dramatically restructured his diet and began supplementing him with magnesium. Guess what?! My son has shown significant improvement over the past 3 weeks! Even his allergies seem to have improved. I am proud to report my son hasn't taken a single asthma or allergy medication in two weeks. If you are resigned to a life of medication and supporting the multi-million dollar pharmaceutical company's, then this is the book for you.

Hoping for more information I could use at home to help...
This book is a good book to help define and aid in the understanding in causes of Asthma and different allergies, but I was hoping for more information that I could use at home to help reduce chances for asthma attacks and my son's allergy induced asthma.

... Read more

Product Description
This book describes the background to Paul Ehrlich's immunological works and theories and delves into the substance of his experiments in great detail. By exploring these early developments in immunology, the book lays the foundation for modern concepts, providing immunologists, biomedical researchers, and students the context for the discoveries in their field.

the selectionist theory of antibody formation
kinetics of primary and secondary antibody response
quantitative methods of measurement of antigens and antibody
demonstration of passive transfer of immunity from mother to foetus ... Read more

Product Description
Human beings have always been the most adaptable creatures on the planet, and they should be able to chart a new course for themselves. Some of that charting is already being done. The old mind today is being challenged and changed by many scattered efforts. Can we bring these efforts together to produce a large-scale program for a rapid 'change-of-mind'? We know what the problem is. The 'solution' is not simple -- to generate the social and political will to move a program of conscious evolution to the top of the human agenda.
... Read more

Product Description
During the last half of the 19th century and thebeginning of the 20th century, many brilliant doctors and scientistsworked separately and together around the globe to find ways to cureterrible diseases. These diseases killed many children and made thelife expectancy no more than 40 years. Louis Pasteur and Robert Kochwere two who set about to solve the riddle of deadly microbes. PaulEhrlich was also among the many dedicated German scientists who weresuccessful in solving the mystery behind bacteria. Ehrlich's work withdyes helped develop modern drug therapy and lead him to a cure forsyphilis. He had the uncanny ability to carry out hundreds ofprocedures that failed without ever becoming discouraged. ... Read more

Product Description
In this hard-hitting and timely book, the authors challenge those who use appealing but misleading rhetoric--labeled "brownlash"--to downplay the reality and importance of global environmental problems. The Ehrlichs provide an eye-opening look at current environmental problems and the fundamental importance of the scientific process in solving them .Amazon.com Review
Paul Ehrlich, author of The Population Bomb and aprofessor of biological studies at Stanford, and Anne Ehrlich, also atStanford, are angered by what they perceive as deliberate efforts to subvertmedia interest in pressing environmental issues. They suggest that the planetis in real peril from overpopulation, depletion of the ozone layer, globalwarming, and loss of biodiversity, and that each of these threats is confirmedby solid scientific research. And yet, they suggest, these once-hot mediaissues have been diminished in the public imagination by a determinedbacklash from anti-environmental groups. What riles the Ehrlichs is that thisdiscrediting of the work of serious biologists has been achieved throughpseudoscientific counter evidence--often the output of somepolitically motivated foundation--examples of which the authors methodicallyexamine and refute. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (26)

Laying out the corporate assault on science
Paul Ehrlich has done a thorough job outlining the Corporate Assault on scientific findoings that would challenge their "rights" to make profits at community expense.This book makes a good companion volume to Sharon Bader's "Global Spin" and Naomi Klein's "No Logo"

Good for debates
The book was very interesting. I like how the Ehrlich went into extensive explanation to defy the information or brownlash that was published by the various anti-environmentalists. When the subjects were brought up, I tried to think whether I would be able to counter their quotes, let alone, whether what they were saying was believable. At times, I would not know what to answer, and thought that some of their comebacks were believable, other times I knew there was something fishy, and occasionally, I was certain it was wrong.

Regardless of the right or wrong in it, a great point to grab from this book is the lessons we can learn on how people can distort the facts to lean them towards their personal thinking or outcomes. Analyzing them and reading how they find the reasons behind their controversial remarks is very educative and useful for you personal debates.

Great info and lessons here.

And things have only gotten worse
Between complacency on the part of many, and aggressive efforts from a few, we are in the midst of a backlash against serious environmentalism. Characterized as a "brownlash" by the authors, this reactionary phenomenon takes many forms. And if it was bad in 1998, it is only worse now. It appears as claims that conservation and pollution controls are too expensive, that green politicians favor owls and desert mice over humans, that we have turned the corner and the future is now certain and bright, or that public interest groups (e.g. Sierra Club, NRDC, Nature Conservancy, etc.) are really the same as special interests (oil, mineral, manufacturing, gun, etc. lobbies).The effect has been clear: budget cuts, reversal of legislation, a psychological spin toward "wise-use" of resources and downplaying of very imminent dangers. One congress person tried to cut funding for the new Mojave National Park to one dollar per year, another seeks to open mining on park lands, and here in my neck of the woods, Congressman Charles Taylor successfully sponsored a bill disguised as a forest health measure which allowed massive clearcuts of old growth timber in 1995-96. This last is instructive, a clear example of the subversion of green aims by the opposition. Taking earth-friendly names like "National Wetlands Coalition, The Sahara Club, The Abundant Wildlife Society of North America, The National Wilderness Institute, etc." the browns wear verbal sheep's clothing while actively working against the causes their names suggest they must support. The Ehrlichs are veterans of the eco-wars, having started their public efforts four years before Rachel Carson's 1962 classic, SILENT SPRING. In their newest effort they take on the pseudo-science of the brownlash and carefully rebut the arguments, point by point, and copiously footnoted. They make it clear that the so-called "experts" and "scientists" quoted in brown literature are on the fringe of serious research, that the mass of scientific opinion wieghs in for the view that we are in deep doo-doo and better lissen up.This book is an eye-opener and excellent resource for those who seek to assure a pleasant future for spotted owls, desert mice and the human race.

Reason and Motives
Paul and Ann Ehrlich have devoted their lives to promoting environmental understanding and influencing government policy. They have endured the scrutiny of their detractors with respect to dire predictions concerning population growth and the environment. They have made mistakes-- the most famous being their ill-conceived wager against Julian Simon concerning resource depletion. Many dismissed them out of hand after that debacle-- a testament to the human tendency towards oversimplification with regard to environmental understanding (Dr. Simon, as well, made rather absurd conclusions about humanity and the planet, which the Ehrlichs address in the book).

Despite what some have concluded, Paul Ehrlich is still a highly respected professor at one of the most prestigious universities in the United States (Stanford University). He and his wife, a prominent researcher in her own rite, continue accepting invitations to lecture at colleges and conventions around the world.

The book Paul and Ann have written, expresses the passion with which they've espoused their cause. Indeed, it is a passion that should be equaled by all the planet's inhabitants, whether we agree with the Ehrlichs or not. Yet one need only to take a quick look at the Internet to find the antagonistic nature of many so-called "environmental" websites-- something the Ehrlichs refer to as "brown-lash." Many are portrayed as "green" or "earth-friendly," yet dismissive of any suggestion that humankind has desecrated the earth. Arguments, as noted by the Ehrlichs, range from dismissing the global warming phenomenon completely, to claims that such phenomenon is even beneficial to humankind (the current trend seems to be towards the latter, since arguing against global warming itself is becoming, less and less, a valid point). Statistics are presented out of context and often misrepresented as conclusive.

Indeed, even some scientists have been fooled by the seemingly authoritative nature of some "anti-environmentalist" literature (though it should be noted that the scientific community, by and large, agrees with both the theory of global warming, and its human related causes). As well, a few scientists operating outside the mainstream, such as Patrick Michaels and S. Fred Singer,seem motivated by the large salaries offered to them by multi-million dollars corporations with economic interests at stake regarding environmental regulation. Michaels is the primary authority on the CO2 and Climate Change website, superficially sponsored by the Greening Earth Society, which is, in turn, funded by the Western Fuels Association. The "laundering" of website sponsorship further adds to the confusion concerning ulterior motives.

Other "editorializers," such as Rush Limbaugh or Michael Fumento, routinely sway public opinion by incompetently interpreting scientific data and essentially indulging in name-calling. While their authority should be dismissed as sheer demagoguery at best, their influence over their radio listeners and column subscribers should not be ignored.

The Ehrlichs make a point that much has been done by way of regulating and improving the environment, but it will always be an uphill battle. In their words, "It's like trying to run up an escalator that's going down." The most easily perceived indicators of environmental health are air and water, yet few realize the other multifarious indicators which are just as important to humankind and the environment.

It is a truism that one should not judge a detractor by his or her affiliation alone, but rather address each particular argument in kind-- praising its merits or debunking its fallacies. One's ideology is best judged in the words and theories they express, not the labels they've been assigned. This applies to the Ehrlichs and their detractors as well. Betrayal of Science and Reason is a must read for anyone concerned about the effects of political spin upon the future of the environment. While "brown-lashing" attempts to succeed in confounding the truth contemporaneously, nature, in time, will offer irrefutable proof of its own-- how soon we heed the warnings will determine how adversely our world is affected.

A curious book, to say the least
I recommend this book, with reservations. My take on it is different than many of the reviews so far given.

The Ehrlichs' role as among the first, most persistent, and most dire of environmental Cassandras is well known and need not be revisited now.The presently-reviewed book adds little to what they have previously said in terms of areas of concern.Rather, it appears to be a valedictory of sorts, where the Ehrlichs return their critics' responses in kind.
To my view, their response, although perhaps understandable, is ineffective as being too filled with slanted prose, hyperbole,and, unfortunately, outright name-calling.A more reasoned sort of response would have been highly preferable.The form of the message so obscures and detracts from its substance as to render both rather incredible.

Also, the book is plagued with easily avoided errors.By way of a single chapter's example, the Ehrlichs contend, in their chapter on climate/global warming, that climate earlier than 1200AD is essentially unknowable because of a lack of record keeping.This is not so, as many methods, including varves, dendrochronology, ice-coring, etc., are available to do year-by-year studies.The Ehrlichs' statementsand implications that warming is now more severe than at any time since the advent of the Holocene find no support.The xerothermic episode of the late 1200's that resulted in the demise of the Anasazi culture in the Southwest, and the desertification of much of Nebraska, occurred at this time.Of these, not a word.Likewise the Altithermal, or Climactic Optimum, of circa 4,000BC, or 6000BP, and not the present, has marked the warmest part of the Holocene.

The Ehrlichs'refusal to bring these facts into the equation shows either a lack of research or a refusal to change a previously-desired impression.Neither, ACCORDING TO THE EHRLICHS IN THE SAME CHAPTER, is the mark of good or effective science.Other examples abound elsewhere, but space limits their discussion here.From a factual viewpoint, I cannot recommend this book to the serious scientific reader.

However, the book is a prototypically good example of the causes of the troubles the Ehrlichs describe the environmental movement as facing.The skeptics decried by the Ehrlichs find their fuel in the Ehrlich style of crying wolf too often, and in the Ehrlichs' scientific inflexibility in the face of developing data that may be contrary to their earlier positions. Here, I need only cite the failure of their predictions in, "The Population Bomb."

The upshot is that if Green proponents want to find how to lose status and credibility with those who are undecided, this book is a must-read. Contrariwise, if skeptics wish to determine why their own claims are subject to a healthy case of doubt, the Ehrlichs show them in many instances.Note carefully that I do not say the Ehrlichs are always wrong.They aren't, and a good deal of what they say is buttressed by fact, just not enough of it to be fully persuasive.I suspect that a more reasoned approach by the Ehrlichs would have resulted in a far more important book.The best way to dispel the confusion the Ehrlichs claim their opponents create is by reasoned, honest presentation, not name-calling, slanted prose, hyperbole, and disingenuous simile and metaphor.

In closing, the book's only real value is to show each side of this important controversy the defects that plague their respective positions.Both sides should read the book with this goal in mind. Otherwise, a reading only serves the contrary purpose of reinforcing previously held biases.

I recommend the book, but subject to the foregoing substantial cautions.A pity, because so much more could have been accomplished by a disciplined writer. ... Read more

Product Description
Viral safety is a key issue for biological and biotechnological medicinal products. This first joint PDA/EMEA European Virus Safety Forum brought together an international panel of speakers from the industry, regulatory authorities and research to present and discuss the most up-to-date scientific knowledge and regulatory aspects in the areas of virus safety of recombinant proteins, monoclonal antibodies, plasma-derived medicinal products and advanced technology medicinal products.The conference provided the opportunity to discuss new approaches in viral safety such as generic or matrix validation of virus removal and novel virus inactivation/removal technologies, and to clarify their benefits and applicability for specific product categories or technologies. This volume will further the discussion on virus safety, contribute to the development of new regulatory guidance and support harmonisation of the regulations in this field. ... Read more