What do you think?
Rate this book
On Immunity: An Inoculation
Upon becoming a new mother, Eula Biss addresses a chronic condition of fear--fear of the government, the medical establishment, and what is in your child's air, food, mattress, medicine, and vaccines. She finds that you cannot immunize your child, or yourself, from the world.
In this bold, fascinating book, Biss investigates the metaphors and myths surrounding our conception of immunity and its implications for the individual and the social body. As she hears more and more fears about vaccines, Biss researches what they mean for her own child, her immediate community, America, and the world, both historically and in the present moment. She extends a conversation with other mothers to meditations on Voltaire's Candide, Bram Stoker's Dracula, Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, Susan Sontag's AIDS and Its Metaphors, and beyond.
On Immunity is a moving account of how we are all interconnected-our bodies and our fates.
In this bold, fascinating book, Biss investigates the metaphors and myths surrounding our conception of immunity and its implications for the individual and the social body. As she hears more and more fears about vaccines, Biss researches what they mean for her own child, her immediate community, America, and the world, both historically and in the present moment. She extends a conversation with other mothers to meditations on Voltaire's Candide, Bram Stoker's Dracula, Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, Susan Sontag's AIDS and Its Metaphors, and beyond.
On Immunity is a moving account of how we are all interconnected-our bodies and our fates.
205 pages, Hardcover
First published September 30, 2014
About the author
Eula Biss
14 books548 followersEula Biss holds a BA in nonfiction writing from Hampshire College and an MFA in nonfiction writing from the University of Iowa. She is currently an Artist in Residence at Northwestern University, where she teaches nonfiction writing, and she is a founding editor of Essay Press, a new press dedicated to innovative nonfiction. Her essays have recently appeared in The Best Creative Nonfiction and the Touchstone Anthology of Contemporary Nonfiction as well as in The Believer, Gulf Coast, Columbia, Ninth Letter, The North American Review, The Bellingham Review, the Seneca Review, and Harper’s.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,588 reviews
November 1, 2023
This book enlists the importance of vaccination, taboos associated with it, and how to remove it. The use of metaphors and reference to fictional characters from multiple books makes this book an exciting read for everyone. Immunity is a topic that is continuously evolving and very difficult to understand. The author has done an excellent job in making it an enjoyable read with her impeccable writing skills.
The concept of herd immunity is discussed in detail with multiple examples.
“This is why the chances of contracting measles can be higher for a vaccinated person living in a largely unvaccinated community than they are for an unvaccinated person living in a largely vaccinated community.”
The difference between the vaccination in the developed countries and the developing countries is discussed really well by the author.
“Wealthier countries have the luxury of entertaining fears the rest of the world cannot afford”
How capitalism is hindering our objective of vaccination and implementing herd immunity is dealt with in detail. It is dismal to see people’s greed for money is killing many innocent people worldwide.
“That so many of us find it entirely plausible that a vast network of researchers and health officials and doctors worldwide would willfully harm children for money is evidence of what capitalism is really taking from us. Capitalism has already impoverished the working people who generate wealth for others. And capitalism has already impoverished us culturally, robbing unmarketable art of its value. But when we begin to see the pressures of capitalism as innate laws of human motivation, when we begin to believe that everyone is owned, then we are truly impoverished.”
- These are some other crucial topics discussed in this book
- Vaccination and race.
- Pros and cons of using hand sanitizers.
- Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring and the good and bad changes it brought.
- Why some communities are still not accepting vaccination.
- Vaccination and technology.
- Antibiotics and vaccination, and time travel.
- Heroic Medicine.
- Germ theory and mothers.
- Vampires and Medicine.
- Vaccination in acts of war.
- Chickenpox parties.
- Karl Max’s Capital and vaccination.
- Cynicism and doctors.
- Stoics and vaccination.
- AIDS and individualism
- Narcissus and immunity.
This is a brilliantly written book on immunity that everyone must-read, especially in this current pandemic situation we are facing right now.
—————————————————————————
You can also follow me on
Instagram ID - Dasfill | YouTube Channel ID - Dasfill | YouTube Health Channel ID - Dasfill - Health | YouTube Malayalam Channel ID - Dasfill - Malayalam | Threads ID - Dasfill | X ID - Dasfill1 | Snapchat ID - Dasfill | Facebook ID - Dasfill | TikTok ID - Dasfill1
September 17, 2014
Just lovely: so thoughtful and empathetic and intellectually wide-ranging. I've often wondered why people--privileged, educated people, no less--choose not to vaccinate their children, disregarding scientific evidence and social responsibility. I've especially wondered why this position seems so unassailable, why even people I consider friends are so closed to discussion on this one topic although they are open-minded about so much else.
Eula Biss bridges the gap, exposes the power of irrational fears, shows compassion for this strange choice even as she avoids making the same mistake for her own child. Her investigation of the history of vaccination is thorough and wonderfully written. Everything is political, we are reminded. People are highly resistant to coercion, especially from those whose motives they suspect. And there's a long history of associating vaccination with the very contamination it is intended to prevent.
An amazing read whether you're a parent struggling with this decision yourself, a parent who has already got a firm opinion, a non-parent wondering why on earth this has become such an issue, or just an interested reader curious about this cultural moment where we find ourselves.
Eula Biss bridges the gap, exposes the power of irrational fears, shows compassion for this strange choice even as she avoids making the same mistake for her own child. Her investigation of the history of vaccination is thorough and wonderfully written. Everything is political, we are reminded. People are highly resistant to coercion, especially from those whose motives they suspect. And there's a long history of associating vaccination with the very contamination it is intended to prevent.
An amazing read whether you're a parent struggling with this decision yourself, a parent who has already got a firm opinion, a non-parent wondering why on earth this has become such an issue, or just an interested reader curious about this cultural moment where we find ourselves.
November 27, 2018
A meditation on American culture's conception of illness, On Immunity takes on the misinformation and paranoia surrounding vaccination. In precise and moving prose, Eula Biss tracks the global history of immunization, critiques the act of describing public and private health through militaristic metaphors, reflects on her experience of motherhood, considers the ways in which cultural cornerstones such as Dracula represent disease, and deconstructs common arguments against vaccination. The short book unfolds in a series of impressionistic chapters that, in spite of the author's eclectic interests, rarely feel disconnected from each other. It's astounding how many topics Biss brings under the central concept of immunity, from the racial wealth gap in America to the philosophical writings of Voltaire, and On Immunity easily has been one of my favorite reads of the fall.
October 8, 2014
This book isn't what I thought. I expected a historical record of the development of vaccines as well as a debate about whether or not parents should vaccinate their children and I got that -- for the first few chapters. Then Biss launched into a serious of personal essays about the birth of her son, taking him for shots and obsessing about the transfusion she had to get following labor. Honestly, the book should have been called "Transfusion" because she never shut up about it. You'd think no one had ever needed to get blood from a stranger before. Instead of focusing on being thankful for a modern day medical marvel, she worried herself to death about the process.
This was followed by a bunch of chapters about "Dracula", the legend and the novel by Bram Stoker. While this might have been mildly interesting in a college essay, I'm not sure how it tied into the topic of vaccines despite all of Biss's mental calisthenics.
If you're looking for a serious book about the vaccine debate, I'd look elsewhere.
This was followed by a bunch of chapters about "Dracula", the legend and the novel by Bram Stoker. While this might have been mildly interesting in a college essay, I'm not sure how it tied into the topic of vaccines despite all of Biss's mental calisthenics.
If you're looking for a serious book about the vaccine debate, I'd look elsewhere.
November 8, 2014
Those of us who identify as what is called "pro-vax"--parents who not only vaccinate their children, but who feel passionately about it--are not exactly shrinking violets. Frankly, we can't afford to be--although the vast majority of parents vaccinate their children, we do it as a matter of course for the most part, and do not feel a driving need to speak up about having done so, any more than we brag about taking our kids to the dentist. However, this silence has allowed a vocal and dangerous minority of no-vax, slow-vax, and anti-vax parents to dominate the conversation about immunization, to disastrous effects. We're faced now with measles outbreaks, pertussis clusters which have killed infants, even mumps outbreaks in college kids this year. Because we're so passionate, and because the other side is equally passionate, debates can devolve into shouting matches. One side braying about "science and research" while the other side spouts nonsense about a worldwide conspiracy of silence and "vaccine injuries." It's rarely productive.
Although she vaccinates her children, no one would mistake author Eula Biss as a "pro-vax" parent. And in some ways, that's exactly what this conversation needs. I consider Eula Biss the closest thing we have to our generation's Joan Didion. She shares many of the same stylistic tics, has the same careful, analytic mind, the same elegant literary sensibility, and, most markedly, the same ability to take current anxieties, identify with them, even experience them herself, and them step back and examine them like an archaeologist might examine a shard of Minoan pottery. From bloodletting and bloodsucking (pre-twentieth century medicine and Bram Stoker's Dracula, respectively) to the politics of wealth and education when it comes to the decision to vaccinate, Biss carefully weaves the fears of vaccines, and more broadly, parenthood itself with timeless themes of chaos and lack of control.
There were times I felt Eula Biss was too careful. She refers to the country's most vocal and, in my opinion, dangerous fearmongerer, Barbara Loe Fisher, as a "consumer advocate." There is an endnote that describes in more detail Fisher's role in the anti-vaccine movement, but I was disappointed to see her described in this positive manner in the body of the book. BIss's father, a doctor, at one point dismisses anti-vaxxers as idiots, and Eula Biss states unequivocally that they're not. No doubt there are those who are intelligent but misguided. But there is a deep vein of paranoid, conspiracy-mindedness that goes along with anti-vaccine ideas, and she doesn't touch this. In fact, she doesn't address the fact that the most common arguments anti-vaxxers use to sway parents from vaccinating are not based in science. In fact, they are mostly proved incorrect by science. There was a conversation about the catastrophic effect the fraudulent Wakefield study had on the vaccination rates in the U.S and the U.K., and she mentions that the IOM did an exhaustive review of the literature and found absolutely no connection between vaccines and autism. But I was concerned with the lack of acknowledgment about the scientific illiteracy question, particularly because it ties in so naturally with other dangerous belief systems that can or will cause real and lasting damage to humanity (i.e. climate change denialism).
That being said, I was enraptured as I read this book, which felt--and perhaps intentionally so--addressed to me specifically. In fact, Biss says in one of her endnotes (and be sure to read the endnotes straight through--they're an integral part of the book) that she chose to write the book to mothers, not because fathers are any less important as caregivers, but because she feels many of the anxieties about which she writes are specific to mothers. An interesting approach. A brilliant writer.
Although she vaccinates her children, no one would mistake author Eula Biss as a "pro-vax" parent. And in some ways, that's exactly what this conversation needs. I consider Eula Biss the closest thing we have to our generation's Joan Didion. She shares many of the same stylistic tics, has the same careful, analytic mind, the same elegant literary sensibility, and, most markedly, the same ability to take current anxieties, identify with them, even experience them herself, and them step back and examine them like an archaeologist might examine a shard of Minoan pottery. From bloodletting and bloodsucking (pre-twentieth century medicine and Bram Stoker's Dracula, respectively) to the politics of wealth and education when it comes to the decision to vaccinate, Biss carefully weaves the fears of vaccines, and more broadly, parenthood itself with timeless themes of chaos and lack of control.
There were times I felt Eula Biss was too careful. She refers to the country's most vocal and, in my opinion, dangerous fearmongerer, Barbara Loe Fisher, as a "consumer advocate." There is an endnote that describes in more detail Fisher's role in the anti-vaccine movement, but I was disappointed to see her described in this positive manner in the body of the book. BIss's father, a doctor, at one point dismisses anti-vaxxers as idiots, and Eula Biss states unequivocally that they're not. No doubt there are those who are intelligent but misguided. But there is a deep vein of paranoid, conspiracy-mindedness that goes along with anti-vaccine ideas, and she doesn't touch this. In fact, she doesn't address the fact that the most common arguments anti-vaxxers use to sway parents from vaccinating are not based in science. In fact, they are mostly proved incorrect by science. There was a conversation about the catastrophic effect the fraudulent Wakefield study had on the vaccination rates in the U.S and the U.K., and she mentions that the IOM did an exhaustive review of the literature and found absolutely no connection between vaccines and autism. But I was concerned with the lack of acknowledgment about the scientific illiteracy question, particularly because it ties in so naturally with other dangerous belief systems that can or will cause real and lasting damage to humanity (i.e. climate change denialism).
That being said, I was enraptured as I read this book, which felt--and perhaps intentionally so--addressed to me specifically. In fact, Biss says in one of her endnotes (and be sure to read the endnotes straight through--they're an integral part of the book) that she chose to write the book to mothers, not because fathers are any less important as caregivers, but because she feels many of the anxieties about which she writes are specific to mothers. An interesting approach. A brilliant writer.
June 30, 2021
NOTE: I hope this brilliant book receives an updated edition that includes Biss’s thoughts about vaccination and the novel coronavirus.
***
Eula Biss isn’t a scientist; she’s an award-winning non-fiction writer and a mother. But based on On Immunity: An Inoculation, she’s clearly done copious amounts of research. The book is a personal, impressionistic, fascinating look at the history of immunity, from those 18th century English milkmaids with cowpox who miraculously found themselves immune to smallpox to the crazy (and dangerous) theories of celebrities like Jenny McCarthy.
Biss has a poet’s ear, and recognizes all the connotations of a scientific term like “herd immunity” (“it suggests that we are cattle, waiting, perhaps, to be sent to slaughter”) and takes apart the contradictions of the much-used word “natural” (“What natural has come to mean to us in the context of medicine is pure and safe and benign.”)
This book is in the spirit of Susan Sontag’s Illness And Metaphor and AIDS And Its Metaphors, both of which Biss mentions. She’s very sensitive to how disease has been linked with fear of “the other.” There’s a fascinating section on the legend of Dracula. And during the smallpox epidemic of 1898, the disease was called, variously, “the Nigger itch,” “the Italian itch,” and “the Mexican bump.” Seriously.
Biss also suggests that the frontier mentality of Americans might account for the anti-vaccers: “we imagine our bodies as isolated homesteads that we tend either well or badly. The health of the homestead next to ours does not affect us, this thinking suggests, so long as ours is well tended.”
Biss grounds the book with stories about her own fears of being a new mom, but also looks abroad. Most horrifying is the story of vaccine providers in Pakistan and Nigeria being murdered by extremist groups because it was thought they were giving them AIDS or sterilizing Muslim girls.
Closer to home, there’s the Nashville woman who handed out chickenpox lollipops. And there’s the disturbing demonization campaign against Dr. Paul A. Offit, a pediatrician who co-invented the rotavirus vaccine. To discredit him, he was being called "Dr. Proffit" to create the illusion that the vaccine was simply a way for him to make money. (In fact, vaccines are costly to develop and generate only modest profits.)
The book isn't a page-turner, by any means, but rather a thoughtful, meditative book about a timeless topic that affects everyone on the planet.
***
Eula Biss isn’t a scientist; she’s an award-winning non-fiction writer and a mother. But based on On Immunity: An Inoculation, she’s clearly done copious amounts of research. The book is a personal, impressionistic, fascinating look at the history of immunity, from those 18th century English milkmaids with cowpox who miraculously found themselves immune to smallpox to the crazy (and dangerous) theories of celebrities like Jenny McCarthy.
Biss has a poet’s ear, and recognizes all the connotations of a scientific term like “herd immunity” (“it suggests that we are cattle, waiting, perhaps, to be sent to slaughter”) and takes apart the contradictions of the much-used word “natural” (“What natural has come to mean to us in the context of medicine is pure and safe and benign.”)
This book is in the spirit of Susan Sontag’s Illness And Metaphor and AIDS And Its Metaphors, both of which Biss mentions. She’s very sensitive to how disease has been linked with fear of “the other.” There’s a fascinating section on the legend of Dracula. And during the smallpox epidemic of 1898, the disease was called, variously, “the Nigger itch,” “the Italian itch,” and “the Mexican bump.” Seriously.
Biss also suggests that the frontier mentality of Americans might account for the anti-vaccers: “we imagine our bodies as isolated homesteads that we tend either well or badly. The health of the homestead next to ours does not affect us, this thinking suggests, so long as ours is well tended.”
Biss grounds the book with stories about her own fears of being a new mom, but also looks abroad. Most horrifying is the story of vaccine providers in Pakistan and Nigeria being murdered by extremist groups because it was thought they were giving them AIDS or sterilizing Muslim girls.
Closer to home, there’s the Nashville woman who handed out chickenpox lollipops. And there’s the disturbing demonization campaign against Dr. Paul A. Offit, a pediatrician who co-invented the rotavirus vaccine. To discredit him, he was being called "Dr. Proffit" to create the illusion that the vaccine was simply a way for him to make money. (In fact, vaccines are costly to develop and generate only modest profits.)
The book isn't a page-turner, by any means, but rather a thoughtful, meditative book about a timeless topic that affects everyone on the planet.
March 23, 2015
This book is remarkable. Read it.
November 3, 2020
«On Immunity: An Inoculation»
Book by Eula Biss
Graywolf Press 2014
⠀
«Імунітет. Правда і міфи про щеплення»
Еула Бісс
Наш Формат 2020
⠀
Ця книжка про імунітет очима митців, науковців, цілителів і свідомих матусь.
⠀
Що ми знаємо про імунітет, вакцинацію, віруси, мікроби і їх взаємодію з нашим тілом?
⠀
Чи можливо мати одне без допомоги іншого?
⠀
Чи впливає «індивідуальний» імунітет на «стадний» і навпаки?
⠀
Про імунітет очима матері, яка спробувала розібратися в цьому складному питанні, щоб допомогти своєму синові!
⠀
В цій книжці авторка використовує більш ніж 90 наукових робіт, тези провідних фахівців в цій галузі й ділиться думками звичайних батьків.
⠀
Все це заради відповіді на одне дуже складне питання:
«Вакцинації бути?»
⠀
І так, я вакциную свою дитину.
⠀
І так, я раджу цю книгу до прочитання.
⠀
Цитати:
⠀
«Якщо ми уявимо дію вакцини з погляду впливу не лише на окремий організм, а й на колективний організм громади, справедливо вважати вакцинацію своєрідним нагромадженням імунітету. Внески до цього нагромадження - це допомога тим, хто не може захиститися власним імунітетом. Це принцип колективного (стадного) імунітету, і саме завдяки цьому масова вакцинація є набагато ефективнішою, ніж індивідуальна.»
⠀
«Вважається, що наша адаптивна імунна система, частина імунної системи, яка формує довготривалий імунітет, запозичила свою базову технологію у ДНК вірусу.»
⠀
«Більшість проблемних станів покращиться, якщо просто не втручатися. Ті ж, які не покращаться, швидше за все вб‘ють пацієнта, незалежно від того, що ви робитимете».
⠀
Відгук у співробітництві з «Наш формат».
⠀
#примхливачитака
Book by Eula Biss
Graywolf Press 2014
⠀
«Імунітет. Правда і міфи про щеплення»
Еула Бісс
Наш Формат 2020
⠀
Ця книжка про імунітет очима митців, науковців, цілителів і свідомих матусь.
⠀
Що ми знаємо про імунітет, вакцинацію, віруси, мікроби і їх взаємодію з нашим тілом?
⠀
Чи можливо мати одне без допомоги іншого?
⠀
Чи впливає «індивідуальний» імунітет на «стадний» і навпаки?
⠀
Про імунітет очима матері, яка спробувала розібратися в цьому складному питанні, щоб допомогти своєму синові!
⠀
В цій книжці авторка використовує більш ніж 90 наукових робіт, тези провідних фахівців в цій галузі й ділиться думками звичайних батьків.
⠀
Все це заради відповіді на одне дуже складне питання:
«Вакцинації бути?»
⠀
І так, я вакциную свою дитину.
⠀
І так, я раджу цю книгу до прочитання.
⠀
Цитати:
⠀
«Якщо ми уявимо дію вакцини з погляду впливу не лише на окремий організм, а й на колективний організм громади, справедливо вважати вакцинацію своєрідним нагромадженням імунітету. Внески до цього нагромадження - це допомога тим, хто не може захиститися власним імунітетом. Це принцип колективного (стадного) імунітету, і саме завдяки цьому масова вакцинація є набагато ефективнішою, ніж індивідуальна.»
⠀
«Вважається, що наша адаптивна імунна система, частина імунної системи, яка формує довготривалий імунітет, запозичила свою базову технологію у ДНК вірусу.»
⠀
«Більшість проблемних станів покращиться, якщо просто не втручатися. Ті ж, які не покращаться, швидше за все вб‘ють пацієнта, незалежно від того, що ви робитимете».
⠀
Відгук у співробітництві з «Наш формат».
⠀
#примхливачитака
July 12, 2015
On Immunity: An Inoculation
Eula Biss, the author of "On Immunization: An Inoculation" is the daughter of a poet and a doctor. She is herself a poet and a renowned essayist, this creates a seemingly absurd but interesting background that I think allows her to bring a unique perspective to an issue that could be otherwise tedious and dull.
Before reading this book, I never considered that the subject of immunizations was as complex and vast as it is. But as I learned our seemingly never ending argument about vaccines is not only a health issue, it is also a political/economic/philosophical/ theological and bio-ethical debate.
"On Immunization: An Inoculation", provides a very comprehensive, rational and thorough research of vaccines and their history, how they are developed, why they are so controversial and why we feared them so much. Bliss's takes a nuanced approach on the issue and although she comes strongly on the side that favors the widespread use of vaccines, she seems to make a a point of being respectful of people that are on both sides of the so called "vaccination debate".
The rise of the anti-vaccine movement in the United States, has created an unusual alliance across some extreme ideological political lines. On the left side of the spectrum, we have liberals skeptic of pharmaceuticals companies that developed, patent, manufacture and aggressively market vaccines, on the right there are conservatives and libertarians that held a cynical view of government and its involvement in monitoring, distributing and regulating them.
I should also mentioned that the issue of vaccines and the discussion of their potential side effects touches me on a personal level.
As the mother of a boy who was diagnosed with Autism at 2 1/2 years-old, I experienced a fair amount of apprehension when deciding whether or not my child should continue receiving all his immunization shots and if so, if he was to get them on the schedule recommended by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and his pediatrician.
In 2007 when a neurologist screened my son for Autism we were just starting to notice a significant increase in the amount of kids in the United States and other parts of the world, that were being diagnosed with Autism. This trend was and still is, particularly noticeable among boys in that 2 to 6 age-range.
Right in the middle of this turmoil, a friend gave me Jenny McCarthy's book, "Louder Than Words", I didn't even know who Ms. McCarthy was until I read her book. As a general rule, I try not to take medical advice from celebrities and people that don't have a scientific background, but I confess that McCarthy's candid tell about her experiences in dealing with an Autistic son hit a nerve with me at the time.
It was a difficult and unnerving experience because back then, there was so much to learn about the whole Autism spectrum, its causes, best treatments and whether or not we had reliable studies confirming or denying a link between the MMR (Measles, Mumps & Rubella) vaccine and the outbreak of Autism we were facing.
So I did my best to research the issue, discussed the matter with my child doctors and ultimately decided to err on the side of caution: when outweighing the risks of not being immunized vs. the non-proven risks that linked Autism to the MMR vaccine, the former was scarier than the latter.
Of course, Autism is not the only sickness that many have linked to immunizations, vaccines have been blamed for everything from allergies to cancer. They also carry inherent and real risks that although statistically small, should be part of this discussion.
It was also a personal experience, the birth of her son and the question of whether to vaccinate him, that propelled Ms.Bliss to research the issue of vaccines so thoroughly.
The book reads as a collection of essays and at it starts with Bliss's interesting connection of Greek mythology (Achilles was "made immune to injure but not to heal") and Gothic horror (Dracula demonstrates our deep fears of contagion) with the overall theme of our fears over the practice of immunization. The idea of contaminating our children with the very hazard we hope to avoid sounds indeed almost mythological.
"The Life of Achilles" by Rubens shows the infant Achilles immersed by his mother in the River Styx trying to make him immortal.
Bliss looks at our unease with immunization as a metaphor that reflects on the larger fears and anxieties we have regarding government intervention, unethical medical and pharmaceutical companies and our overall predisposition to distrusts the injection of anything that doesn't feel "natural" into our bodies. These fears seemed to be particularly enhanced when it comes to making decisions that affect our children.
"Our fears," Bliss warns, "are informed by history and economics, by social power and stigma, by myths and nightmares.... When we encounter information that contradicts our beliefs, … we tend to doubt the information, not ourselves."
There's a good reason why metaphors are widely used by politicians, think tanks and legislators in an effort to (re))define the framework in which health issues are discussed. "If thoughts corrupts language", George Orwell famously said "language can also corrupt thought".
Bliss recounts the results of a research that found that "whenever two issues are metaphorically linked, manipulating a person's attitude towards one can affect how one thinks about the other". Think of the infamous "death panels" during the The Affordable Health Care(ACA) debate for example.
The author also takes some time to explore the history of vaccines, debunks some falsehoods about them and explores the links between class, race and gender as they relate to this issue.
"On Immunization", delves into the origins of vaccinations, we learn for example that in 18th century England, milkmaids were known not to be affected by the small pox epidemic. It was almost common knowledge among farmers that the milkmaids that endured blisters in their hands were immune to the virus even when nursing victims of the disease. In 1774 and to the dismay of his neighbors, a farmer decided to inject pus from an infected cow into the arms of his wife and sons. Although the wife got ill, she recovered eventually and the sons experienced only mild symptoms. After this experience they were exposed to the disease on multiple occasions but never got infected. The term vaccine actually comes from the Latin "vacca", which means cow.
Bliss also makes an important moral and social argument in favor of immunizations: vaccines protect not only those that have been immunized, but also those that for different reasons, are unable to do so. This includes people with impaired immune systems, pregnant women and people that are too young or too old.
We all have probably heard the term "herd immunization"(a term that unfortunately has a very negative connotation), it refers to "a means of protecting a whole community from disease by immunizing a critical mass of its populace." In order for herd immunity to work a certain percentage of the population needs to be vaccinated. Unfortunately in the case of many diseases we don't know for sure where that minimum threshold is until we reached the tipping point. Consider this, according to the Center for Disease Control's web site, as of the year 2000 the United States declared that the Measles was eliminated from this country, now is back thanks to the growing rate of non-vaccination.
Bliss expands this concept by pointing out that "from birth onward our bodies are a shared space" and seriously challenges our illusion of our independent bodies, "we resist vaccinations in pat because we want to rule ourselves". In a way, this debate reflects our never-ending search for a perfect balance between the interest of the collective vs. the rights of the individual. This is indeed a very American dilemma...
"Narcissus at the pool" was on the cover of Science in a 2002 edition that was dedicated to "Reflections on Self: Immunity and Beyond". The concept of Self is fundamental to the science of immunity.
Ultimately when addressing our fears and deep skepticism regarding vaccines, the author calls for us to consider this debate from a more reasonable perspective: Does it makes sense to be more afraid of the inoculation than the disease?
By 2004, the 1998 British study that originally linked the MMR vaccine to Autism has been thoroughly debunked and retracted. As Bliss states, "Science is "self-correcting", meaning that errors in preliminary studies are ideally revealed by subsequent ones", unfortunately in the case of the this paper, it lives forever in the viral world of hoaxes and misinformation that are part of the internet.
Bliss cites scientist Richard Feynman as saying "Knowledge is, by its nature, incomplete" and she indicates that this also applies to poetry, the poet John Keats frames this as ""negative capability". She mentions that her mother, also a poet, "has instilled this ability in me since I was a child". As a mother and as a poet she says "You have to erase yourself", meaning abandon what I think I know, or "live the questions our children raise for us".
Finally I have to say that I wish "On Immunization", would had been available to me in those difficult days when I was agonizing about my son and considering the best choices concerning his health. But I am glad to say that he's a happy, highly functioning, well adjusted 12-year old. He still have some issues to overcome but he does attends a regular public school and enjoys a dynamic and healthy social life. I hesitate to use the word "normal" when referring to him, but I have come to learn that "normal" is highly overrated.
***********************************************************************On 03/24/15 Frontline aired a one-hour special on vaccinations called "The Vaccine Wars"
Here's a link to watch online:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontli...
Eula Biss, the author of "On Immunization: An Inoculation" is the daughter of a poet and a doctor. She is herself a poet and a renowned essayist, this creates a seemingly absurd but interesting background that I think allows her to bring a unique perspective to an issue that could be otherwise tedious and dull.
Before reading this book, I never considered that the subject of immunizations was as complex and vast as it is. But as I learned our seemingly never ending argument about vaccines is not only a health issue, it is also a political/economic/philosophical/ theological and bio-ethical debate.
"On Immunization: An Inoculation", provides a very comprehensive, rational and thorough research of vaccines and their history, how they are developed, why they are so controversial and why we feared them so much. Bliss's takes a nuanced approach on the issue and although she comes strongly on the side that favors the widespread use of vaccines, she seems to make a a point of being respectful of people that are on both sides of the so called "vaccination debate".
The rise of the anti-vaccine movement in the United States, has created an unusual alliance across some extreme ideological political lines. On the left side of the spectrum, we have liberals skeptic of pharmaceuticals companies that developed, patent, manufacture and aggressively market vaccines, on the right there are conservatives and libertarians that held a cynical view of government and its involvement in monitoring, distributing and regulating them.
I should also mentioned that the issue of vaccines and the discussion of their potential side effects touches me on a personal level.
As the mother of a boy who was diagnosed with Autism at 2 1/2 years-old, I experienced a fair amount of apprehension when deciding whether or not my child should continue receiving all his immunization shots and if so, if he was to get them on the schedule recommended by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and his pediatrician.
In 2007 when a neurologist screened my son for Autism we were just starting to notice a significant increase in the amount of kids in the United States and other parts of the world, that were being diagnosed with Autism. This trend was and still is, particularly noticeable among boys in that 2 to 6 age-range.
Right in the middle of this turmoil, a friend gave me Jenny McCarthy's book, "Louder Than Words", I didn't even know who Ms. McCarthy was until I read her book. As a general rule, I try not to take medical advice from celebrities and people that don't have a scientific background, but I confess that McCarthy's candid tell about her experiences in dealing with an Autistic son hit a nerve with me at the time.
It was a difficult and unnerving experience because back then, there was so much to learn about the whole Autism spectrum, its causes, best treatments and whether or not we had reliable studies confirming or denying a link between the MMR (Measles, Mumps & Rubella) vaccine and the outbreak of Autism we were facing.
So I did my best to research the issue, discussed the matter with my child doctors and ultimately decided to err on the side of caution: when outweighing the risks of not being immunized vs. the non-proven risks that linked Autism to the MMR vaccine, the former was scarier than the latter.
Of course, Autism is not the only sickness that many have linked to immunizations, vaccines have been blamed for everything from allergies to cancer. They also carry inherent and real risks that although statistically small, should be part of this discussion.
It was also a personal experience, the birth of her son and the question of whether to vaccinate him, that propelled Ms.Bliss to research the issue of vaccines so thoroughly.
The book reads as a collection of essays and at it starts with Bliss's interesting connection of Greek mythology (Achilles was "made immune to injure but not to heal") and Gothic horror (Dracula demonstrates our deep fears of contagion) with the overall theme of our fears over the practice of immunization. The idea of contaminating our children with the very hazard we hope to avoid sounds indeed almost mythological.
"The Life of Achilles" by Rubens shows the infant Achilles immersed by his mother in the River Styx trying to make him immortal.
Bliss looks at our unease with immunization as a metaphor that reflects on the larger fears and anxieties we have regarding government intervention, unethical medical and pharmaceutical companies and our overall predisposition to distrusts the injection of anything that doesn't feel "natural" into our bodies. These fears seemed to be particularly enhanced when it comes to making decisions that affect our children.
"Our fears," Bliss warns, "are informed by history and economics, by social power and stigma, by myths and nightmares.... When we encounter information that contradicts our beliefs, … we tend to doubt the information, not ourselves."
There's a good reason why metaphors are widely used by politicians, think tanks and legislators in an effort to (re))define the framework in which health issues are discussed. "If thoughts corrupts language", George Orwell famously said "language can also corrupt thought".
Bliss recounts the results of a research that found that "whenever two issues are metaphorically linked, manipulating a person's attitude towards one can affect how one thinks about the other". Think of the infamous "death panels" during the The Affordable Health Care(ACA) debate for example.
The author also takes some time to explore the history of vaccines, debunks some falsehoods about them and explores the links between class, race and gender as they relate to this issue.
"On Immunization", delves into the origins of vaccinations, we learn for example that in 18th century England, milkmaids were known not to be affected by the small pox epidemic. It was almost common knowledge among farmers that the milkmaids that endured blisters in their hands were immune to the virus even when nursing victims of the disease. In 1774 and to the dismay of his neighbors, a farmer decided to inject pus from an infected cow into the arms of his wife and sons. Although the wife got ill, she recovered eventually and the sons experienced only mild symptoms. After this experience they were exposed to the disease on multiple occasions but never got infected. The term vaccine actually comes from the Latin "vacca", which means cow.
Bliss also makes an important moral and social argument in favor of immunizations: vaccines protect not only those that have been immunized, but also those that for different reasons, are unable to do so. This includes people with impaired immune systems, pregnant women and people that are too young or too old.
We all have probably heard the term "herd immunization"(a term that unfortunately has a very negative connotation), it refers to "a means of protecting a whole community from disease by immunizing a critical mass of its populace." In order for herd immunity to work a certain percentage of the population needs to be vaccinated. Unfortunately in the case of many diseases we don't know for sure where that minimum threshold is until we reached the tipping point. Consider this, according to the Center for Disease Control's web site, as of the year 2000 the United States declared that the Measles was eliminated from this country, now is back thanks to the growing rate of non-vaccination.
Bliss expands this concept by pointing out that "from birth onward our bodies are a shared space" and seriously challenges our illusion of our independent bodies, "we resist vaccinations in pat because we want to rule ourselves". In a way, this debate reflects our never-ending search for a perfect balance between the interest of the collective vs. the rights of the individual. This is indeed a very American dilemma...
"Narcissus at the pool" was on the cover of Science in a 2002 edition that was dedicated to "Reflections on Self: Immunity and Beyond". The concept of Self is fundamental to the science of immunity.
Ultimately when addressing our fears and deep skepticism regarding vaccines, the author calls for us to consider this debate from a more reasonable perspective: Does it makes sense to be more afraid of the inoculation than the disease?
By 2004, the 1998 British study that originally linked the MMR vaccine to Autism has been thoroughly debunked and retracted. As Bliss states, "Science is "self-correcting", meaning that errors in preliminary studies are ideally revealed by subsequent ones", unfortunately in the case of the this paper, it lives forever in the viral world of hoaxes and misinformation that are part of the internet.
Bliss cites scientist Richard Feynman as saying "Knowledge is, by its nature, incomplete" and she indicates that this also applies to poetry, the poet John Keats frames this as ""negative capability". She mentions that her mother, also a poet, "has instilled this ability in me since I was a child". As a mother and as a poet she says "You have to erase yourself", meaning abandon what I think I know, or "live the questions our children raise for us".
Finally I have to say that I wish "On Immunization", would had been available to me in those difficult days when I was agonizing about my son and considering the best choices concerning his health. But I am glad to say that he's a happy, highly functioning, well adjusted 12-year old. He still have some issues to overcome but he does attends a regular public school and enjoys a dynamic and healthy social life. I hesitate to use the word "normal" when referring to him, but I have come to learn that "normal" is highly overrated.
***********************************************************************On 03/24/15 Frontline aired a one-hour special on vaccinations called "The Vaccine Wars"
Here's a link to watch online:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontli...
October 29, 2014
There was a lot of very informative and insightful material in On Immunity. I liked the section focused on perceptions of risk, where the belief of the validity of a particular risk by many people in society is often at odds with quantifiable facts. I also enjoyed the metaphorical comparisons that Eula Biss makes in our language and our exaggerated scientific studies, both of which contribute to our general fear of vaccinations. But, I felt the book didn't quite work for me. My biggest problem is with the transitions to literary references like Dracula and Candide. Sure, I get the metaphorical implications, but some of them seem awfully far-fetched and those that appear to support her point don't always fit the book structurally. Consequently, the book is disjointed and messy more often that not. A stronger editorial hand was required here to elevate her strong points and eliminate her redundant literary diatribes.
April 16, 2015
Wow, not what I expected. I agree with Rebecca's review below. I was wanting a more factual/historical read, but instead this book was ALL OVER THE PLACE. The chapters weren't arranged chronologically, or in any logical way whatsoever. You start a new chapter where she talks about when her son was born, but in the previous chapter he was 4 years old. She talks way too much about vaccinating her son, her father being a doctor, and a blood transfusion she once received. The title should be more like, "My Personal Opinions on Vaccinating My Son"
December 5, 2014
Thank you to Eula Biss for pushing me to return to goodreads. I felt as though this was the only place I could properly voice my disappointment in this book. As focused as a broken telescope I have to wonder with what scandalous info she blackmailed her editor. Her use of metaphors are like a clean-up hitter shooting a three point shot during the superbowl and coming up short only to get an icing call on the final lap. ...or should I say it is like a vampire quoting Sontag but only to support Kierkegaards theories about Dr. Bob and Frankenstein. Wait...weren't we supposed to be talking about vaccinations? I thought so too. Much like the cover of the book only shows 20% of P.P. Ruben's "Thetis dipping the infant Achilles into the river Styx", this book only scratches the surface of any real research done into the world of vaccines. Muddled among misguided literary references and the airing of her own personal demons are the oases of pure quotes from existent research. For anyone truly interested in vaccines and the pros and (imagined) cons of them I would recommend reading the "Selected Sources" portion of this book and finding out the complete information on your own.
September 28, 2020
This book is a collection of essays from the author's perspective as a doctor's daughter and a mother. It informs the reader about immunity, viruses, history of some diseases, clinical trials and vaccination. It also explains the concept of herd immunity and the process involved in finding a vaccine for a disease. I found this book very relevant to the current crisis of coronavirus.
This book does not focus only on hard science. It sheds light on how healthcare impacts, as well as gets impacted by politics, economics, morality and prejudice. It was interesting to read about how the metaphors we use to describe disease and immunity can influence our thought process about health.
I liked how the author referenced books by professionals to back up her claims and occasionally quoted fiction or recounted her own experience when she focussed on philosophical grey areas.
This book does not focus only on hard science. It sheds light on how healthcare impacts, as well as gets impacted by politics, economics, morality and prejudice. It was interesting to read about how the metaphors we use to describe disease and immunity can influence our thought process about health.
I liked how the author referenced books by professionals to back up her claims and occasionally quoted fiction or recounted her own experience when she focussed on philosophical grey areas.
May 28, 2016
Rating 6* out of 5. I have never read anything like this in my life. I am not talking about the subject in itself, because actually none of the facts presented here were new to me. I have read about them before. What is different is how Eula Biss pieces together fact and mythology (Greek and vampirical) together with her own experiences as a first time mother to make a case for vaccination. She does this so gently, so expertly, that surely not even the anti-vaccination faction could take offense. Biss is sympathetic where I would have been arrogant.
I got this book in the post on Thursday. I had already started something else, but I thought I would read a couple of pages while warming up dinner. I was immediately hooked. I had been afraid that this would be a technical and complicated book that would require some additional effort on my part, but it is not. This is a very easy book, compelling, fascinating, deeply personal and written for the lay man. All you need is basic reading comprehension. This should be mandatory reading.
"After leaving the cemetery I remarked to my father that I had noticed the graves of five-year-olds and ten-year-olds and a number of teenagers, but that I was surprised not to have seen, in one of the oldest cemeteries in Chicago, the graves of any babies. This, my father reminded me, was probably because infants died in such large numbers during the nineteenth century that they were not routinely buried in marked graves. Later, I would learn that one out of every ten children born in 1900 died before their first birthdays. I would read this ina report on vaccine side effects, which concluded its brief historical overview of child mortality with the observation that now 'children are expected to survive to adulthood.'"
Think about it. Up until recent history, even in the Western world, child mortality was a fact everyone had to live with. Even when children did not die, they could suffer consequences for the rest of their lives, as with polio. Antibiotics are also a recent invention, and a respite from infections that will quickly come to an end because of over-use.
"For several nights while my son had croup I sat with him for most of the night, holding him upright while he slept so that he could breathe more easily. There was nothing else I could do for him. I traveled back in time then, or so I felt, passing through a space-time rift into what I imagined might have been the experience of a mother a hundred years ago, when faux-croup could just as easily have been killing croup. I thought of the mothers in Daniel Defoe's 'A Journal of the Plague Year' who were said to have died after losing their children - not of the plague, but of grief."
"However we choose to think of the social body, we are each other's environment. Immunity is a shared space - a garden we tend together."
I cannot do this book justice. It is a call for greater good. It is deeply intellectual and philosphical work, written so that anyone can grasp its concepts. READ IT!
I got this book in the post on Thursday. I had already started something else, but I thought I would read a couple of pages while warming up dinner. I was immediately hooked. I had been afraid that this would be a technical and complicated book that would require some additional effort on my part, but it is not. This is a very easy book, compelling, fascinating, deeply personal and written for the lay man. All you need is basic reading comprehension. This should be mandatory reading.
"After leaving the cemetery I remarked to my father that I had noticed the graves of five-year-olds and ten-year-olds and a number of teenagers, but that I was surprised not to have seen, in one of the oldest cemeteries in Chicago, the graves of any babies. This, my father reminded me, was probably because infants died in such large numbers during the nineteenth century that they were not routinely buried in marked graves. Later, I would learn that one out of every ten children born in 1900 died before their first birthdays. I would read this ina report on vaccine side effects, which concluded its brief historical overview of child mortality with the observation that now 'children are expected to survive to adulthood.'"
Think about it. Up until recent history, even in the Western world, child mortality was a fact everyone had to live with. Even when children did not die, they could suffer consequences for the rest of their lives, as with polio. Antibiotics are also a recent invention, and a respite from infections that will quickly come to an end because of over-use.
"For several nights while my son had croup I sat with him for most of the night, holding him upright while he slept so that he could breathe more easily. There was nothing else I could do for him. I traveled back in time then, or so I felt, passing through a space-time rift into what I imagined might have been the experience of a mother a hundred years ago, when faux-croup could just as easily have been killing croup. I thought of the mothers in Daniel Defoe's 'A Journal of the Plague Year' who were said to have died after losing their children - not of the plague, but of grief."
"However we choose to think of the social body, we are each other's environment. Immunity is a shared space - a garden we tend together."
I cannot do this book justice. It is a call for greater good. It is deeply intellectual and philosphical work, written so that anyone can grasp its concepts. READ IT!
August 13, 2015
When she first became a mother, professor and essayist Eula Biss took the opportunity to reconsider inoculation. She’d never given it much thought before, but in an American culture of paranoia about everything from bird flu to food additives, it was impossible not to ask what risks she was exposing her son to, and whether they were worth it. In a wide-ranging cultural history reminiscent of Susan Sontag’s AIDS and Its Metaphors, she delves into the facts, myths and metaphors surrounding immunization. This book powerfully captures the modern phenomenon of feeling simultaneously responsible and powerless. Biss reminds us that “what heals may harm and the sum of science is not always progress.” A short, well-constructed argument, well worth reading.
(See my full review at Nudge.)
(See my full review at Nudge.)
Read
March 2, 2015Despite the fact that this book has been deemed one of the best non-fiction books of 2014, it completely took me by surprise. By combining historical information and personal essays, Biss takes on the hot button topic of vaccinations and brings it to a level that can appeal to anyone. Plus she is able to take the idea of vampires and our cultural history with those creatures and integrate them into our current cultural fear of vaccinations. Without shaming people who may be wary of vaccines and providing her own personal stories of motherhood, Biss does a really fantastic job explaining how we have vaccines, what they can do compared to what we think they can do, and why they are so important. — Rincey Abraham
From The Best Books We Read In February: http://bookriot.com/2015/03/02/riot-r...
From The Best Books We Read In February: http://bookriot.com/2015/03/02/riot-r...
May 7, 2021
Get vaccinated.
Then read this book.
Then read this book.
January 8, 2015
This is a thoughtful discussion of illness and immunity that pays particular attention to the controversies surrounding vaccines. And there is no doubt the author invested a great deal of research and thinking in this. Be warned, however, that it is less straightforward narrative than a bricolage of her own memories, readings and musings, which can be, at times, difficult. For example, early in the book, Biss moves from Kierkegaard, to the Doppler effect, to O negative blood and then to the idea we owe each other our bodies. This elliptical strategy allows her to include a range of reflections, but as a reader I did find myself feeling lost, from time to time. I also found the system of ‘Notes’ exasperating. They include important material but they’re buried at the back of the book, and there is no indication in the text that you’ve just read something on which there is further comment. One must keep a thumb at the back and continually check to see when the next note should be read. Alas, this is not the book I was expecting, or hoping for, especially considering the effusive blurbs on the back cover.
April 5, 2021
Edit 5/4/21 - changed the rating to 2.5 stars, reason at the end of the review
I am a bit perplexed by this book. The positives are: it's destigmatising, it addresses skeptics of vaccines in a constructive manner that is inviting rather than accusatory, it clarifies not only what vaccines are from a scientific perspective without resorting to jargon or über-scientific terms while also shedding light on what vaccines mean from a purely social perspective, and some of the metaphors used to talk about immunity (such as the warlike language to discuss immunity) and studied throughout this book are highly effective*, as are some others such as comparing capitalism to a vampiric system.
* I now realise that these effective metaphors were quoted or paraphrased from other authors/people so...
However, I think this book falls short in several aspects too. I usually like shorter chapters but this book could have benefited from uniting the central ideas of separate chapters into more cohesive and bigger chapters. This book is quite meandering and anecdotal, and I felt that the message was often lost in the turns the author took to reference back to an event or a conversation in her life that I found only tangentially relevant to the point raised in the specific chapter. A more concise authorial voice would have driven the point home much more effectively imo. Speaking of driving the point home, there is a jarring contrast between the wishy-washy parts of the book where the author seems almost frightful of calling a spade a spade (such as calling anti-vaxxers "vaccine activists"... what in the name of silly euphemisms?) while also sometimes showcasing the ability to actually seem a lot more convinced by the stances this book took. What I'm trying to say (while paraphrasing hbomberguy) is: this book frequently threatened to finally give us more and be convinced of itself and convincing too, but it was too worried and indecisive to achieve that, which is a shame given the topic at hand. Sometimes, being direct is good, and hand-wringing typically gets on my nerves so that's that on that. Finally, I found that the author's own metaphors were sometimes stretched too thin to accommodate the points raised in this book.
It's a rather mixed bag but I'd still recommend this book. An interesting note on the book is that Susan Sontag's "Illness as Metaphor and Aids and Its Metaphors" is frequently quoted so I'm quite interested in getting to that work relatively soon, as I feel that the metaphors drawn in Sontag's work may be more effective than Biss's, whose extensive ramblings on vampirism as a metaphor for virus/plague/healthcare/modern medicine/anything else that was compared to Dracula didn't quite convince me.
However, I do think this book serves an interesting purpose and will work for a wide variety of people with varying opinions. If you are looking for something more science-driven than anecdotal, this book is not for you. However, if you like personal essays and themes such as motherhood, health and the place of individuals within a community, I think you'll like this book. At the end of the day I appreciate what this book managed to accomplish while also acknowledging that there are things that did quite work for me.
Edit: I just remembered that there was a worrisome passage on autism at the end of the book that struck me as ableist. The book did a great job up until that point to rebuke the popular theory about anti-vaxxers that vaccines caused autism but for some reason, the last leg of the book the author said this: "When my son was an infant, I feared autism, which seemed to be spreading like a plague, particularly among boys." I find this a rather shockingly ableist thing to say so.... yeah. Demoting it to a 2 star, this book could've been something interesting but it decided to be weird instead.
I am a bit perplexed by this book. The positives are: it's destigmatising, it addresses skeptics of vaccines in a constructive manner that is inviting rather than accusatory, it clarifies not only what vaccines are from a scientific perspective without resorting to jargon or über-scientific terms while also shedding light on what vaccines mean from a purely social perspective, and some of the metaphors used to talk about immunity (such as the warlike language to discuss immunity) and studied throughout this book are highly effective*, as are some others such as comparing capitalism to a vampiric system.
* I now realise that these effective metaphors were quoted or paraphrased from other authors/people so...
However, I think this book falls short in several aspects too. I usually like shorter chapters but this book could have benefited from uniting the central ideas of separate chapters into more cohesive and bigger chapters. This book is quite meandering and anecdotal, and I felt that the message was often lost in the turns the author took to reference back to an event or a conversation in her life that I found only tangentially relevant to the point raised in the specific chapter. A more concise authorial voice would have driven the point home much more effectively imo. Speaking of driving the point home, there is a jarring contrast between the wishy-washy parts of the book where the author seems almost frightful of calling a spade a spade (such as calling anti-vaxxers "vaccine activists"... what in the name of silly euphemisms?) while also sometimes showcasing the ability to actually seem a lot more convinced by the stances this book took. What I'm trying to say (while paraphrasing hbomberguy) is: this book frequently threatened to finally give us more and be convinced of itself and convincing too, but it was too worried and indecisive to achieve that, which is a shame given the topic at hand. Sometimes, being direct is good, and hand-wringing typically gets on my nerves so that's that on that. Finally, I found that the author's own metaphors were sometimes stretched too thin to accommodate the points raised in this book.
It's a rather mixed bag but I'd still recommend this book. An interesting note on the book is that Susan Sontag's "Illness as Metaphor and Aids and Its Metaphors" is frequently quoted so I'm quite interested in getting to that work relatively soon, as I feel that the metaphors drawn in Sontag's work may be more effective than Biss's, whose extensive ramblings on vampirism as a metaphor for virus/plague/healthcare/modern medicine/anything else that was compared to Dracula didn't quite convince me.
However, I do think this book serves an interesting purpose and will work for a wide variety of people with varying opinions. If you are looking for something more science-driven than anecdotal, this book is not for you. However, if you like personal essays and themes such as motherhood, health and the place of individuals within a community, I think you'll like this book. At the end of the day I appreciate what this book managed to accomplish while also acknowledging that there are things that did quite work for me.
Edit: I just remembered that there was a worrisome passage on autism at the end of the book that struck me as ableist. The book did a great job up until that point to rebuke the popular theory about anti-vaxxers that vaccines caused autism but for some reason, the last leg of the book the author said this: "When my son was an infant, I feared autism, which seemed to be spreading like a plague, particularly among boys." I find this a rather shockingly ableist thing to say so.... yeah. Demoting it to a 2 star, this book could've been something interesting but it decided to be weird instead.
December 29, 2019
4.5 stars -- this was a very emotional read for me, one that I almost resented. But ultimately, I could not deny the beauty of the writing or the thoughtfulness of Biss' consideration of ourselves as bodies interconnected to one another in so many different ways.
February 9, 2020
This isn't a science book. It's not a book about health care. It's not even a book about vaccination. Instead, On Immunity is a confusing collection of essays with no cohesive theme. Biss cycles between motherhood and literary analysis and never brings it all together.
With the measles outbreak splashed across every newspaper, I picked up a copy of On Immunity, aiming to educate myself on vaccination, and expecting a primer on vaccines and vaccine culture. I was disappointed to discover that this book is an unorganized collection of vague musing about Biss' decision to vaccinate her son, and her obsession with Stoker's Dracula.
I'm not sure what this book is, and I don't think Biss is, either. It's definitely not a comprehensive history of vaccination. I'm not even convinced that Biss is pro-vaccine. She treats the anti-vaccine movement like a valid philosophy, and that's a dangerous approach. The truth is, anti-vaxxers are not parents with valid concerns. They spread misinformation, information known to be false, and their message results in low vaccination rates that put vulnerable members of the population at risk. It's not okay. From all her "research," I expected more from Biss.
And was this a book about vaccination, or a book about Dracula? I'm convinced that Biss had an idea for a thesis about medicine as the modern Dracula, and it never got approved, so she turned it into a book. She practically mentions Dracula on every page. It quickly became annoying, then infuriating. The constant discussion of Dracula wasn't relevant to Biss' larger goal to discuss the sociology of vaccines. Her editor should have taken most of that out.
Parts of this book struck me as insightful, specifically where Biss highlighted the contrast between mothers and doctors, and how the disconnect can impact vaccination rates, which is why I'm giving it two stars instead of one. But I would never recommend this book to anyone.
With the measles outbreak splashed across every newspaper, I picked up a copy of On Immunity, aiming to educate myself on vaccination, and expecting a primer on vaccines and vaccine culture. I was disappointed to discover that this book is an unorganized collection of vague musing about Biss' decision to vaccinate her son, and her obsession with Stoker's Dracula.
I'm not sure what this book is, and I don't think Biss is, either. It's definitely not a comprehensive history of vaccination. I'm not even convinced that Biss is pro-vaccine. She treats the anti-vaccine movement like a valid philosophy, and that's a dangerous approach. The truth is, anti-vaxxers are not parents with valid concerns. They spread misinformation, information known to be false, and their message results in low vaccination rates that put vulnerable members of the population at risk. It's not okay. From all her "research," I expected more from Biss.
And was this a book about vaccination, or a book about Dracula? I'm convinced that Biss had an idea for a thesis about medicine as the modern Dracula, and it never got approved, so she turned it into a book. She practically mentions Dracula on every page. It quickly became annoying, then infuriating. The constant discussion of Dracula wasn't relevant to Biss' larger goal to discuss the sociology of vaccines. Her editor should have taken most of that out.
Parts of this book struck me as insightful, specifically where Biss highlighted the contrast between mothers and doctors, and how the disconnect can impact vaccination rates, which is why I'm giving it two stars instead of one. But I would never recommend this book to anyone.
January 13, 2016
The measles vaccine, MMR, is getting some major press time lately. It seems like many people are questioning the safety/wisdom of vaccines and many parents are choosing not to vaccinate their children. I openly admit that I am pro-vaccine. Do I recognize that there are some potentially serious side effects? Yes. Do I recognize that those side effects have been greatly reduced over recent decades as science has progressed? Yes. Do I think that the benefits of vaccinations outweigh the risks? Yes.
While I think there are some very convincing arguments as to why certain parents chose not to vaccinate, I am often appalled at the downright lies and misinformation that permeate this argument and seem to take on a life of their own. I picked up this book hoping that it would provide some solid rebuttals to the common anti-vaccine arguments with an added connection of how this mother navigated the waters when making decisions for her own child.
I was extremely disappointed.
This book contains very few scientific facts about the safety and risks of vaccines. And by "very few", I mean like maybe two. Instead, it is a rambling account of what the author thinks vaccines mean to society and the history of how vaccines came to be so widespread. This could be interesting, I like social science and history, and she started strong with an interesting comparison to immunity in Greek mythology (Achilles, anyone?), but she quickly lost me as she bounced from topic to topic without any structure. It seemed like she didn't even know where she was going next but, instead, just wrote about whatever popped into her head.
She also focused extensively (or, at least it felt extensively) on the comparison of immortality (which she poorly attempted to connect to vaccinations) to how vampires are portrayed in mainstream media. From Dracula to Bela Lugosi to True Blood and Twilight, the portrayal of vampires mirrors how society feels about vaccines. What?!? Does that mean that society really wishes we could sparkle in the sunlight?! (Okay, that may actually be a valid point). It was just weird. And based on poor logic.
The author annoyed me as well. It becomes painfully clear that this is one of those parents who is scared of everything her child comes into contact with. She is the mother who reads crazy blogs, accepts them as gospel, and then knee-jerk reacts to them. She came across as flaky, an over-disinfecter to ensure her child's world is germ-free, and basically someone I would never be friends with but would roll my eyes at in public.
I could go on and on about the ways this book annoyed me. It adds nothing to the vaccination debate outside of soundbite quotes and illogical analogies. I highly recommend not reading this book and instead finding something with even a modicum of fact or actual research.
While I think there are some very convincing arguments as to why certain parents chose not to vaccinate, I am often appalled at the downright lies and misinformation that permeate this argument and seem to take on a life of their own. I picked up this book hoping that it would provide some solid rebuttals to the common anti-vaccine arguments with an added connection of how this mother navigated the waters when making decisions for her own child.
I was extremely disappointed.
This book contains very few scientific facts about the safety and risks of vaccines. And by "very few", I mean like maybe two. Instead, it is a rambling account of what the author thinks vaccines mean to society and the history of how vaccines came to be so widespread. This could be interesting, I like social science and history, and she started strong with an interesting comparison to immunity in Greek mythology (Achilles, anyone?), but she quickly lost me as she bounced from topic to topic without any structure. It seemed like she didn't even know where she was going next but, instead, just wrote about whatever popped into her head.
She also focused extensively (or, at least it felt extensively) on the comparison of immortality (which she poorly attempted to connect to vaccinations) to how vampires are portrayed in mainstream media. From Dracula to Bela Lugosi to True Blood and Twilight, the portrayal of vampires mirrors how society feels about vaccines. What?!? Does that mean that society really wishes we could sparkle in the sunlight?! (Okay, that may actually be a valid point). It was just weird. And based on poor logic.
The author annoyed me as well. It becomes painfully clear that this is one of those parents who is scared of everything her child comes into contact with. She is the mother who reads crazy blogs, accepts them as gospel, and then knee-jerk reacts to them. She came across as flaky, an over-disinfecter to ensure her child's world is germ-free, and basically someone I would never be friends with but would roll my eyes at in public.
I could go on and on about the ways this book annoyed me. It adds nothing to the vaccination debate outside of soundbite quotes and illogical analogies. I highly recommend not reading this book and instead finding something with even a modicum of fact or actual research.
February 5, 2017
When I was pregnant with my daughter, I was obsessed with what I consumed. I didn't just give up wine; I gave up chewing gum. I feared that my cups of early pregnancy green tea could cause spinal bifida; I meticulously removed the feta cheese from a dining hall sandwich, knowing that there was virtually no chance that institutional dairy was unpasteurized. In "On Immunity," Eula Biss explores our desire to spare our children the toxicity and mortality that is their lot, and she is unsparing in her assessment of the privilege such anxieties reflect. Though it would be easy to imagine the ideal of immunity as a hermetic space, repelling the onslaught of infection through the shield of the immune system (and Biss discusses our martial metaphors for immunity as well), Biss emphasizes the collective condition of vulnerability and the ideal of herd immunity as a metaphor for the body politic, where the choice to vaccinate supposedly protected privileged children improves the health of everyone. She understands vaccination not as an incursion on our inviolate bodies but rather as a choice to opt in to a social good, to mind the commons for everyone.
Biss's book weaves together feminist, posthuman, and queer theory with personal anecdote and medical research, and she makes her own learning process and maternal anxieties part of the narrative. Her family members play roles in the unfolding philosophical dialogue about vaccination and its implications: her father, a doctor, and her sister, an ethicist. Her syntactical grace and unfailing clarity effortlessly lift the intellectual weight of her explorations; I do not know how she slices through these waters with such momentum given how easily she could be bogged down by her multi-faceted approach (symbolic, epidemiological, and psychological) to the subject.
The one thing that was very demoralizing was reading this book during the dawn of the Trump era. Biss prognosticates about the contemporary anxieties about what it means to be a citizen in a democracy and what it means to be awash in toxicity, and she convincingly links xenophobia and racism to metaphors about bodily invasion and infection (one of my favorite things about the book). She chronicles the debunking of Robert Kennedy Jr.'s unfounded article about immunization and autism. When she was writing this, she must have imagined her inoculation moving forward into a reasonable future, helping people to see not simply the pragmatic benefits of vaccination but also its important to a more capacious view of our physical enmeshment with one another. Unfortunately, it seems we're going in the other direction .
Biss's book weaves together feminist, posthuman, and queer theory with personal anecdote and medical research, and she makes her own learning process and maternal anxieties part of the narrative. Her family members play roles in the unfolding philosophical dialogue about vaccination and its implications: her father, a doctor, and her sister, an ethicist. Her syntactical grace and unfailing clarity effortlessly lift the intellectual weight of her explorations; I do not know how she slices through these waters with such momentum given how easily she could be bogged down by her multi-faceted approach (symbolic, epidemiological, and psychological) to the subject.
The one thing that was very demoralizing was reading this book during the dawn of the Trump era. Biss prognosticates about the contemporary anxieties about what it means to be a citizen in a democracy and what it means to be awash in toxicity, and she convincingly links xenophobia and racism to metaphors about bodily invasion and infection (one of my favorite things about the book). She chronicles the debunking of Robert Kennedy Jr.'s unfounded article about immunization and autism. When she was writing this, she must have imagined her inoculation moving forward into a reasonable future, helping people to see not simply the pragmatic benefits of vaccination but also its important to a more capacious view of our physical enmeshment with one another. Unfortunately, it seems we're going in the other direction .
December 12, 2014
“Immunity is a shared space – a garden we tend together.”
Eula Biss has written a fine argument and defense for the importance of vaccination in our society.
When I was in high school, we had a contest between other school debate teams called The Lincoln-Douglas Debates, named for the famous candidates in the 1858 Senate race in Illinois, Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas. Even though Lincoln didn’t win the debate in 1858, his opinions won the popular vote, and the debates helped launch his career and popularity. Just two years later, Lincoln would become President.
Biss has made nearly every “best of” list this year for On Immunity. Like Lincoln, it seems her ideas and arguments resound with the public, or at the very least, with journalists and media. With public health being such a hot topic and a theme for 2014, I can see why.
This book reads like a persuasive speech, a treatise meant to dispute the idea that vaccinations are harmful and should be avoided. The most popular theory is that vaccinations cause autism, a theory I admittedly once entertained. As Biss points out (I’ve come to the same conclusion through my own research), the idea that vaccinations cause autism is unfounded and has been proven false through several unbiased studies.
There are several intriguing metaphors in the book that are quite near perfect, the idea of disease and inoculation, like vampires and Dracula, being interconnected with the collective and individual body, both reliant and harmful.
Unfortunately, I also had a few problems with this book. First, I think her political ideology often gets in the way. To make a case for the benefit of immunization, something that you actually need everyone to agree on, it might not be best to quote Karl Marx and compare capitalism to Dracula,
“The drive toward capital, as Dracula suggests, is inherently inhumane. We are justified in feeling threatened by the unlimited expansion of industry, and we are justified in fearing our interests are secondary to corporate interests.”
While I understand her point, I think this could alienate a large population of people (people that are needed in order for her arguments to work) and supposes that everyone involved has evil vampire motives. This shaming of Wall Street, corporate America, and everyone that transcribes to it is also somewhat hypocritical. After all, guess who’s got shareholders and big players in this evil game? Amazon (AMZN), Barnes & Noble (BKS), New York Times Co (NYT), which are all the reasons and distribution channels that have made this very book successful, not to mention the countless pharmaceutical and medical supply companies that make even the idea of public immunization possible. This book was published by Graywolf Press, a non-profit, but even they accept stock gifts: https://www.graywolfpress.org/about-u.... What’s more capitalistic than the stock market?
I’m not defending capitalism. I understand its problems of inequality and excess. I’m just pointing out that if you are going to demonize a system (comparing it to a blood-sucking Dracula), at least acknowledge that you’re also a part of it.
I also wonder if her political bias shielded her from seeing the bi-partisan efforts that are happening right now to immunize entire areas of the world. She touched on the subject of global immunization a few times, but did not once acknowledge the current and massive efforts to vaccinate against HPV in Africa, a virus that causes cervical cancer and threatens to end the lives of millions.
This is a project that extended from the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which provided antiretroviral treatment to millions infected with HIV and is the largest health initiative ever initiated by one country to address a disease. It was started in 2002 by President Bush and has been extended by President Obama. Why did Biss not mention these efforts? I hope this slight was not political, but based on her obvious political orientation, it was hard not to think so.
(By the way, my defense of any side doesn’t indicate I’m one or the other. I just don’t prefer political bias in my books. On either side.)
Biss shines in her idea of lowering the self for the collective good. In my mind, this is exactly the way I want to live my own life, to put my needs second to the needs of others. To me, that is the most fulfilling life. Admittedly, I often fail in my attempts, but books like this really help me see the benefit and help motivate me to do better.
“The unvaccinated person is protected by the bodies around her, bodies through which disease is not circulating. But a vaccinated person surrounded by bodies that host disease is left vulnerable to vaccine failure or fading immunity. We are protected not so much by our own skin, but by what is beyond it. The boundaries between our bodies begin to dissolve here. Donations of blood and organs move between us, exiting one body and entering another, and so too with immunity, which is a common trust as much as a private account. Those of us who draw on immunity owe our health to our neighbors.”
This idea of common trust is beautiful.
The absolutely most beautiful account in this book is when Biss describes a friend of hers from Vietnam who fears vaccinations for her own children. Her friend was exposed to agent orange during the Vietnam War (an exposure I also believe killed my mom, a nurse in Vietnam, a little over two years ago), and was suspicious of the “collective trust” and rightly so.
“I could not ask her to risk her children for the benefit of the citizens of the country that had put her in danger. The best I could do, I determine, was hope that my own child’s body might help shield them from disease. If vaccination can be conscripted into acts of war, it can still be instrumental in works of love.”
I love this idea. Biss was fearful as well, but instead of letting fear keep her from participating in the “collective trust”, she offers her own child on the altar of hope for what’s best for us all. If this were the Lincoln-Douglas debates, her courageous surrender of her own son is a two for the win.
Eula Biss has written a fine argument and defense for the importance of vaccination in our society.
When I was in high school, we had a contest between other school debate teams called The Lincoln-Douglas Debates, named for the famous candidates in the 1858 Senate race in Illinois, Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas. Even though Lincoln didn’t win the debate in 1858, his opinions won the popular vote, and the debates helped launch his career and popularity. Just two years later, Lincoln would become President.
Biss has made nearly every “best of” list this year for On Immunity. Like Lincoln, it seems her ideas and arguments resound with the public, or at the very least, with journalists and media. With public health being such a hot topic and a theme for 2014, I can see why.
This book reads like a persuasive speech, a treatise meant to dispute the idea that vaccinations are harmful and should be avoided. The most popular theory is that vaccinations cause autism, a theory I admittedly once entertained. As Biss points out (I’ve come to the same conclusion through my own research), the idea that vaccinations cause autism is unfounded and has been proven false through several unbiased studies.
There are several intriguing metaphors in the book that are quite near perfect, the idea of disease and inoculation, like vampires and Dracula, being interconnected with the collective and individual body, both reliant and harmful.
Unfortunately, I also had a few problems with this book. First, I think her political ideology often gets in the way. To make a case for the benefit of immunization, something that you actually need everyone to agree on, it might not be best to quote Karl Marx and compare capitalism to Dracula,
“The drive toward capital, as Dracula suggests, is inherently inhumane. We are justified in feeling threatened by the unlimited expansion of industry, and we are justified in fearing our interests are secondary to corporate interests.”
While I understand her point, I think this could alienate a large population of people (people that are needed in order for her arguments to work) and supposes that everyone involved has evil vampire motives. This shaming of Wall Street, corporate America, and everyone that transcribes to it is also somewhat hypocritical. After all, guess who’s got shareholders and big players in this evil game? Amazon (AMZN), Barnes & Noble (BKS), New York Times Co (NYT), which are all the reasons and distribution channels that have made this very book successful, not to mention the countless pharmaceutical and medical supply companies that make even the idea of public immunization possible. This book was published by Graywolf Press, a non-profit, but even they accept stock gifts: https://www.graywolfpress.org/about-u.... What’s more capitalistic than the stock market?
I’m not defending capitalism. I understand its problems of inequality and excess. I’m just pointing out that if you are going to demonize a system (comparing it to a blood-sucking Dracula), at least acknowledge that you’re also a part of it.
I also wonder if her political bias shielded her from seeing the bi-partisan efforts that are happening right now to immunize entire areas of the world. She touched on the subject of global immunization a few times, but did not once acknowledge the current and massive efforts to vaccinate against HPV in Africa, a virus that causes cervical cancer and threatens to end the lives of millions.
This is a project that extended from the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which provided antiretroviral treatment to millions infected with HIV and is the largest health initiative ever initiated by one country to address a disease. It was started in 2002 by President Bush and has been extended by President Obama. Why did Biss not mention these efforts? I hope this slight was not political, but based on her obvious political orientation, it was hard not to think so.
(By the way, my defense of any side doesn’t indicate I’m one or the other. I just don’t prefer political bias in my books. On either side.)
Biss shines in her idea of lowering the self for the collective good. In my mind, this is exactly the way I want to live my own life, to put my needs second to the needs of others. To me, that is the most fulfilling life. Admittedly, I often fail in my attempts, but books like this really help me see the benefit and help motivate me to do better.
“The unvaccinated person is protected by the bodies around her, bodies through which disease is not circulating. But a vaccinated person surrounded by bodies that host disease is left vulnerable to vaccine failure or fading immunity. We are protected not so much by our own skin, but by what is beyond it. The boundaries between our bodies begin to dissolve here. Donations of blood and organs move between us, exiting one body and entering another, and so too with immunity, which is a common trust as much as a private account. Those of us who draw on immunity owe our health to our neighbors.”
This idea of common trust is beautiful.
The absolutely most beautiful account in this book is when Biss describes a friend of hers from Vietnam who fears vaccinations for her own children. Her friend was exposed to agent orange during the Vietnam War (an exposure I also believe killed my mom, a nurse in Vietnam, a little over two years ago), and was suspicious of the “collective trust” and rightly so.
“I could not ask her to risk her children for the benefit of the citizens of the country that had put her in danger. The best I could do, I determine, was hope that my own child’s body might help shield them from disease. If vaccination can be conscripted into acts of war, it can still be instrumental in works of love.”
I love this idea. Biss was fearful as well, but instead of letting fear keep her from participating in the “collective trust”, she offers her own child on the altar of hope for what’s best for us all. If this were the Lincoln-Douglas debates, her courageous surrender of her own son is a two for the win.
June 26, 2020
The author tries to weave a story through hard hitting research and personal experiences. The intergenerational approach added with current political environment over vaccination makes it an interesting read.
The areas where the book stands out is the precise combination of science of vaccination added with other aspects related to vaccination. The author is able to give out the historical data along with some of the personal anxieties which surround the individuals. Another exciting aspect is the use of literary metaphors throughout the essays. It might not be liked by all but surely is a novel approach.
If one is not very comfortable with reading dry non fiction book then this turns out as a saviour. The narration is beautifully weaved as a story and hence can be termed as fiction and non fiction at the same time.
Only problem with the book is that the view point of the author is not clearly articulated. Often the message is hidden behind the wide usage of metaphors. Though largely she addresses the science behind the vaccination but also tries to cater towards the fears of anti vaccine brigade. I think the balancing act here might not be liked by all.
Being said that this book is actually a nice read overall.
The areas where the book stands out is the precise combination of science of vaccination added with other aspects related to vaccination. The author is able to give out the historical data along with some of the personal anxieties which surround the individuals. Another exciting aspect is the use of literary metaphors throughout the essays. It might not be liked by all but surely is a novel approach.
If one is not very comfortable with reading dry non fiction book then this turns out as a saviour. The narration is beautifully weaved as a story and hence can be termed as fiction and non fiction at the same time.
Only problem with the book is that the view point of the author is not clearly articulated. Often the message is hidden behind the wide usage of metaphors. Though largely she addresses the science behind the vaccination but also tries to cater towards the fears of anti vaccine brigade. I think the balancing act here might not be liked by all.
Being said that this book is actually a nice read overall.
August 4, 2014
I remain immune to the hype.
There's some brilliant writing in here awaintg an editor. Is it a commentary on the current immunity scare? A history of inoculation? A journey into the subtle class boundaries of North America? Who knows. It's all of those things, but in no particular order and with no obvious object. Now, I know that post-modern post-structuralist writing values the amorphous subjective (and perhaps the also the even more elusive intersubjective) but readers still deserve, at the minimum, some sort of signposting to help us through it.
By the end, which came too slowly, I lost all patience and skimmed. A lesser writer would have merited fewer stars, and it was only Eula Bliss' prose that kept me going.
Also on Twitter and Tumblr.
There's some brilliant writing in here awaintg an editor. Is it a commentary on the current immunity scare? A history of inoculation? A journey into the subtle class boundaries of North America? Who knows. It's all of those things, but in no particular order and with no obvious object. Now, I know that post-modern post-structuralist writing values the amorphous subjective (and perhaps the also the even more elusive intersubjective) but readers still deserve, at the minimum, some sort of signposting to help us through it.
By the end, which came too slowly, I lost all patience and skimmed. A lesser writer would have merited fewer stars, and it was only Eula Bliss' prose that kept me going.
Also on Twitter and Tumblr.
January 8, 2015
I love Eula Biss. Notes from No Man's Land: American Essays is soooo important to me and so stylistically impressive. This is different--one structured narrative rather than an essay collection, but she does trace different topics related to the history of vaccinations and anti-vaccinations.
Ugh she's just so SMART and so good at making connections between things. And I love that she writes openly from her perspective as a new mother, a privileged mother, who can understand the panic that anti-vaccinators feel while so, so perfectly destroying their arguments on both a medical and ethical level. Just. Great. And she's such an impressive writer. I already said that. I'm just very impressed by her. *_*
Ugh she's just so SMART and so good at making connections between things. And I love that she writes openly from her perspective as a new mother, a privileged mother, who can understand the panic that anti-vaccinators feel while so, so perfectly destroying their arguments on both a medical and ethical level. Just. Great. And she's such an impressive writer. I already said that. I'm just very impressed by her. *_*
December 30, 2014
What a waste of time this book was. The only positive thing is that it is short. The problem? It has no thesis whatsoever. I still do not know what all the ranting was about. It talks a great deal about vaccines and why people are afraid of them, about Dracula, and about her son, but I still don’t know what she was trying to get at. She goes on and on about her son, his birth, his vaccines, his allergies, etc. Please! You should just go ahead and write a memoir about your tendencies as an overprotective helicopter mom. I decided to read this book because it was considered one of the best 10 books of 2014 by the New York Times. I don’t know what the Times base’s its decision on but this one has got to be the worst I have read in a long time!
March 30, 2020
If you are sick of getting quarantine recommendations for The Plague and The Road, this is the book for you.
I picked it up in January while I was in Boston, read the first half of it in a frenzy—inspired, interested, oddly repulsed. The book is about vaccination, immunity, and public health and all the discussions of illness and needles felt nauseating at first.
Now, returning to it after the outbreak of COVID-19, it is prophetic and helpful. It shows you in artful writing what and how we should respond to pandemics: by taking care of our most vulnerable and at-risk through vaccination, or in our case today; social-distancing.
"Immunity is a shared space—a garden we tend together"
Good read.
I picked it up in January while I was in Boston, read the first half of it in a frenzy—inspired, interested, oddly repulsed. The book is about vaccination, immunity, and public health and all the discussions of illness and needles felt nauseating at first.
Now, returning to it after the outbreak of COVID-19, it is prophetic and helpful. It shows you in artful writing what and how we should respond to pandemics: by taking care of our most vulnerable and at-risk through vaccination, or in our case today; social-distancing.
"Immunity is a shared space—a garden we tend together"
Good read.
October 30, 2020
This book is very readable and has lots of interesting information to offer. Biss explains where anti-vaccinators are coming from, their fears and concerns. I think I understand that a little better now, even though I don't agree with it in the slightest. Biss brings in lots of historical examples of how people have tried to prevent disease. The discussion of the weaponisation of disease and vaccination was fascinating and horrible to read about.
Biss also refutes most of the claims and fears of anti-vaccinators. I just think that she gives too much space to the fears, and not enough to the science. Even though her conclusions are that vaccinations are important, she spends so much time detailing erroneous fears and so little going into the reasons why vaccination is important and safe that the book doesn't read as balanced as Biss would like it to seem.
Biss also draws parallels to metaphors of disease and how they shape our thinking. Dracula is a recurring theme, and it was interesting to think about how people reacted to vampires then and now.
Biss also refutes most of the claims and fears of anti-vaccinators. I just think that she gives too much space to the fears, and not enough to the science. Even though her conclusions are that vaccinations are important, she spends so much time detailing erroneous fears and so little going into the reasons why vaccination is important and safe that the book doesn't read as balanced as Biss would like it to seem.
Biss also draws parallels to metaphors of disease and how they shape our thinking. Dracula is a recurring theme, and it was interesting to think about how people reacted to vampires then and now.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,588 reviews