Separating the wheat from the chaff
934873
This is an excellently written book, liberating and highly informative. The snobs will be put off by the Teach Yourself title, but don't be fooled: the author thoroughly knows his stuff. Unlike so many acolytes of postmodernism his approach is not uncritical, yet he has managed to separate the wheat from the chaff, unfailingly identifying the main points of value of the various postmodernist thinkers in clear, compact and easy to understand language. This is particularly important, as the original texts of some of the postmodernists can be rather long-winded and obscure.

Where necessary the author adds points of criticism immediately following the basic discussion, which helps to improve one's understanding. Clear, concrete examples from everyday life illustrate each point, so as to put the issue in perspective.

Before reading this book I was somewhat sceptical toward postmodernism, having been exposed to so much quasi-intellectual drivel and posturing. Postmodernism seemed to be a fashionably destructive form of nihilism and relativism cloaked in obscure and pretentious terminology. This book makes it clear that though some aspects of postmodernism may be doubtful, much of it is of value, particularly with regard to globalisation.

My only regret is that no mention is being made of the "Sokal Hoax" of 1996 when the physicist Alan Sokal managed to get his deliberately nonsensical article "Transgressing the boundaries: towards a transformative hermeneutics of quantum gravity" published in the postmodernist journal Social Text - much to the embarrassment of many postmodernist academics. The Sokal Hoax was followed by a number of books sharply criticising some postmodernists' views on science. Indeed PM's relationship with science, and the PM tendency to inspire quasi-intellectual articles may be its weakest links. Though Glenn Ward's book includes a list of recommended websites, it unfortunately does not contain Andrew Bulhak's highly entertaining The Postmodernism Generator. This website continuously generates completely meaningless postmodernist articles, but the forgeries are so brilliant that you could be fooled if you did not know better.

Criticism of PM should of course not blind one to its merits. If you have heard much about postmodernism, but could never figure out what it's all about and if you don't want to spend too much time in finding out, this wonderful, concise introduction is for you.
3519497
Where biblical studies meet arhaeology, history and literary criticism there now exists a maelstrom of conflicting views, methods and terminology that was once represented by a "biblical archaelogy" that had a certain degree of concensus. Politically correct ideologies and politics have added to the stew.  Dever does an excellent job of making sense of this confusion, showing how we got to this point, making concrete suggestions towards syncretizing the discplines and promoting his side of a surprisingly vitriolic argument. Those who can enjoy a good academic punch-up will find much of amusement and interest here. It has to be one of the best of the genre!
  The book also gives a good idea of what archaeology is actually about, as well as an excellent account of what we know of the Iron Age in the area at present. One does not have to agree with all his conclusions or need for all of his carefully structured "hermaneutics" to find the book readable, interesting and of enormous value.
  I once worked on Dever's excavation at Gezer. Although low on the totem pole, I came there from  rigorous training in prehistoric archaeology and I could see that the archaeological standards were up to the best of its time. The number of people involved in attributing levels, reading pottery, etc. would have made it virtually impossible to "fudge" anything. Furthermore, the feeling of academic integrity that came from Dever and his close associates was clear. It motivates this book and is not a pose.
1799690
It's no wonder Wheat Belly made #1 on the NY Times bestseller list. Well researched and documented studies should convince the greatest of skeptics to see merit in this book.  Dr. Davis' patient stories are further evidence that eating wheat-free might be worth the effort.  Give it a try for 3 weeks as he often suggests to his patients.  What do you have to lose?!  I decided to do just that and, while I don't need to lose weight, found I quickly lost inches in the midsection.  More importantly to me, I feel better.  Most of the aches and pains of osteoarthritis are gone.  Like many other reviewers, I don't have as great a need to snack.  Not eating my "go to" wheat snacks I've learning to be more thoughtful about what I eat between meals.

I found Dr. Davis' explanation about what has happened to wheat since the 1950s interesting reading too.  To think what geneticists have done by developing new strains of wheat is alarming. Now I read and research on line articles about how so many of our foods come from GMO grown seeds.  I am more carefully reading labels and buying more organic foods plus making more from scratch as did everyone before all the canned and processed foods beginning in the middle of the 20th century.  I'd been interested the alkaline-acidic balance for some time.  Dr. Davis explains in his book how alkaline our diets are if we eat wheat plus meat and dairy and how bad this is for our health.
3633504
Wheat Belly: Lose the Wheat, Lose the Weight, and Find Your Path Back to Health

By William Davis, MD

ISBN: 978-1-60961-154-5 (Rodale Books, 2011)

This book should persuade us all to eliminate wheat from our diet. It is an unhealthy whole grain! Although the cardiologist author is guilty of a little hyperbole, he makes an excellent case that consumption of wheat is the main cause of obesity and diabetes in the United States, along with other inflammatory conditions such as arthritis and many skin disorders. Wheat is the only grain that crosses the blood-brain barrier, which causes appetite stimulation and an addictive response in the brain. The author presents scientific data explaining his thesis and case histories showing disease resolved once wheat consumption is halted. Immediate weight loss occurs when wheat is eliminated from the diet and obesity disappears along with the inflammation it causes. Diabetes and cardiovascular disease are then reversed.

Sheryl Sanchez, L.Ac., Heavenly Herbs and Acupuncture
3926716
This is a book for thoughtful people willing to suspend what the media has told us are the answers about Fascism. The author distinguishes Fascists from Nazis and, contrary to what some "professional" reviewers would have you believe, does not simply label Liberals as Fascists, but rather explains how classic liberalism was hijacked and transformed into the "Progressive" movement which is at its roots fascist in nature.
This was written before Barack Obama was elected, and is somewhat prophetic.
It is flawed by a title and cover illustration that take away from the serious nature of the discussion, but otherwise is worth buying, reading, and sharing.
2192028
J. Philip Wogaman's latest book, From the Eye of the Storm, is, as they say in the military, a target-rich environment. That a prominent Protestant ethicist and the pastor of the First Family's own Foundry United Methodist  Church in Washington, D.C., would see fit to remark on the moral or  pastoral dimensions of the presidential crisis provokes no qualms. That a  pastor would attempt to critique issues of politics, law, and justice  prompts some misgivings. That Wogaman would argue for the imposition of his  own peculiar theology and pastoral method on these issues, quite simply,  invites ridicule.
 If we are to trust Wogaman's argument (to use the  term liberally), the only authentically Christian rebuke politicians can  render against a man who took it upon himself, in the hallowed halls of  justice, to define his own meaning of truth is a censure resolution filled  with harsh-though not too judgmental!-words about what a bad, bad thing he  has done.
 Words, as it turns out, mere words, are the only things  Clinton's apologists, Wogaman among them, can offer in his defense. Rather  than using the language of race, class, or economics to elicit the typical  emotional responses on Clinton's behalf, Wogaman's rhetoric takes on a  thin, Christian veneer. Take his use of the words "love" and "forgive" and  their variations: In his 139-page book, he mentions "love," or some  variation of the word, 140 times. References to "forgive" creep up in 75  different passages. This linguistic deluge is rather numbing in effect,  like having a blinding light shined in your face for several days straight.  Called aggressive marketing by some, this type of persuasion goes under a  more fitting name: propaganda. And propaganda of this kind has played no  small role in the polarization of the public arena. Rational debate has  been forced aside by unrelenting sloganism that has less sophistication  than a Coke vs. Pepsi taste test challenge.
 Wogaman does present one  justification for counseling the nation to reject impeachment, and that  justification takes the form of an analogy representing the two paths  America can take in response to the crisis:
The most important issue  posed by the presidential crisis had become increasingly clear to me: Will  we be a society that is grounded in compassion and a generous spirit-as  exemplified by the theme of the White House prayer breakfast and the  response by the religious leaders? Or will we allow ourselves to be  increasingly hard-hearted, as exemplified by the Starr report and the  manner of its presentation to the nation?
Wogaman leaves no doubt in  which direction he would shepherd us. In situations in which law and love  conflict, he says, love must prevail. Just so, but do love and law  conflict? In the gospel of Matthew, Christ, who also reminds us that love  is supreme, said of law:
Do not imagine that I have come to abolish the  Law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to complete them. I  tell you solemnly, till Heaven and earth disappear, not one dot, not one  little stroke, shall disappear from the Law until its purpose is achieved.  (5:17-18)
Wogaman's call for a spirit of forgiveness and  non-judgmentalism is undercut by his own blatant judgmentalism and  accusations of "malice." Of Kenneth Starr and supporters of Clinton's  removal, the best he can bring himself to say is "a generous spirit is not  altogether lacking," while "those who want to follow the path of  forgiveness" are not "altogether saintly." More amusing still was his  statement regarding his fellow participants on a political talk show:  "There was a fair amount of self-righteousness floating in the air, if I  can say this in a non-judgmental way." Indeed.
 Of course, one could  address further hypocrisies, inconsistencies, and absurdities Wogaman  thrusts upon the reader on the president's behalf, but to do so would lend  a credence to his tract that it does not deserve.
3339602
The author of this book defines a "genetic ceiling" for a variety of crop to be a situation (such as the need for growing the crop in arid environments) where standard breeding is intractable but where genetic engineering can step in to successfully solve the problem at hand (such as the introduction of foreign genes in the crop so as to make it hardy in such environments). Without giving a "cookbook" for how to implement genetic engineering through transgenic strategies, the author's goal is to make readers more aware of the need for biodiversity as it relates to the miniscule number of actual food crops cultivated at the present time: rice, wheat, maize, and soybeans. To depend on so few poses a threat, considering the world's population at the present time and its growth in the near future. But the goal of biodiversity must be cognizant as to the dangers of introducing species to environments in which they are not native, or the inadvertent introduction of `feral' organisms (those domesticated species that have escaped domestication and returned to the wild state). "Gene flow" therefore is an issue that must not be taken lightly, even to those individuals, such as this reviewer, who are die-hard advocates of genetic engineering and transgenic strategies.

Even though the author is not presenting a collection of recipes for repairing the problems brought about by "glass ceilings" the reader can extract a problem-constraint-strategy pattern throughout the book. Examples of this include:

Problem: To use straw for producing meat and fuels.
Constraint: Straw is difficult for ruminants to digest and only about 20% efficiency for conversion to ethanol.
Strategy: Use RNA interference to modify the lignin and cellulose content in order to increase digestibility.

Problem: Papaya is highly susceptible to papaya ringspot virus.
Constraint: Metabolic pathways for inducing disease-fighting phytoalexins are very complex.
Strategy: Transform the VST gene encoding stilbene synthase into papaya.

Many more of these kinds of examples abound in the book, along with in-depth discussion on the risks of ferality and gene flow into existing populations.

Clearly the author is fed up with the irrationality and propaganda of many groups opposed to genetic engineering. His common sense approach to the issues will speak to the choir but will probably not dissuade those who are members of these groups. But sustained information flow from the advocates of genetic engineering, with real evidence from scientific field experiments may persuade the regulatory agencies of the viability and safety of transgenic crops. Still though, it is a disconcerting development that not only must a war be fought against hunger and disease, but also one against hysteria and misinformation.
2230314
This book is written in lay language easily understood by persons who do not have science backgrounds. It is an in depth summary of more than 70 years of research by the author on the lack of a role of cholesterol in coronary heart disease. It discusses the misguided efforts to lower serum cholesterol levels by low cholesterol diets and drugs. He points out that there is no correlation between serum cholesterol levels and incidence of atherosclerosis.
The book outlines the correlation between trans fat in the US diet and increases in coronary heart disease.
The author advocates a total ban on trans fats and has petitioned the USDA for such a ban.
The book succeeds in achieving its goal of "separating scientific fact fro nutritional fiction" about what we eat.
1110582
The gist of the book is: political discourse tends to run along three axes, which are incommensurable. Liberals tend to judge along an oppressor-oppressed axis, Conservatives along a barbarian-civilization axis, Libertarians along a coercion-freedom axis. The purpose of the book is not to deconstruct and criticize what he sees as the dominant heuristics of each group, but to use them to help readers get into their ideological opposition's shoes.

The strong point of this book is in trying to put the reader into his or her ideological opponents' shoes. He brings up the ideological turing test (created by Bryan Caplan) which asks: if you were put in a room with your ideological others, could you pass as one of them? Psychology finds that, on average, liberals think they can make better conservatives than conservatives, and vice versa. Neither is right.

Now on to the parts of the book I disagreed with. Kling compares the diverging languages to an 'audible' in football: a purposeful confusion of signs to make sure the opposition doesn't know what is going on. This seems farfetched to me. Diverging language among groups that are so large, tends to be an unintentional process that indicates that there are few contacts between groups. Polite society has politics as one of its taboos, and people tend to view media outlets that they agree with in the first place; this means that the network of people actually using political language in conversation is very fractured, just what you would expect from people with little real contact (and strong enforcement within each social group).

His portrayal of the explanations for the financial crisis seemed a little problematic. The movie "Inside Job," which seems to be a very Progressive explanation of the financial crisis, is told with a strong appeal to the barbarian-civilization axis. The director chronicles the 'depravity' of bankers, interviewing former prostitutes and others who can attest to the barbarousness of bankers. The barbarian-civilization heuristic seems to be somewhat common in Progressive discussions: witness discussions about gay marriage or creationism in schools. Their ideological opponents aren't oppressors (though in the former there is some of that), but barbarians who refuse to embrace civilization--a civilization that embraces science, and sees traditional hierarchies as barbaric (as well as oppressive).

These differences in interpretation notwithstanding, this is an excellent and quick read. It is a rare duck that tries to improve political discourse rather than score points for the author's team. There have been critics who argue that this book doesn't advance the academic literature on the cultural theory of preference formation, and so on, but these critics miss the point. As James Buchanan (the economist, not the president) was fond of saying, it takes repeated iterations to force alien concepts on reluctant minds. There are few concepts more alien than respecting your political opponents, and this is an excellent iteration of it.
1043146
This isn't a diet book...it doesn't contain pages of meal plans and shopping lists, exercises, or day-to-day schedules. It's a book that covers both scientific research and the author's (a cardiologist) anecdotal observations about a diet containing wheat. Much of it discusses the affects of wheat on the body for anyone, not just celiacs, in great detail. He offers suggestions to work around wheat, but it is not a complete source if you're looking for a do-it-yourself lifestyle of wheat-free eating. I've read Dr. Davis's blog for years and watched how he has gone from 'what's this thing that wheat's doing to everyone' to 'wheat is a bad thing for the modern man to ingest', and it has been enlightening and educational. His book is also. I had hoped it would have more lifestyle examples of how to substitute wheat and grains meals, and more easy-to-make recipes, but it is still a worthwhile read. He gets a little out there in medical terminology at times, but it is still understandable. I highly recommend in addition to this book that the reader locate an online forum such as LowCarbFriends or some other discussion group for recipe resources and support if one is thinking about taking wheat out of their diet. I am convinced Dr. Davis's hunch is correct - that wheat is not good for us - because of my own experiences in eating it and not eating it. I encourage everyone who struggles with their weight and/or blood sugar to take charge of their own nutrition (don't leave your health to the USDA) and try this.
2885652
The 2016 election brought to the forefront a long simmering anger in rural America. Unfortunately, most of the analysis of that underlying rage has been overly simplistic and dismissive. This is an exception to that trend. This is one of the few pieces Ive read that doesnt summarily dismiss the point of view of rural America as bigoted and uneducated. I highly recommend this book especially for those liberals (like myself) who have struggled to understand the rationale that lead so many of our fellow citizens to vote for a demagogue. By the end of the book, while I vehemently disagree with the end results, I can honestly say that I better comprehend the fundamental issues at play. If there is to be a way forward collectively beyond the ultra-partisan divide, surely it must begin with a better understanding of the core issues that are dividing us. This book is a useful tool towards a better understanding.
3901359
I think that Dr. Davis presents a very logical case and clear benefits for avoiding wheat. The inflammation caused by the ingestion of modern wheat can effect all of us, not just those with celiac disease who need to avoid the protein to prevent the body from attacking itself. In addition to the weight benefits alluded to in the title, he also points out how avoiding wheat can help people with many other health complaints can benefit from avoiding the grain. Very enlightening on many levels.
510097
Author/economist Eberstadt makes a compelling argument for the reasons for this somewhat publicly unrecognized unemployment phenomenon, and what to do about it. A bit wonky in part, the book can be a relatively quick read (if you diligently avoid getting lost in the weeds), or a well documented economics course of study. Presenting differing views, in what amounts to peer review right in the work itself, is clarifying to some degree and quite refreshing. Written during the just past presidential campaign,  the information contained in this work makes one hopeful that the problems addressed therein -- a 50+ year spiralling trend --  can finally be turned around.
2413023
Could wheat, hybridized for increased baking-friendly gluten content, be the principal culprit fueling our epidemics of obesity, diabetes, celiac disease, and a host of other inflammatory maladies? Absolutely! argues Dr. Davis, who makes a compelling case for getting wheat--above all else--out of your diet. Forget that low-fat, heavy on the whole grains mantra that dates back to the mid-80s, just as "new" wheat had achieved its bulked up gluten content. Even more than our sedentary lifestyles and high-fructose corn syrup--both significant contributors to our health crisis--wheat stands apart as the mother of inflammation. And yet, last December, when I was diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer, both my primary care provider and my urologist/oncologist recommended I "eat a lot of greens" (sound advice) and strictly adhere to a low-fat diet replete with whole grains (really bad advice!).

Since reading "Wheat Belly" (and "Grain Brain"--similar line of reasoning, but by a different author) I've been handing out copies to my relatives and recommending the book to almost everyone I know. Because Dr. Davis, who cites numerous convincing studies, is only one among many experts making the case against gluton's insidious effects on our health. And, unfortunately, many of our mainstream providers are "20 years behind the times" when it comes to nutrition. It's a bonus that Davis writes like a gifted journalist, infusing his tightly-argued thesis with humor and anecdotes that make this book a "page turner"--a rare and wonderful quality for a "health book."

 If we Americans hope to avoid the horrible suffering and quality of life nightmares that stem from epidemic diabetes and obesity--as well as avoiding bankrupting ourselves with the associated medical costs--we'd do well to read this book and spread the word to everyone we know and love.
1761574
We're a suburban family who gets the papers thrown over the front fence.  We changed to the Australian a couple of years ago and have been amazed at how many other families in our circle have done the same.  The Oz is a great read. Interesting and challenging with worldwide coverage and articles from Wall St Journal, South China M Post etc.  Sometimes I agree with them, sometimes I thoroughly disagree; but I just don't see diverse and balanced discussion happening in other media.  News by comparison is vibrant and quirky.

I think there is a growing trend to oppose contrarian discussion and open debate.  In this essay the arguments appear not always as intellectual but provide a particular view of morality. For example Nazi peril analogies are used to position claims yet balance and rigour is expected from everyone else.
The question of forming one's own opinion is not sufficiently explored.
1357811
Very Interesting and a lot of good information.  Trying to cut out the wheat, not difficult with the bread, cookies, cakes, and such are another thing.  My sister has high praise for this type of eating and since we have some of the same issues, I'm giving it a try.
3355914
From the outset, I should say that this book is an important contribution to a debate in Australia that is often ill-informed and, as the author points out, usually presented in a manner that is biased by strong commercial, political, or other vested interests.

I was initially disappointed to see that this book had been self-published as it does give immediate rise to suspicions that the facts may not hold up under close scrutiny.  It also invites the question of whether it was self-published because no publishing house would lend their name to the views expressed, or whether it was done for financial reasons.  I have no issue with it being self-published for either of these reasons, but it does open the door to questions of doubt.  When you are putting forward an argument based on facts, it is important that these facts are incontrovertible and the attention to detail is beyond question.  Small editorial errors such as referring to the National Australia Bank as National Australian Bank (page 8), or the Governor of the Reserve Bank as "the chairman" (page 201) are minor in the overall context, but as I say, they do invite criticism that the editorial standard is not up to scratch which in turn opens doubt about the veracity of the other (more significant) facts.

However, if one looks past these small deficiencies to the "guts" of the argument, it remains a compelling story, told in a cohesive, plausible, and well structured fashion.  The author is to be applauded for putting his views on such a passionate topic in writing and open to scrutiny.  He has said what many others are thinking but are often afraid to express because the vested interests response is one of open derision and ridicule.  Just ask well respected people such as Gerard Minack or Jeremy Grantham what happens when you take the opposite side of the argument on the housing market in Australia.

Reading Australia:  Boom to Bust was a bit like reading Michael Lewis' "The Big Short" BEFORE the event.  Even if Mr David's views do not come to pass in the time frame he predicts, there can be little doubt that the central premise of his book (reversion to mean) will eventuate.  Having just seven years ago witnessed the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, it beggars belief that Australia finds itself in the position it does today.  We need the coming economic collapse as it will teach us lessons that will hopefully stand us in better stead for future challenges.

Having seen China's 3rd, 4th, and 5th tier cities first hand in the past year, Mr David's observations on the property bubble there are, in my view, spot on.  One has to see with their own eyes the extent of the over-construction to truly understand the magnitude of the problem they are facing.  However, it takes either an outsider coming in to the country, or as in the case of the author, returning home after an extended absence to see and comprehend the extent of the problem.  The local population (be it in Australia or China) can't or won't acknowledge the problem as it has developed slowly over a long period of time such that the situation they now see is considered "normal".  This is akin to the "boiling frog" anecdote.  When I asked local Chinese whether the row after row (entire suburbs in some cases) of empty dwellings was of concern to them, their response was that it had been like this for a long time and was therefore accepted as normal!

Overall, an excellent contribution to the debate and one that I hope will at the very least give readers pause to consider what COULD eventuate in Australia under some extremely plausible CURRENT conditions.