Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

Stossel is certainly correct in claiming that much of today's "news" is aimed at boosting viewership through scary, often unwarranted, claims. Thus, putting some of these claims into a more objective perspective is valuable. Unfortunately, Stossel tries to cover too many areas, and thus the detail afforded each myth or lie is usually insufficient to credibly make the case, given the increasing need to distinguish between pseudo-science and truth. (No offense to Stossel intended; however, credibly refuting bogus claims is more easily said that done.) He begins by repeating the often-made point that absolute bans on DDT are counter-productive, and cost countless lives in Africa. The problem originated when Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring" reported that DDT caused bird eggshells to collapse because they were too thin; Stossel infers that the DDT was simply applied too densely, but offers no data. Needless fear of food irradiation is the next topic - Stossel tells us that government experts believe about 350 lives/year would be saved if only 50% of U.S. meat was irradiated to improve its shelf-life. Stossel, however, wanders away from reality when claiming that drug companies are not price gougers - that "the higher the price of drugs, the more good drugs we get." Apparently he is unaware that unbiased experts report that most new drugs are developed through government funding in government labs, and that European drug companies devote as high or higher proportion of revenues to research than those in America - despite price controls. Another silly Stossel stretch is claiming that "outsourcing creates American jobs" - in some cases, yes - however, credible research has concluded that several million U.S. manufacturing jobs were lost between '01 and '04. Stossel then wades in even deeper by stating "new jobs created via outsourcing are better" than those lost. (Census Bureau, and other data contradicts him.) Education is another Stossel target, and he is right on target here - mostly. However, trying to make his sub-point that government monopoly is a major/the problem by comparing U.S. pupil achievement with that in other nations WITH STATE-RUN SCHOOLS is a total non-sequitor; further, the evidence on charter schools is mixed, at best - far from the unqualified success promised. Incorporating Jay Greene's findings that inflation-adjusted per-pupil spending has doubled over the last 30 years, without improved pupil outcomes is useful, though would be improved by providing background on Professor Greene, the NAEP test involved, and Eric Hanushek's findings on class-size vs. pupil achievement (no relation). "Global warming probably won't cause storms, flooded coasts, and huge disruptions in climate" is another Stossel-laid egg. Hurricane Katrina, for example, gained most of its power from the warmer than normal Gulf of Mexico waters. Still another goof is "Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity's" effort to refute the claim that "more driving creates more pollution" - by trying to shift the emphasis to "it matters more what you drive." To a degree; but the original claim is still totally true, especially when carbon dioxide is included as a pollutant. Bottom Line: If you want insight on economics, read material written by university economists; for science insights, stick to material by (hopefully) unbiased scientists. Stossel is in over his head.