1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars
Great book, but repetitive, Jan 2 2012
I thought this was a great book, and was well researched. It provided deep insight into Dr. Snow's research on the Cholera epidemics of London, but I found it to be quite repetitive. The last 2 chapters or so are basically reiterations of what was already said and I found myself skipping many pages in this last section. Otherwise, a great read for any epidemiologist, scientist, or anyone interested in public health or history.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
Breaking the paradigm, Jan 15 2008
The story follows the cholera epidemic in the Soho district of London during the summer of 1854 which originated in a well on Broad Street. We know this through the investigations of two men, John Snow, a medical doctor and Henry Whitehead, a clergyman at the local church. If it was up to the members of the local health board, the story of the spread of cholera and the origin of the Broad Street epidemic would have been very different. It would have come from those noxious fumes created by an -overabundance of fecal matter, otherwise known as miasma, produced by people living within a densely populated area without the advantage of a proper sewage system. Yet, these two men fought against the collective will of the so-called experts to produce evidence that would forever change our understanding of how cholera is spread and in so doing, save the lives of thousands of their fellow citizenry. John Snow was sure that cholera was spread by water. Henry Whitehead was able to trace the origin of the contaminated water that caused the Broad Street epidemic because he knew the area and his congregation far better than Dr. Snow ever could. Mr. Johnson draws parallels between the cooperative effort of these two men and the realities of today where experts and citizenry work together to find solutions to problems that would otherwise be outside the capacity of any one individual.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars
Very engaging and interesting read, May 8 2010
I thoroughly enjoyed The Ghost Map and I strongly recommend it to anyone with an interest in medicine, infectious disease, history, or urbanization. In fact, it has excellent pacing and makes for an interesting "whodunnit" mystery-esque read even if those particular areas do not pique your interest. I had read about John Snow and the Broad Street pump before (in various epidemiology and community health textbooks) but Johnson's book provided a truly engaging and fascinating look into this seminal historical event that kept me turning the pages. Johnson introduces a number of very interesting characters central to the cholera outbreak and investigation and seamlessly takes the reader through the events of a few days in London with those characters. Overall, it is a well-researched, well-written book.
One of Johnson's greatest strengths is that he never lets the reader forget that this story took place in 1854 in one of the first metropolis' of the time - London. At several points throughout the book, it could have been easy to dismiss some of the various individuals in the narrative as crazy, stubborn, or simply stupid. Every time I found myself slipping towards those thoughts, however, Johnson would remind me of the historical context in which all of this was occurring. He does a wonderful job of contextualizing and grounding the historical account in the world of 1854 London.
My only critique of the book is that the epilogue moved slightly off topic and came across as much more hastily written and less well-researched than the rest of the book. Johnson seems to use the epilogue as a means to advance a few of his own personal ideas on urbanization, information-sharing, and terrorism that the historical narrative simply does not support very well. This does not take away from the main focus of the book at all, but I did finish the epilogue feeling a little bit confused, possibly as a result of having been bombarded with what I saw to be only tangentially-related arguments over the course of just a few pages.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No