I had absolutely no idea what this was really about, despite the super long subtitle, but it ended up being really interesting. While I generally feel that touting anti-medical establishment sentiments at all is an extremely dangerous line to toe, Bell balances his experience and emotions pretty well, considering what he went through.
Yes, it's important to be your own advocate when discussing serious medical conditions with healthcare workers, and yes, it's super frustrating to have your symptoms and illness reduced to "anxiety" when you know full well that's not what's going on. AND, it's also true that if doctors and other diagnosticians don't know what's going on with you, they start with treatment based on the primary symptom and go from there. This is basic deduction, and in most cases this course of treatment is helpful eventually. Bell is not inherently anti-medicine though, there were just a few parts where his frustration was aimed at the medical institution and it made me a little uneasy.
A popular review of this book expresses the lack of citations, but I'm not convinced this is a huge problem here. Alan Bell is a lawyer, and he understandably cites cases throughout this book wherein an institution is found responsible (or not) for the chronic environmental poisoning of multiple people. As a toxic torts attorney, aside from getting people the help they deserved after such poisonings, one of his goals was to increase awareness of the lack of study and legislation that lead to regulation of chemicals in America. He states several times throughout the book that accompanying scientific research is lacking in environmental toxicity because pharmaceutical companies can't make money off of it (a well-known problem in the scientific community). So, there's likely a lack of great citeable literature out there in the first place. And this is a memoir after all. However, this was published in 2017 so I really hope there's more research now.
There are a few statistics where I'd have liked to see citations though, for example, when he writes that "worldwide, 70% of all deaths can be attributed to environmental factors" (or something equally alarming). This stat was unbelievably high and the claim conspicuously vague. Does this include things like malaria from mosquitoes, food insecurity from climate change, etc. Or, is this stat supposed to be just effects of environmental poisoning? If the former, including the stat at all is extremely misleading given the nature of this entire book (the latter).
Another "hmmm" moment for me was basically any time he wrote that his 7-year-old daughter was essentially acting like a 30-year-old woman — urging him to see new doctors, approaching strangers for contact information, and commenting on environmental segregation, etc. I love kids and they're brilliant in their own ways, but no 7-year-old kid that I've ever known is that self-sacrificial or well versed in modern race relations lol. So, I suspect some of the family drama was embellished a little.
My advice? It's worth a read, but take it with a pinch of salt. The important takeaways are that our environments have an effect on our bodies and health, and there's a huge lack in awareness and research in this area.