What do you think?
Rate this book
Cellular and Molecular Immunology
The new edition of this text continues the tradition of delivering an accessible, engaging, and current introduction to this essential subject. It describes the principles of basic and applied immunology in a concise, straightforward manner, while incorporating a wealth of current information. Over 330 new, full-color illustrations help readers grasp important information quickly and easily.
553 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1991
164 people are currently reading
906 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews
December 21, 2022
this book is my villain origin story.
October 24, 2023
Normalmente no añado los libros que leo para la universidad, pero como me maté leyendo de este, que cuente para algo jajsja. Igual el libro está bastante bueno y se entiende re bien.
January 23, 2015
very powerful source for students studing immunology
Read
May 3, 2020یاد خاطرهای افتادم که همه بچههای کلاس به دکتر کاظمی الکی اعتراف کردیم این کتاب هیچوقت ازمون جدا نشده
Read
May 23, 2024IM FREEEEEE FROM JAIL
July 21, 2024
In 1994 I bought my copy of the first edition of Abul K Abbas et al.'s Cellular and Molecular Immunology, copyrighted three years earlier. This reference text had proved invaluable to me during my work in histocompatibility in support of tissue transplantation. But a great deal of advancement in cellular and molecular biology has happened since those earlier times. The major impetus for the enormous expansion of our knowledge was work on HIV, followed by the Human Genome Project and other associated omics studies, development of next generation sequencing, in our improved understanding of oncological processes, and in the still nascent field of epigenetics. My fond memories of the first edition therefore made me very eager to read the 10th edition of 2022 and to see how far we've come.
A common trope frequently repeated about the Human Genome Project is that while we finally found a parts list of how to make a human, it reveals next to nothing about how those pieces are assembled and work together in health and disease. I submit this problem is the Mount Everest confronting all biologists at this stage of the scientific endeavor. Most scientists, it seems to me, are very narrowly focused on their own intensely complex projects and scarcely have time to look up and see the harrowing bigger picture. This is not a bad thing: at this point in science very close scrutiny paid to all the moving parts is vital. But one consequence is that it becomes a serious challenge to discriminate between the near-trivial minutiae and more significant insights. We accordingly get fact-crammed books that are overloaded with both kinds of insights (doubtless more that's near-trivial, far less that's significantly insightful), and only with time will we be able to more fittingly winnow the wheat from the chaff. This is all probably an unavoidable outcome of the dispersive time in which we are living. It may be that artificial intelligence will be able to distill out myopic human biases and lead us out of this prevailing chaotic wilderness. For now though we must work with what we have.
Biologists are notoriously bad at coining useful terminology, having little or no sense of the importance of syntax or etymology. Whether consciously or no (and usually no), we rely on context all the time to infer meaning in conversation or in text, and the source of context is often related to either how the words are assembled in sequence (syntax) or in what other, more familiar words they remind us of (etymology). Biologists ignore such niceties and give important concepts sterile names like NF-κB, TLR, Th1, Th2, Th17, Tfh, CD16a (also known as FcγRIIIA), ADCC, CD247 (also known as TCR ζ chain), c-KIT ligand, TSLP, interferon-λs (also known as type III IFNs), and so on ad nauseam. This jargon is not, as is sometimes claimed, invented to conceal meaning from the layman, but has a more prosaic and all too human source: egotism. Names given by original sources tend to stick, even when the original assumed meaning of a name is later proved either wrong or a minor feature of a much broader physiological activity. That is to say, even if a covert etymology is present, it is often enough misleading. Toll was originally named for a gene involved in fruit fly development. Mammalian homologs to the Toll protein, which play a central and vital role in innate defense against viral invaders, thus became Toll-like receptors, or TLR, second in my list above: a role far more important than their relatively obscure original mention in fruit fly ontogeny. So it goes.
We can't blame Abbas et al. for the syntax- and etymology-free jargon with which the 10th edition is copiously littered, but this philological junkyard necessarily prejudices this book, and others like it, against comprehension by mere mortals. One simply cannot hold in one's mind all the diverse and unsystematic assemblages of molecular structures, molecular families, main cellular expression tissues or cells, and known or proposed functions of 369 or so cell markers distinguished only by the letters CD followed by a number, for example. The same kind of problem exists with interleukins, interferons, cytokines, etc. On the other hand, we can blame Abbas et al. for other shortcomings unique to this volume, which unnecessarily interfere with understanding. Unfortunately, the 10th edition is painfully, annoyingly, and irritatingly repetitive: in style, it is far from user-friendly. In the preface this repetition was presented as a feature, but don't be fooled: it's a bug. But even the repetition is nowhere near as annoying, irritating and positively infuriating as the recurrent tic of inserting a parenthetical "(described later)" on every second or third page of the text, particularly when what is to be "(described later)" crops up, more often than not, a few hundred pages further on, by which time you've encountered so many "(described laters)" that you've given up on trying to keep track of them all. This is sloppy writing in open rebellion against the usual goal of an author's attempt to communicate with his reader, who therefore only wants to fling the book against the far wall with every new iteration of "(described later)". This sin is so frequent in the text that if we take Abbas et al. literally, as we expect to do in nonfiction, then we cannot fully understand any of the book until we've read absolutely all of it and, presumably, have taken the relevance and meaning of all those infernal "(described laters)" onboard. Gah! Awful.
I come from a background in which I think immunology is about the coolest thing ever. A good immunology text ought to convey the majesty, almost the magical wonder, of the human immune system. Unfortunately, the 10th edition does the opposite of that. I read this book cover to cover and found it unbearably repetitive, with dull, tedious writing. The effect was often soporific. My guess is that after 10 editions of adding layer upon layer to the original skeleton, it's time to rethink the project in its entirety, scrap the old model and start from scratch. I'd also add that one of the things I loved about the 1st edition was the stylized line-drawing graphics: it was always easy to immediately recognize which cell types were involved in various intercellular interactions. The fancy, colored graphics now in use are far worse and are not immediately recognizable, again interfering with comprehension.
I really, really expected to like this book. I did not. This was a much more difficult slog than, say, was reading Finnegans Wake, where the etymology at least is always present, even if it takes a lifetime to dredge it forth. As I took some time here to point out, the complexity is not entirely the fault of the authors, but sadly for me, enough fault does lie at their doorstep to disallow a favorable review of the book.
A common trope frequently repeated about the Human Genome Project is that while we finally found a parts list of how to make a human, it reveals next to nothing about how those pieces are assembled and work together in health and disease. I submit this problem is the Mount Everest confronting all biologists at this stage of the scientific endeavor. Most scientists, it seems to me, are very narrowly focused on their own intensely complex projects and scarcely have time to look up and see the harrowing bigger picture. This is not a bad thing: at this point in science very close scrutiny paid to all the moving parts is vital. But one consequence is that it becomes a serious challenge to discriminate between the near-trivial minutiae and more significant insights. We accordingly get fact-crammed books that are overloaded with both kinds of insights (doubtless more that's near-trivial, far less that's significantly insightful), and only with time will we be able to more fittingly winnow the wheat from the chaff. This is all probably an unavoidable outcome of the dispersive time in which we are living. It may be that artificial intelligence will be able to distill out myopic human biases and lead us out of this prevailing chaotic wilderness. For now though we must work with what we have.
Biologists are notoriously bad at coining useful terminology, having little or no sense of the importance of syntax or etymology. Whether consciously or no (and usually no), we rely on context all the time to infer meaning in conversation or in text, and the source of context is often related to either how the words are assembled in sequence (syntax) or in what other, more familiar words they remind us of (etymology). Biologists ignore such niceties and give important concepts sterile names like NF-κB, TLR, Th1, Th2, Th17, Tfh, CD16a (also known as FcγRIIIA), ADCC, CD247 (also known as TCR ζ chain), c-KIT ligand, TSLP, interferon-λs (also known as type III IFNs), and so on ad nauseam. This jargon is not, as is sometimes claimed, invented to conceal meaning from the layman, but has a more prosaic and all too human source: egotism. Names given by original sources tend to stick, even when the original assumed meaning of a name is later proved either wrong or a minor feature of a much broader physiological activity. That is to say, even if a covert etymology is present, it is often enough misleading. Toll was originally named for a gene involved in fruit fly development. Mammalian homologs to the Toll protein, which play a central and vital role in innate defense against viral invaders, thus became Toll-like receptors, or TLR, second in my list above: a role far more important than their relatively obscure original mention in fruit fly ontogeny. So it goes.
We can't blame Abbas et al. for the syntax- and etymology-free jargon with which the 10th edition is copiously littered, but this philological junkyard necessarily prejudices this book, and others like it, against comprehension by mere mortals. One simply cannot hold in one's mind all the diverse and unsystematic assemblages of molecular structures, molecular families, main cellular expression tissues or cells, and known or proposed functions of 369 or so cell markers distinguished only by the letters CD followed by a number, for example. The same kind of problem exists with interleukins, interferons, cytokines, etc. On the other hand, we can blame Abbas et al. for other shortcomings unique to this volume, which unnecessarily interfere with understanding. Unfortunately, the 10th edition is painfully, annoyingly, and irritatingly repetitive: in style, it is far from user-friendly. In the preface this repetition was presented as a feature, but don't be fooled: it's a bug. But even the repetition is nowhere near as annoying, irritating and positively infuriating as the recurrent tic of inserting a parenthetical "(described later)" on every second or third page of the text, particularly when what is to be "(described later)" crops up, more often than not, a few hundred pages further on, by which time you've encountered so many "(described laters)" that you've given up on trying to keep track of them all. This is sloppy writing in open rebellion against the usual goal of an author's attempt to communicate with his reader, who therefore only wants to fling the book against the far wall with every new iteration of "(described later)". This sin is so frequent in the text that if we take Abbas et al. literally, as we expect to do in nonfiction, then we cannot fully understand any of the book until we've read absolutely all of it and, presumably, have taken the relevance and meaning of all those infernal "(described laters)" onboard. Gah! Awful.
I come from a background in which I think immunology is about the coolest thing ever. A good immunology text ought to convey the majesty, almost the magical wonder, of the human immune system. Unfortunately, the 10th edition does the opposite of that. I read this book cover to cover and found it unbearably repetitive, with dull, tedious writing. The effect was often soporific. My guess is that after 10 editions of adding layer upon layer to the original skeleton, it's time to rethink the project in its entirety, scrap the old model and start from scratch. I'd also add that one of the things I loved about the 1st edition was the stylized line-drawing graphics: it was always easy to immediately recognize which cell types were involved in various intercellular interactions. The fancy, colored graphics now in use are far worse and are not immediately recognizable, again interfering with comprehension.
I really, really expected to like this book. I did not. This was a much more difficult slog than, say, was reading Finnegans Wake, where the etymology at least is always present, even if it takes a lifetime to dredge it forth. As I took some time here to point out, the complexity is not entirely the fault of the authors, but sadly for me, enough fault does lie at their doorstep to disallow a favorable review of the book.
May 25, 2018
Excellent coverage with one shortcoming; I am on SSDI but paid for the eighth edition as the ninth edition was about to be published (I have to survive on $1,250 per month)
Excellent breadth of coverage generally speaking. And the book explains immunologic concepts lucidly. My primary reasons for providing a four-star review instead of five stars are (1) that the book does a good job addressing the regulatory role of the kynurenine pathway as a key component of immunoregulatory tolerance, but it does not address the crucial role of excessive and imbalanced activation of IDO in causing extreme excitotoxicity, severe oxidative stress, severe impairment of antioxidant defenses, and devastating immune system dysfunction in a wide range of treatment-refractory, chronic infections, in a wide range of neurodegenerative disorders, and in a wide range of psychiatric disorders; (2) also, I bought this book recently, but just discovered that the ninth edition was in the final stages of preparation when I paid more than I can afford for the eighth edition. I have to get by on $1,249.00 per month in Social Security Disability Income (the equivalent of $7.80 per hour for a 40 hour work week. There is no way I can possibly afford to pay for the ninth edition after recently paying for the eighth edition as the ninth edition was about to be published. I feel taken advantage of by being offered the eighth edition as the ninth edition was about to be published.
Excellent breadth of coverage generally speaking. And the book explains immunologic concepts lucidly. My primary reasons for providing a four-star review instead of five stars are (1) that the book does a good job addressing the regulatory role of the kynurenine pathway as a key component of immunoregulatory tolerance, but it does not address the crucial role of excessive and imbalanced activation of IDO in causing extreme excitotoxicity, severe oxidative stress, severe impairment of antioxidant defenses, and devastating immune system dysfunction in a wide range of treatment-refractory, chronic infections, in a wide range of neurodegenerative disorders, and in a wide range of psychiatric disorders; (2) also, I bought this book recently, but just discovered that the ninth edition was in the final stages of preparation when I paid more than I can afford for the eighth edition. I have to get by on $1,249.00 per month in Social Security Disability Income (the equivalent of $7.80 per hour for a 40 hour work week. There is no way I can possibly afford to pay for the ninth edition after recently paying for the eighth edition as the ninth edition was about to be published. I feel taken advantage of by being offered the eighth edition as the ninth edition was about to be published.
December 31, 2023
A comprehensive textbook of immunology. It is considered one of the most authoritative ones. I liked it a lot, especially because of its beautiful and illuminating illustrations and lucid prose. This book is a complete package for anyone interested in getting a solid grounding in the field and it will help people at all levels, whether one is an undergraduate student or a seasoned researcher.
That being said, there are two things that I found lacking in the book. One is almost a complete lack of historical aspects of how the science of immunology was developed. None of the people who made the contributions to this amazing field of scientific inquiry are mentioned. The second is that many times, the authors discuss the minutiae of various concepts and can make a learner miss the forest for the trees.
These are minor points, though. Immunology can be a notoriously difficult subject for both new and experienced learners. On the whole, you cannot go wrong with this superb, well-written textbook.
That being said, there are two things that I found lacking in the book. One is almost a complete lack of historical aspects of how the science of immunology was developed. None of the people who made the contributions to this amazing field of scientific inquiry are mentioned. The second is that many times, the authors discuss the minutiae of various concepts and can make a learner miss the forest for the trees.
These are minor points, though. Immunology can be a notoriously difficult subject for both new and experienced learners. On the whole, you cannot go wrong with this superb, well-written textbook.
December 14, 2007
I thought the organization of this text was severely lacking. Diagrams were good but it took a long time to figure out the organization system.
June 13, 2012
RRrrr.. engga ngerti ><
February 21, 2015
i am student of laboratory science and study this book frequently for pro expert exam. i think its good for enjoying from good-knowing immunosystem
February 17, 2017
It's a good book and it gives a clear insight on the pathological reactions that take place during inflammation, and also which body cells become activated.
August 29, 2023
De puta coña que buenas ilustraciones asi da gusto leer libros
August 9, 2024
يبقى مرجع "عباس-Abbas"، كما يحلو لطلبة وأساتذة المناعة والحساسية والميكروبيولوجيا أن يدعوه نسبةً لمؤلفه، هو المرجع الأكثر وضوحاً بين مراجع المناعة. لغته سهلة وواضحة، والرسومات التوضيحية تقوم بوظيفتها على أفضل وجه، هذا بالإضافة إلى شموليته حيث يستعرض كل ما يخص علم المناعة المعقد بدايةً من أساسيات علم المناعة إلى الأمراض المناعية وأمراض الحساسية شديدة الصلة بالمناعة. لذا فهو مرجع ممتاز لطلبة الجامعات، ولطلبة الدراسات العليا، ولا غنى عنه لدى الأساتذة أيضاً، فهو خير رفيق لكل دارس ومهتم بعلم المناعة الممتع.
هناك أيضاً مرجع "Janeway" الواضح في لغته ورسوماته التي تعرفها على الفور من بالتة الألوان المستخدمة، وهي الألوان الرئيسة. أما مرجع "kuby" فهو أكثر تعقيداً وأكثر خوضاً في التفاصيل.
هناك أيضاً مرجع "Janeway" الواضح في لغته ورسوماته التي تعرفها على الفور من بالتة الألوان المستخدمة، وهي الألوان الرئيسة. أما مرجع "kuby" فهو أكثر تعقيداً وأكثر خوضاً في التفاصيل.
May 17, 2024
No se que haría sin ti
February 19, 2025
damn immunologia
October 25, 2025
después de casi suicidarme con esta asignatura tenía q meter el libro lmfao
de todas formas buen libro de texto se entiende bastante bien 👍👍👍
de todas formas buen libro de texto se entiende bastante bien 👍👍👍
August 12, 2024
imunologia para idiotas! acabou a matéria🙌🏻
January 9, 2025
traumatico ma l’ho letto quindi merita di essere caricato su goodreads
September 4, 2020
This almost did it for me, doing general pathology during med. School. Did I read it twice or thrice or was it just parts the third time? I wish I had more time then, before examination. It pulled me in and held me there. Still warm inside seeing it, 13 years later.
September 14, 2022
My Basic Library
I wish when I was in med school more than 40 years ago that medicine would have been taught this way Outstanding book as well as it's companion book "Basic Immunology". Andre
I wish when I was in med school more than 40 years ago that medicine would have been taught this way Outstanding book as well as it's companion book "Basic Immunology". Andre
December 30, 2014
A good book but needs work. I have read it a couple of years ago but I have added it now
Read
March 3, 2016I really wanted to read and require this as a source ebook library
Want to read
July 22, 2017not satisfied
August 31, 2017
Well written & clear though I prefer the more recent edition because I found it to be more thorough.
April 4, 2021
why is it so long. shorten the chapters. interesting tho.
April 19, 2021
adding this to my read list bc i literally read this cover to cover for my grad class so yeah lol it was legible and great infographics 3.5/5
May 18, 2022
Najbolja knjiga na medicini, hvala amerima sto ne kompliciraju!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews