Science and Inquiry discussion

For March 2026, we will be reading Pathogenesis: A History of the World in Eight Plagues by Jonathan Kennedy.

Please use this thread to post questions, comments, and reviews, at any time.

Is anyone else reading this? I've had a library copy since the end of February.

I just started it. The wait list at my library was pretty long. I love that he started off with references to both The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter. And then he argues against Yuval Noah Harari. Good stuff. But I'm not very far in.

This is next on my audio book list. I'm about 85 % done with my current book so should be able to begin soon.

I'm about 3/4 of the way through the book at this time, and will probably finish it soon.

Sticking with the first chapter for now, I was happy to see him take on Yuval Noah Harari’s assertion that there was a leap in Homo Sapiens cognition that led to their migration into Europe to compete/absorb/replace the Neanderthals . Kennedy's idea that the Homo Sapiens migration was enabled by a climate-driven increase in acquired immunities while Neanderthals had relatively lower immunity as thinly populated hunter/foragers seems reasonable. But he also does not reference any specific evidence, other than that's just how pathogens work. So it's just speculation versus speculation. Did I miss something?

I agree. I'm still not very far in. But that was also my objection to Harari. Lack of evidence. It seems to me Kennedy's evidence is a little more compelling -- DNA. But this is not my field, so I don't know how to judge it. And it's not quite direct.

I finished this a few days ago and I'm of two minds. On the one hand it's super comprehensive and written by an author with a PhD in sociology who now teaches global health. It's cited, there are some good sounding arguments, and it's engaging.

On the other hand, the "eight plagues" are actually time periods rather than specific pathogens, and the book is Eurocentric despite Kennedy calling out Eurocentrism in scientific theories. Additionally, it's advertised as a hard science book but it's more of a social science history book.

I've finished the book yesterday, and am still thinking about what I want to say in a review.

@Betsy: It's also not my field, but I think the DNA evidence he describes points strongly at the timeframe of the Homo Sapiens migration into Europe, rather than the "why then" of it.

@J. I also have some ambivalence about it being more of sociology/economics read than a science read. I would take what you say about Eurocentrism a step further, and call it Anglocentric - especially that chapter on the English Industrial Revolution.

Tomislav wrote: "I've finished the book yesterday, and am still thinking about what I want to say in a review.

@Betsy: It's also not my field, but I think the DNA evidence he describes points strongly at the timef..."

See, I appreciate a good social science as much as a hard science and think those topics are just as important for us to read in this group. My main issue was in how the book sets up the expectation of its content for the reader, which then does the work a disservice.

And regarding the Anglocentrism, honestly you're probably right to suggest it's actually worse than I wrote. Which again does the work such a disservice because the reader is expecting a history of "the world" not "the world insofar as it's part of the British Commonwealth".

The final chapter of the book is mostly oriented towards advocacy of collective government action in matters of public health (with which I strongly agree). However, he cites a falsely low death rate from covid in China where strong intervention was enforced. "Although China was the original source of Covid-19, the pandemic has killed fewer than 15,000 people there, according to official statistics: 0.001 percent of the population."

The book was written in 2023, and his data may have been preliminary, but the reality is much different from that. Today I found on wikipedia that "The number of reported deaths and cases in China is likely severely undercounted. Multiple independent studies estimate China's true COVID-19 death toll may be between one to two million, rather than the official count of 122,398.[12][13] This is partly due to how deaths caused by COVID-19 are counted. Only deaths occurring in hospitals are included.[14] Furthermore, regional disparities in reporting and sudden changes in testing strategy contributed to challenges in determining the actual mortality burden." China's rate is still a lot lower than that experienced in the US for example, but nowhere near as extremely so.

I finished this a few days ago. I enjoyed it, but I agree with J. that it was somewhat misrepresented. Here is my review.

I finally finished this book. It is a really good read, and I learned (or re-learned) a lot from it. Here is my review.

Here is my review too.