Boulder Book Club discussion

Humans don't grow forever and we're not immortal. That's two characteristics, neither of them human. I wonder if they're extricable, one from another. Cancer's not the interesting part, the genetic improvement that cracks the "hayflick limit" is.

No, HeLa is not human, but a closely related, superior species. We have met an alien! We know from the chromosomal makeup that she's a nascent intelligence, inchoate perhaps, but can give us immortality if we can crack her code. Sounds like something we should bow down to!

I was proposing this to Miles and he said... (view spoiler)[ damn even I can't give away somebody else's spoiler! OMG what a good one though. This'll suffice to remind me of it later though, just in case he doesn't comment.Everybody read fast let's meet soon! (hide spoiler)]

Finished last night -- I think I'll give it two stars. My notes/comments in no particular order:

--Seems like it should have been about 1/3 of the length that it is. Way way way too little science.

--pg 28: "carcinoma in situ, which derives from the Latin for "cancer in its original place"" -- isn't 'in situ' common enough to not have to explain it? I found a whole bunch of these.

--I didn't like the author at all. She pretty much harassed a family for years and called it reporting. I think they should sue her! The part when she was driving around without a muffler on a private road again and again until someone was so annoyed with her that they stopped her I thought was callous. Leaving many many messages per DAY on someone's answering machine is awful. Shame on her.

--Comparing work with HeLa cells even indirectly to what Nazis did was stupid.

--Really the only reason I'm not giving it one star is that there was some interesting stuff about how people are patenting tissue these days...and the huge database of tissue samples. I *definitely* would have liked more about that stuff. That's way more interesting than the biography. Even when she wrote about the Hayflick Limit and telomerase, etc it was covered so superficially -- that's the stuff I want to read about!!

Anyway, overall I didn't think there was much to this book. I'm not even sure it should be published -- it sounds like most, or all, of the information in the book has been published before. The additional information seems to be about how the family feels exploited. Well, that sucks, but I don't think that's because of the cells. If this had happened today, the cells would be labeled anonymously and nothing further would have happened.

Yeah totally, but see how controversial books make the best discussions? I can hardly wait!

Tumor smoothies at my house on the 11th or 12th?

Hey, is a "tumor smoothie" a kind of homeopathic tonic for cancer prevention? I'm envisioning 7-11 and supermarket coolers full of The Krebs Tumor Smoothie in the near future! I can see the beads of condensation forming on the bottles. I see the cash piling up in Mark's bank account!

I knew that Mark was gonna make it big some day. Lookin' forward to his TED Talk!

(I'm probably confused because I haven't read the book yet. Sorry for the idle and uninformed speculation.)

Ya, I imagine it to be something kind of like this: http://www.neatorama.com/2012/07/14/7...

Oh crap, Adam, you are sooo far ahead of me! Why bottle the stuff when you can dispense Krebs Tumor Smoothies from a slurpee machine?

We are not the book's intended audience. Most people don't have a basic understanding of Latin or an interest in a deeper understanding of science than what was offered. I'm sure there were plenty of people more interested in the soap opera of the Lacks clan than in the science and likely skimmed the science.

In some ways, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks follows the tradition of Tuesdays with Morrie. Mitch Albom admits at the beginning of that book that he's a self-serving, money-grubbing asshole, and then attempts to convince us that writing a self-serving, money-grubbing book that abused the kindness and wisdom of a dying old man is proof that he can change (not to mention milking that book for years and essentially shitting publicly on the old man's image while making more money off him). You can somewhat make the same argument about Rebecca Skloot and her use of the Lacks clan, except they are actually people she can and has been helping (albeit to an unknown degree) with the proceeds of this book.

Ultimately, every journalist and author must be somewhat narcissistic, egotistical, and self-serving to continue to write and believe they can educate or entertain others and be worth reading. Should we hold it against Skloot that she did so successfully for the masses?

I really don't feel like we can complain that a pop-science book isn't a science book when it should've been obvious it was pop-science to begin with.

Ok! I'm calling for a formal meeting of this body.

My house, Friday, 7:30 PM
This will be the usual torchlight & drinks. Unusually, light food('cause I'm lazy, lately).

Yes, there will be smoothies!

I have been out of town for over a month, but am back, and would love to meet. By 'My house', I'm going to need something a bit more specific....

I'll finish the book by then. I made it about half-way through and put it down because I was frustrated with it. However, upon reading the above posts, it looks as though I'm not alone. Should be an interesting discussion.

Hi Amy, glad you're coming. 7127 Overbrook, Niwot.
There's another section of goodreads containing events for the club: this web site may have TOO many features.
Anyway, here's the invite.

My review is here, if you are interested:

ILoHLreview