In the March-April issue of American Scientist, Robert Cook-Deegan reviews the memoir of Harold Varmus, The Art and Politics of Science (H/T Powells.com Review-a-Day).  Cook-Deegan runs the Center for Genome Ethics, Law and Policy at Duke University, and has written a wonderful review.  I recommended the book earlier this year based on an excerpt. Anyone still not persuaded of the need to read the book, or to follow Varmus as he serves as co-chair of President Obama’s PCAST (President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology), will be after reading Cook-Deegan’s review.

Cook-Deegan not only covers the book well, but does a fine job of placing its stories and Varmus into proper contexts.  The average review in a Sunday book review supplement wouldn’t necessarily take the time to compare Varmus’ memoir with that of his Nobel Prize-sharing colleague Michael Bishop, nor would it look into the future to see how Varmus and his past experiences could shape policy moving forward.  That reflects well on both Cook-Deegan and American Scientist.  A taste of the review, which hints at the value of the book.

Varmus still smarts from having occasionally been beaten to a discovery that a different scientific approach might have snared for him. Apparently even a Nobel Prize is only partial recompense for lost opportunities. Aspiring scientists will see the importance of scientific competition in Varmus’s story. His obvious competitiveness is complemented by his clear affection for others in the field, though. And he keeps his rhetoric in check, giving credit where credit is due. The book would be more piquant if it settled some scores, but Varmus turns his analytical firepower on his own mistakes rather than on the offenses of others.