Overdosed America: The Broken Promise of American Medicine, by John Abramson

You may have suspected it. In spite of the incredible expense poured into our health care system we aren't any healthier. Here, then, is the proof confirming your suspicions and the why.

Near the end of the book Abramson, a long-time family doctor who has an extensive background in statistics, epidemiology, and health policy, puts it simply: the bad news is that many of our celebrated advances in medicine, including new drugs, medical procedures, and sophisticated equipment, do not perform as well as older treatments and cost a great deal more. The good news is the same! If we knew what really works, based on unbiased well-designed studies, we would not need to use expensive treatments, equipment, or drugs nearly as often as we do, and we'd be better for it. In other words, our health care costs would drop and our health would improve.

Our health care system has gone so far astray that in comparisons with other developed countries the U.S. pays twice as much for abysmal results. And it really is not an accident. And it isn't because we eat too much fried food (although, of course, we do have to take responsibility for choices within our power). Read this book and find out for yourself. It's easy to read, clearly written, easy to understand. And so important. I would like every one of our political leaders to have a copy.

Nicole Brown Simpson, by Faye Resnick

Truth: I am writing about this book as comic relief. Not because I think murder is funny and certainly not because I think it's funny to get away with murder. But because this is essentially the story of the rich and brainless.

The one thing Faye Resnick (written with Mike Walker) does in this book is convince us that she was a friend of Nicole Simpson's. She further provides the build-up to Nicole's murder somewhat convincingly, although I have to admit that I wonder if some of her histrionics are really after-the-fact. Did she really plead with Nicole to get away from Los Angeles because O.J. might murder her? Did she take O.J.'s proclamations, that he would kill Nicole, seriously right out of the gate? I will probably never know and I won't lose any sleep over it.

Much of the book details the friendship between Nicole Simpson and Faye Resnick. The two of them had married men who made a lot of money so they generally were not hurting financially, even after divorces. It appears that they spent their time going dancing, shopping, and to Cabo San Lucas. And occasionally hooking up.

When Faye goes to a friend's house she describes it as a nice house, "20,000 square feet". When she talks of Nicole, she amost always mentions how beautiful she was, how fit. Most of the adjectives describing places and events and people emphasize how expensive, how big, how beautiful. Quintessential Beverly Hills women. Which is to say, really, the newly rich, anxious to prove they have friends with money.

Although she frequently mentions what a great mom Nicole is, she usually means that she takes them to dance classes or recitals or holds big parties. We don't get to know the children at all in this book. We only get their names. And an odd, somewhat sensual photo of Nicole's two children which is described as her favorite.

Resnick says she wrote the book to quell the rumors about Nicole. I'm not at all sure she did her any favors. I came away seeing Nicole as a party girl, a woman lacking the ability for deep reflection, a woman lacking any sense of wrong when she has affairs with married men ("I deserve happiness"). She comes across, worse, as a woman who has "had black and can't go back". Such a cliche yet it's spelled out in here.

I have absolutely no idea about what kind of mother she was. Her long relationship with O.J. seems to have existed on a bizarre sense of what's important in a marriage - is it the diamond earrings, Nicole? The sex? Really?

Resnick drags out her dimestore psychology books and makes some attempts to explain Nicole's personality and she gets some of it right but doesn't go nearly far enough. The theories are hackneyed and in some cases just plain wrong. The result is a cardboard cutout suitable for teen boy adoration.

No reason to look for this book unless you are obsessed with Nicole. It's badly written and has nothing to illuminate Nicole's murder.

Blaming the Brain, by Elliot S. Valenstein, Ph.D.

If you believe that some mental disorders are caused by a "chemical imbalance" you need to read this book. Blaming the Brain: The Truth About Drugs and Mental Health is perhaps the most definitive, heavily-researched, and thoroughly-detailed book on how mental health professionals and the public came to believe in a biological basis for mental disorders and why this belief is ill-founded.

Valenstein, a professor emeritus of psychology and neuroscience at the University of Michigan, takes us through the history of mental illness treatment from the nineteenth century through the beginning of this one. He explains that his original intent when he began work on the book was to track how views about the basis of mental illness changed over the past fifty years plus. There have been many theories over the years that suggested a biological basis for mental illness, but in the 1940s and 1950s there was a strong belief in the power of psychotherapy alone. Valenstein was curious about how we have come to where we are now, to a commonly-held belief that depression and schizophrenia in particular are caused by chemical imbalances "similar to the imbalance of insulin for those who have diabetes".

The book evolved into more than a history. Valenstein discovered along the way that the basis for this common belief is shaky. What studies there are that seem to support the theory are flawed and can usually not be replicated. Further, too many persons with depression and schizophrenia do not respond to the current drugs. If these drugs actually corrected a problem present in all depressed or schizophrenic patients then we would expect them all to be helped.

Why, then, do so many patients - and doctors - honestly believe such an iffy theory?? Valenstein devotes much of the book to this question and answers it clearly.

Valenstein's research is exhaustive and his caution in interpreting what he learns is admirable. His writing is clear and comprehendible to laypersons but not simplistic. In the end he summarizes his findings and makes clear that he is not saying that nobody should use these drugs. But they should not be used without investigation into alternatives and certainly should not be considered the best option in all cases. His greatest concern - and it should also be ours - is that such a tunnel-visioned view of mental illness is dangerous and will not lead to improvements in care.