web analytics

Science Left Behind

Published September 2012 by Public Affairs Books

Buy it on Barnes and Noble and Amazon.com

Some Reviews:

Wall Street Journal – “usefully revealing how pervasive scientific misinformation is in progressive arguments on organic and genetically modified foods, clean energy, nuclear waste and other matters.”

Scientific American – “…the left’s sacred values seem fixated on the environment, leading to an almost religious fervor over the purity and sanctity of air, water and especially food. Try having a conversation with a liberal progressive about GMOs — genetically modified organisms — in which the words “Monsanto” and “profit” are not dropped like syllogistic bombs.”

Michael Medved, nationally syndicated talk radio host, author of THE 10 BIG LIES ABOUT AMERICA – “Entertaining, enlightening and important. This valuable book should shatter the left’s smug certainty that science registers as a partisan Democrat. Berezow and Campbell provide persuasive evidence and argument that should reshape conventional wisdom on a wide variety of current controversies.”

Forbes – “on many of the most critical issues of our time, the “progressive” perspective is often rooted in out-dated, anti-empirical, junk science paradigms that threaten innovation—and are beginning to unnerve the most scientifically minded thinkers on the left.”

Huntington News – “Groundbreaking…If I were teaching journalism, this is a book that I would require my students to read and absorb — and keep for reference.”

San Francisco Book Review – “Berezow and Campbell offer numerous examples of progressives hijacking legitimate programs and research and twisting them to suit a backwards-ass anti-science agenda. In this way, reading Science Left Behind is as infuriating as it is eye-opening. A fundamental lack of familiarity with science is rampant in government as a whole, and Science Left Behind does an impressive job drawing attention to this alarming disparity.”

Publisher’s Weekly – “Their nonpartisan message is clear: Washington as a whole is woefully uninformed when it comes to the scientific underpinnings of pertinent topics like stem cell research, green energy, organic food, vaccines, and gender issues.”

Marginal Revolution – “This excerpt made me giggle: …despite what some progressives will contend, the purpose of this book is not to demonize all progressives.  We just want to demonize the loony ones.”


Pundits and political writers try to convince us that evolution, stem cells and climate change comprise the trifecta of conservative sins against science.  Yet the anti-science left have numerous pet fallacies of their own.  Aversion to nuclear power, animal research and vaccines come naturally to many progressives, supported by little more than junk science and wishful thinking.

Now for the first time, science writers Alex B. Berezow and Hank Campbell have drawn back the curtain on the left’s fear of science.  As Science Left Behind reveals, vague inclinations about the wholesomeness of all things natural, the unhealthiness of the unnatural, and many other seductive fallacies have let to an epidemic of misinformation.  The results: public health crises, damaging and misguided policies, and worst of all a new culture war over basic scientific facts — in which the left is far more dangerous than the right.

It may be shocking to suggest that progressives have a problem with science.  But ideology and objective research don’t mix, especially when the following hot topics are involved:

  • VACCINES  The anti-vaccine movement has been thoroughly debunked — vaccines do not cause autism, period.  Yet during the H1N1 flu pandemic, the government put pressure on influenza vaccine manufacturers to avoid using thimerosal, a compound falsely alleged to cause autism.  This pointless initiative contributed to a vaccine shortage in 2009.
  • FOOD  Everything natural is good!  That’s why, according to most progressives, you should boycott genetically modified (GM) food.  Never mind the fact that GM food is essential to feed starving people across the developing world, and that there is no scientific evidence of anything unwholesome about it.
  • GREEN ENERGY  A large subset of environmentalists have turned against wind power fearing that it’s responsible for killing too many birds — in though in the U.S. it accounts for only about .006% of avian fatalities.  Hydroelectric power is no good either: its dams disrupt riparian ecosystems.  As for solar, word is beginning to spread that the rare earth minerals are just as messy to extract from the ground as coal.  It won’t be long before “green energy” is shorthand for no energy whatsoever.