Dr. Arthur Guyton and Dr. John Hall fail in offering a comprehensive molecular understanding of physiology. Although the general presentation of subjects is decent, it does not offer a thorough understanding of molecular events that occur to create what is observed macroscopically. The diagrams are weak utilizing ancient graphs that do not serve to clarify difficult points, and the book is in desparate need of some schematics and flow charts. Tip to Guyton and Hall: today's medical students need more than just a cursory glance at the molecular basis of physiology. And I would suggest to those reading to check out Berne and Levy and Ganong, the latter of which offers up much more detail than Guyton despite being a review text.

As a general practitioner, I don't recommend this book for professionals who want to improve in advanced knowledge in physiology. It is a STARTER book on the theme, for medical students only, not for practicising doctors. I've got frustrated.

This book states clearly in the preface it is NOT meant to be an advanced molecular physiology text. I am neither a doctor nor a scientist, just an interested mature student of biology, and this book is exactly what I was looking for. Physiology texts seem to be either sophmoric, very basic overviews or dense comprehensive surveys used as reference by researchers / professionals. This book, to me, is unique in providing depth and detail missing from basic texts, without being overwhelmed by minutia only selectively interesting. Highly recommended for the curious who feel their intelligence is being insulted by most introductory physiology texts.

This is one of the better translations of a Season in Hell. It's very faithful to the original French without compromising its poetry; many of the passages are nothing short of brilliant. Also, it's a bilingual edition for those who are either able or willing.

However, Varese struggles a bit under the poetic demands of the Drunken Boat. For example:

(Varese):
I can no longer, bathed in your languors, O waves,
Obliterate the cotton carriers' wake,
Nor cross the pride of pennants and of flags,
Nor swim past prison hulk's hateful eyes!

>> But trust me, for the superb quality of translation in A Season in Hell, this book's well worth the price.

This book is an essential portrayal of Rimbaud's most celebrated works. It includes a brief biography of Rimbaud. It is a great introduction to works by poets of that genre. People who enjoy this will also like Baudelaire and Verlaine. I recommend it highly.

A Season in Hell and The Drunken Boat by Arthur Rimbaud is one of the turning points of world literature and poetry. Henry Miller, the Surrealists and the Beat Generation poets as well as rock star Jim Morrison owe a great debt to young Prince Arthur. This passionate leap into the depths of insanity is enthralling. The meek would be well advised to steer clear. This is the granddaddy of modern poetry. Now, is truly the time of the assassins

I think it's a pity how one of the world's most esteemed brands was wrecked by greedy, unscrupulous people and uncaring managers who checked their values at the door (if they ever had them to check). I was actually looking forward to reading the inside story. But this book reads like a patchwork quilt of news articles and interviews that are in the public domain. If you've kept up with the business press you'll likely find little that is new. The publisher should have asked for more rather than rush this out to capitalize on the corporate scandals.

This book was a huge disappointment. Instead of providing insights that others might use to understand how the culture of a firm can affect its success or failure, this book was mostly a long recitation of excerpts from news stories and other already public information. Did we really need another summary of the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act?

Loved it! By taking the view of culture the authors hit at the marrow of the Arthur Andersen debacle. Arthur Andersen created a phenomenal franchise in a sector that demands integrity as a precept. The cultural erosion of that precept inside our public accounting sector is a particularly chilling realization for an average 401k investor.

All I have to say is, if your a big fan of Bob Hope and believe that Mr. America- loyal, faithful husband and family man then don't read this you will look at him differently or probably won't be able to look at him at all. All I can say is I'm not surprised, what man don't sleep around? What disappoints me is that how easy the women went to bed with him, it takes two to tangle, and obviously these women wanted to do it. So I don't necessarily blaim Bob Hope, if their willing to give it up, any man is going to take it. All I have to say is and I've been saying it for years, Write books like this, when their alive and around to defend themselves. This book will break anybody's heart who's a big Bob Hope fan and believed he was Mr. America- faithful husband and family man. All I have to say is if he was this bad, it would of came out, all the wrongdoing came out about the rest of the stars of the past and present, I'm sure someone would of tried to tarnish his career like what happen to Bill Clinton, I'm sure some woman would of came forward and said something. I don't know what to believe, I wish somebody would let Bob Hope and his family read this book and get their say. Some things are just left best unsaid, and let people and fans believe the illusion and image the stars create.

Throughout the history of biographies, official or otherwise, authors who choose to pen books about celebrities, politicians or media figures do so because they either: a) revere or empathize greatly with their subject; or b) have a reason to vilify or skewer that subject's good name. In the case of this book, the latter is in effect. Arthur Marx (son of the great comic actor, Groucho Marx) seems to be doing his best to deflate Hope's standing with the American public. Although a few of his sources seem iron-clad, others appear without so much as a footnote. Lurid tales of Hope's antics, jealousies, and personal feuds are layed out one by one; each paragraph tries to hit harder than the one preceding it. Most will find this book interesting simply because of the sheer ribaldry and titillating content. For instance: Bing Crosby ended up in the hospital in 1948 for an operation, and as is retold by Marx, "Der Bingle" was fellated by a nurse on staff. He was suitably impressed about it that upon being released by the hospital, he promptly told Hope about the nurse's proclivity. It wasn't long before Hope was requesting the same room and the same nurse...with the same end result. Such lascivious behavior should be backed up by corroborating evidence; none, however, is offered. Marx also breaks the rule of biographers: Never include yourself, your family members, or your friends into the life of your literary subject. He introduces Groucho into the storyline in one chapter; and while Groucho was himself an entertainer well-known to millions of Americans, such as Hope was and is, Groucho's life and career didn't intersect with Hope's enough to warrant the inclusion of the elder Marx's name. It was, however, an interesting anecdote, and one Groucho could have easily related to his son. However, some of Arthur Marx's charges may have some validity. When he writes about a special Hope had on T.V. that was almost universally panned by television critics, Hope's spin doctors went into overdrive. They quoted a critic from a paper called "Chicago News," who said Hope's T.V. special was a "delight." An observant Los Angeles critic (who panned Hope's show the most vociferously) was contacted IN PERSON by a Hope employee. The man demanded a detraction, and told the critic that Hope could make her life miserable. The sycophant later said that Hope's show was reviewed most favorably elsewhere. The lady critic points out that the fictitious writer of the fictitious Chicago journal was evidence enough that Hope's latest T.V. effort did indeed fall well short of glory. It is not for me to say that Hope had as many affairs as Marx said he had; it may not be so, and I can't just take his word for it. Marx may have a serious axe to grind, and judging by his attempt to fit all of Hope's transgressions into one book makes it seem that way. All things considered, Marx must be taken with a grain of salt. It is up to those who were in the audience of one of Hope's USO shows to judge the validity of servicemen who castigated and booed Hope because of his "hawk" views of the Vietnam War. Marx tells us that although nearly all films show us nothing but laughing and applauding soldiers, the truth was that Hope had many detractors in the military. I won't argue the fact that Hope had some liberal detractors in his audience. Is Marx inflating the numbers of servicemen who really DID resent Hope and his political views? Again, I was not there; I have no say. I prefer to remember the Bob Hope from the "Road" pictures, ambling off to some misadventure or other with Bing. Or the guy who could just say something funny, and get it in before the censor had a chance to quash it. In conclusion, I tend to agree with a few of Marx's observations; the rest seem to extend the realm of reality. Delores Hope won't talk, and Bing and Marilyn Maxwell et. al., have all been outlived by Hope. No doubt, Hope is a man with faults, as have all of us. Keep that in mind as you read this book.

Since it is out of print, you may have to consult your library to see if they have a copy.

Bob Hope, America's comedian -- at least among white middle-Americans of a certain age. But like any institution, and he is an institution, there is a downside to one of the country's favorite success stories. Arthur Marx pulls no punches in characterizing Hope's many flaws. Chief are the secretly promiscuous womanizing, the penny-pinching among staffers, the ceaseless self-promotion, and a generally curmudgeonly personality. Not really bad stuff, like mixing with gangsters or playing with drugs, the sorts of things Hollywood is generally prone to. But bad enough to tarnish a nurtured image as family man and patriot. Many readers will avoid a tell-all book like Marx's for that sort of defensive reason. Moreover, I get the feeling that like many in Hollywood Marx respects Hope the comedian at the same time he generally dislikes the man. Nonetheless, he is careful to point out Hope's many strengths as a performer -- his matchless ability with one-liners; his energy, verve and sass; his tireless dedication to servicemen,(which appears genuine); and his shrewd sense of the business. Additionally, Hope makes up for a lack of creative spark with a sound sense of comedy, which has helped him stay on top for a remarkable period. I like the way Marx has included excerpts from routines to provide period flavor. They furnish a sense of popular humor over time, and Hope was an expert purveyor of popular tastes until at least the 1960's when the unpleasant war-mongering side took over. Marx's style is easy and readable. Even so, as another reviewer has pointed out, there is a notable shortage of citations to back up fact. What there are consists of a list of persons interviewed for the book, which seems a little over general for a work of this type. Nevertheless, many allegations are also attributed by name from the list of interviewees. So, however you take it, be prepared for an eye-level approach to a legend who is also very much a flawed individual.

This is a terrible book. It is completely unfocused. It moves from topic to topic without any worthwhile detail about any specific topic. Concepts are not adequately explained -- either you already understand the topics in this book, in which case you don't need this book; or you don't already understand the topics in this book, in which case this book will not help you understand them. If you want to learn about database design, buy a good book on that subject (for example, Hernandez). If you want to learn about object-oriented design, buy a good book on that subject. If you want to learn about writing requirements, buy a good book on that subject. It is ridiculous for the first reviewer to suggest that this book teaches anything useful about writing requirements. Don't waste your money on this book - it's completely useless.

this book is an insightful, thorough and straightforward examination of the art and practise of information system design. however, it's difficult to really incorporate its lessons unless you are using it in conjunction with a course and using the powerful CASE (Computer Aided Software Engineering) tools featured therein. the author himself is perhaps the premier teacher in the country on this subject and if you're really interested in software design and you are in new york by all means make every attempt to attend his class at columbia university. if not, then i guess this text by itself might be the next best thing. in any event, this book will serve as a useful guide to both the student and seasoned software design professional.

This book provides a systematic approach and clear, detailed information about so many topics: e-commerce system design, system applications and reengineering legacy systems --- in short, every facet of developing software solutions -- that any individual involved in or interested in establishing the requirements and design of a system will find this essential reading. and not only is this a good read, but it's a totally decent reference as well. Excellent!

This book does not deter the violence and gore of today's youth. It enhances the problem. The magic trick, sawing in half and providing a bucket to catch the blood is hardly suitable language for children, especially 3-4 year olds...! IT SHOULD BE WITHDRAWN and DISCOURAGED. Most of Marc Brown's Authur books seem to be OK, otherwise and teach fairness and good judgment. However, this was a great disappointment. Good taste and judgment was aparently laid aside if not in the conception, but the developement of this magic show with a subtle dark side. Am I over sensitive? Maybe, but our three year old doesn't need to hear talk about buckets of blood just yet. One drop of arsnic in the glass of water is too much for me. Let's pour out the tainted water. Arthur's April Fool is tainted. There is too much violence and gore to be viewed later in life. When I grew up we had a steady diet of Barbar the elephant. He never cut anyone up or made passig reference to gore. Even the Cat in the Hat never reached this level of implied violence.

It is not the best book in the world, but it is one of the few on April's Fool Day. I think my students will enjoy it's sense of humor.

ARTHUR'S APRIL FOOL is one of the earlier books when the drawings of Arthur still gave him the longer head. And because it's an earlier book, all the characters you know from the wonderful TV series are here, but they look just a bit different than we're used to. It's a great story with a lot of depth and a lot of fun. The illustrations are so funny, with a lot of interesting details for kids to find. My favorite is always D.W., and she doesn't let me down here, either. The Arthur series is simply amazing and wonderful. It brings me great joy. I would get every one of the books in this affordable series of paperbacks.

"Best Practice" appears to be the latest whole language code word. Many of the "best practices" suggested here have little or no solid foundation on convergent, juried, replicable research. To say that these practices make common sense is simply not evidence enough to implement them in our schools. For the first time since the Progressivism of the 1930's educational reform is not coming from our colleges and universities. They have, after all, perpetuated the "best practices" that have been failing our children since they were first widely implemented in our public schools in the 1950's. Reform is coming from political leaders, as in the "No Child Left Behind" legislation, and scientific researchers who have been commissioned by Congress. Whole school reform that is based on scientifically based, EFFECTIVE practices demonstrate positive change in the first year, not in the three to five years indicated in this book. The "Report of the National Reading Panel" would be a good place to start looking for effective school reform practices. This writer is the Coordinator of Instruction for a large, urban school system.

As part of my school's curriculum committee, Best Practices is on our assigned reading list. After reading the introduction I was shocked to find the book not only interesting, but also easy to read. The book's main premise is that school reform, what ever direction a school chooses to take, is a process, not a magic potion. Meaningful school reform, according to the authors, could and prbably should take at least three years. No one standardized test and no one curriculum can be a cure-all for improving student performance. Best Practice tells how to begin the process of reform to produce improved student performance in an environment dedicated to that process.

As an instructor of a graduate level education course, this book is an excellent example of the best that is happening in classrooms. It is filled with practical and engaging ways to involve students in their own learning. A must for all first and 20 year teachers.

Don't wanne even get closer to something remotely associated with "BUTCHER" Harris....

Sometimes evil needs someone to to his dirty job. In war, there's no quarter given or taken. Arthur Harris was C-in-C Bomber Command in WW II, and he led RAF bombers to destroy German cities, with never regretting. In doing so, thousands (almost 50%) of RAF's aircrew perished or were taken prisoner, with what gain? Even today the answer isnot clear. What is clear to me is that Harris never once lost his sleep for the thousands of people (British and German) that his orders sent to die, always under cover of "Orders are orders". He apparently felt joy doing his job.

Harris was head of bomber command in WWII for the british. This account starts with his initial military service in africa in the first world war where he particiopated in the longest forced march to combat known in modern history. He became (by shear nepotism in his own words) an officer in the flying corps and saw action in mesopotania (now basically IRAQ). He rose to become head of the british airforce. He analyses phases of the war from this high perspective. For instance, balancing aircarft production and crew training against losses over germany, produced grim statistics like an 'acceptable' loss rate of 4% of aircraft and men PER MONTH. tactics for window (now called chaff foil dropped to blind radar) introduction and decisions for its deployment are discussed. Here the germans made the wrong decision. They did not even try to reseach conter measures for chaff in the fear that the allies would hear about it. Harriss took the correct gamble and used it. The effects were devesting. The normal error for night bombing was five miles due mainly to the effect of german radar directed ground fire. With Window this error went down to 1 and a half miles. This increased the bomb / incendary concentration and caused the worlds first fire storm in Hamburg in 1943. After the raids 74% of all buildings were destroyed in this city. He is almost silent on the dresden raid. "Atomic Explosives" are discussed, but the full implications are not realised. I think estimates of a simple atomic bomb were an equivalent of 2000 tons of TNT. The first one released about 14,000 tons TNT equivalent energy. This period saw RADAR and RADIO navigation progress at an amazing rate. In this book it is seen from the usability and effect perspective. Essential reading for WWII historians...

This book should have been much better. Mr. Ferrill does not follow his own advice to treat ancient historians with caution. He believes every word and is highly critical of scholars who have rationalized the life of Caligula to what has been written about him. There is no doubt that Caligula's reputation has suffered from hostile writers and Mr. Ferrill cannot be objective enough to see beyond the smokescreen. He tries to provide evidence that Caligula was crazy before his illness and comes up with his spending large amounts of the money Tiberius left. This is a dubious argument and only proves that Caligula had no idea of the value of money.

Rather than discuss the evidence pro and con on the many points Ferrill resorts to the device that Caligula was crazy so we cannot expect an irrational person to be reasonable. This is simply a cop-out. The madness of Caligula is one of a gradual disintegration of the emperor's mind but Ferrill does not give any idea why this is true or what illness is at work. In the brief discussion of Caligula declaring himself a god, there is no discussion of the concept of the emperor's numen.

Having read a great deal about Caligula I can say that "Caligula:Emperor of Rome" expresses a minority opinion. Mr. Ferrill does not to mention obvious contradictions in Suetonius' life of Caligula that cast him in a favorable light. Ferrill even says that even if some stories by ancient historians are "untrue or greatly exaggerated, there can be little doubt that Caligula was one of the cruelest rules Rome ever had." What is certain to me is that Mr. Ferrill cannot persuade us by logic so he must resort to stepping around the difficult question of who Caligula was and what he did.

One cannot contradict the fact that Caligula was a ruthless autocrat who was provocative in what he said and did. Without a doubt, the turbulent childhood he experienced left a mark on his character. However, Caligula is more complex that the stereotypical mad monarch presented in this book. Mr. Ferrill is correct in suggesting that it is possible for someone who is mad to become an emperor but it is also true that one does not have to be insane to be cruel.

Ferrill's book makes interesting reading as a chronicle of Caligula's supposed crimes, but as that only. He spends much of the book recounting stories by Suetonius that have no other historical backing. Suetonius's credibility is questionable, and Ferrill should have tried to prove that Suetonius was trustworthy before he accepted the man's work without question. Nevertheless, I agree with many of Ferrill's conclusions; he just didn't back them up enough.

Arther Ferrill's main purpose seems to refute modern authors like Balsdon and Barrett who have whitewashed Caligula. In that he is successful. Even if Caligula did not do everything Suetonius says, he seems to have been capricious, tyrannical and at least unbalanced. Tacitus's version is lost, but elsewhere in his writings he constantly refers to Caligula as "mentally disordered", of a "horrible character" and whose impulses "shifted like a weather-cock". Balsdon and others probably went too far in discounting Suetonius and Tacitus, and Ferrill restores the balance, but goes too far. It is absolutely impossible to determine whether, for instance, Caligula committed incest with his sisters or not, and it is as futile for Ferrill to say categoricallly "yes, he did" as it was for others to say, "no, he did not". Ferrill also says categorically that Caligula was "mad". Caligula was probably unbalanced, not surprising given the events of his life, something that Ferrill correctly emphasizes. But who can say that he was "mad" in a clinical sense? Ferrill should be a little more skeptical. But altogether this book was necessary to challenge the whitewashers.

I was very disappointed in this book. It is not geared at all toward the older runner except in the photos and in the title. Arthur Lydiard still thinks that the older runner needs to work up to a weekly mileage of 160km (100mi) a week to insure he or she is running fit. For the older runner and for that matter for most runners this is excessive. His schedules also advocate running every day. This also contradicts much of the advice given by other experts who advise at least one day of rest per week, especially for the older runner. I was also very disappointed in the photos. The photos depict an older runner doing various running drills. However, these drills are not described at all in the text. As a matter of fact it seems that for the most part the photos bear little relation to the text they are embedded in.

My bottom line recommendation is to forget this book. There are much better books on the market for the Master runner that provide a lot more useful information.

This book doesn't go into detail about why you should do each of the exercises shown in the schedule, but I recommend this book anyway because the schedule for masters would be a useful guide. This is basically why I got this book.

I have read a previous book of his from '79 called Run the Lydiard Way, which gave the purpose of each of his exercises. Unfortunately this appears to be out of print, and I don't know if any other of his existing books provide the details.

For example, you do hill springing for ankle flexibily and knee lift, repetitions (time, distance, and quantity don't matter, as long as you feel tired at the end) for anaerobic capacity, leg speed and sprint training for speed and technique, 100 and 50m windsprints for sharpening and maintaining anaerobic capacity, and time trials for getting the body conditioned to running your race distance.

Some say his training concepts are outdated, but the fact is that all middle and long distance training are based on them. I have tried other schedules and have found his schedules to be the most effective for me. Some have said his 100 miles per week recommendation is outdated, but I have found his schedules will still work for you regardless of what mileage you decide to do.

Btw, fyi the 'old' man on the cover that another reviewer lammented over is an Olympic Bronze medalist (Barry Magee) in the '60 Rome Olympics, trained by Lydiard to be the fastest white man over the distance at that time.

This book brings out points that older runners maybe weren't aware of or had forgotten. For instance the emphasis on the high knee kick was something I did naturally when in my 20s but after taking 15 years off from running, my body just doesn't do it naturally. I've begun to really notice my form in training. The emphasis on quality running vs. high quantity for older runners is sitting very well with me. I can't do high miles per week anymore but I make sure there's lots of quality. Exercising the posterior muscles to enhance form is something I never thought of. I think we all get in the habit of developing arms and chest for our egos and forget about the back. The book is definitely a jumpstart in attitude. I just wish they used a younger looking runner to demonstrate the exercises. I feel old looking at the book's cover and knowing its geared toward me, a 44 year old. The guy on the cover must be in his 60s.