Rob

I hated his political insertions so i gavr him 2

Revisado: 05-18-21

Next time keep politics out of your books, noone seeks a fiction writers material for political ideology

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

CONSIDERABLY GREAT ONE

Revisado: 12-14-20

Great narration, could use more special effects, great story line, good main character. Definately one of the better books in this class of series.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

good read

Revisado: 09-04-20

Excellent story great realism a very complete suspense thriller from Andrew Klavan my new fav writer

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Definitely, alternate paths then the tv show

Revisado: 07-15-20

Just as good as the TV show, but COMPLETELY different outcomes and paths as far as I can tell after readi ng book1

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Worth every penny

Revisado: 05-31-20

Really well narrated and very realistic, and amazing in its honest, feral and passionate simplicity

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Hardly a capitalist

Revisado: 03-22-20

Is this man a scientist or a politician himself?

His narrow view of 'the rich' ruling and somehow limiting technology that would otherwise benefit the collective flies untrue inthe face of reality. Wealth disparity is concerning, but in itself not necessarily a problem but for the construct of the system that would or would not constrain or allow such a disparity. This scientist has much more wealth than the average police officer, im sure. Does that fact make this author a crook or nefarious?? Does that aforementioned notion make the society in which he lives more or less oppressive?? Sometimes economic disparity reflects the disparity in we human beings ourselves... some women/men are born with talents that escape others---- like this author whos talents benefit society much more disparately than the aforementioned police officer.
It seems that a free market would actually even that disparity not increase it-- though my statement would be difficult to prove, as no such perfectly free market exists, though the more free markets are centralized-- the less collective prosperity the people within that system have-- rich or poor-- ergo the tide raising all boats analogy oftentimes used by 50 plus year old Adam Smith economists.(see heritage foundation economic / freedom index)

DISCLAIMER: I am not wealthy nor do i have some preference for the wealthy over the unwealthy--- or vice-versa.I learned long ago that its UNWISE TO JUDGE people for their wallets or economic input/output.
The reality is, however, that the wealthy oftentimes are as beneficial / benevolent as they are malignant. As any man--- some do immensely honorable deeds that benefit society, others less. When a uber wealthy person seeks to indulge and purchase a 2 mile long sailing vessel, it may seem obscene, but then ask yourself --- who benefits from the purchase of this vessel?? The rich man or those he gave money to which were responsible for the creation and production of the vessel?? All of the painters, carpenters, steel workers, engineers and even sailing staff required to maintain and pilot the vessel. Without that ostentatious rich purchaser, these people would likely have much less wealth themselves or prestigious employment... look at the alternative for such working people. Does this escape the author?? Again, nothing is perfect, but certainly one outcome is better than another, especially for those workers-- if the good doctor is actually attempting to care about those least fortunate..

Many of the benevolent wealthy fund many of the technologies this author raves about.
Market forces, or the wealthy(and others) buying into these life extending technologies, actually brings down price of these technologies, that this making them more affordable for people like me!!
Those life extending gservices / products eventually( facilitated by the wealthier) eventually become more affordable to economically poorer people.

I speak generally of more free market societies, because if compared to the lesser free market societies, there is little debate as to which countries have a far superior standard of living and thus the money to individually afford those life extending services which this author claims to promote. I, myself, am middle class, yet can easily afford drugs like metformin (for non diabetic purposes) because of free'er market societies.
If the American healthcare system were not already so borderline socialist, i would be able to much better afford metformin -- as the American 3rd party healthcare system increases the prices of such medications astronomically, though the system is also much more effective and affordable than a pure socialized system (where rationing exists on a much larger scale due to less INCENTIVIZED productivity, inventiveness and ingenuity--- see /read an Adam Smith book)

Free market systems stem innovation : in the last 50 -100 years, try and compare the innovation of any less free market country / system in contrast to that of a more free one. Make sure to compare their comparative population density and size, as well to be fair.
Then, genererally compare Western countries(more individualist) to eastern(more )collectivist . There isnt even a comparison to be made in terms of living standards .. for the greater majority of people living in the society. Western populations generally live considerably better than eastern.

The fact that the east has any technology at all is on the backs of mostly western innovators--
There is considerable theft of intellectual property and trade secrets rendered upon the west by the east, particularly and egregiously collectivist communist countries like China.

This author is no doubt an intelligent scientist/physician, but dares to daftly cross the line into a seemingly common sense realm-- that of business--- its obvious how out of his depth he is.

Despite his scientific intelligence, the man would barely rate a wechsler score of 60 respective to any sort of basic business common sense scale.
He seems to rage against capitalism and promote collectivism, from which there is little doubt, stifles creativity, kills a wealthier standard of living(for especially the poorest), and equally terminates all semblance human rights.


This mans son in only alive because of capitalism--- which greatly solved the lymes disease epidemic.
Those regulations that hampered the authors ability to test his own child expedientl6ly using his own personal technological skillset is likely due to the same bureaucratic central planning that the author seems to promote in turn. Irony??

Some western societies are much more economically viable, and thus collectively more free than others. The free'er and less regulated countries will indeed be able to afford more of these technologies for the greatest % of its people.
DONT believe me, just search out the counties that have THE MOST DISPOSABLE INCOME per capita and youll quickly find that this authors political ideologies sabotage his scientific wishes( for every person to extend their lives through scientific innovation I assume).
I also vehemently protest that the worlds population is becoming too drastic in number to sustain itself. Those its IMPORTANT to look at this issue in terms of separate countries than in globalistic terms--- some countries can easily self sustain, others may not feel so confident in that description.
In most collectivist countries - if a country cant sustain itself, people die from all sorts of maladies and that process, in itself is self correcting of the supposed premise problem. Unfortunately most collective countries have let their citizens down and thus by removing or abating their citizens liberty, they condem them to a painful death...see China, most of the middle east (aside from Israel) , most of Africa, most of the east etc etc... economics , culture, human rights and freedom are inextricably connected. Quell one of those and quell them all.

In terms of space... well every person on this planet can comfortably fit with over 200 meters of space left per person---on 1 state--- Alaska(go do the math yourself on google or duckduckgo). So, wait, I thought that we didnt have enough space on the planet?? AND If half of those people lived the apartment life, there would easily be even more space. Perhaps, if one was, SAY, a wealthy doctor and sought to live in a world where everyone could have 1000 acres of space, the world might be alittle too small for their liking---
Maybe the maij problem is the doctors lifestyle expectations--
Maybe were taking too much as truth the political commentary of a likely rich, privileged, and indulgent man himself.
Be very skeptically aware when a rich man claims to himself hate the rich.
Although, there are differing levels of wealth, thus accentuating my point about the irrelevance and impracticality of class / wealth warfare.
Hes rich compared to me and somes rich compared to he--- and so what?? And whos to say how much is too much for any man or woman to own, though im not a very materialistic man myself. What is a more dangerous consideration is
who would you give the power to determine who is too rich and poor and what should be 'justly ' taken from such a person? For such power could easily be turned on you that suggest such a course, indeed. This doctor should be ashamed of such a consideration-- for allow a group of people to tell you that you have too much is to empower that same group to tell others that your life is worth exactly that of others--# BECAUSE they say so.


PERHAPS WHAT THIS AUTHOR SHOULD SUGGEST, in terms of whats best for humanity,is NOT A GLOBALIST VISION OF THE EARTH (which would terminate the collective wealth of those that have produced more in this world - partially through consumption, and also production), but for every collectivist country to join western tradition and become more free market.
Free market, like Denmark (having a very free market aside from their health system) and the US. Somewhat like Canada and the UK. Even like Japan --- which is quite an example of what standards of living can vacillate towards if a society leaps from collectivism towards individualism.

The author of this wook writes of the consumption of America, but not of the production of America (in comparison to other countries).
I believe this author is confused about business, a free market, and free markets support of science.
Believe me,
im not naive enough to pretend that free'er markets are perfect for NOTHING is perfect----
Man (and woman) are imperfect themselves by nature so far be it for anyone to suggest that such a flawed creature as are we could produce anything objectively perfect.
In fact, this is the main reason central planning fails--- fewer people calling the shots begets greater failures of conception and greed.
If the market systems that this author would insinuate supplant western ones would, that would take science and man/woman kind back to the stone age.
I
believe this author naively means well, and the book was interestingly enough of a read---
I also believe that this authors drinking too much of his sons social justice koolaid and should have much more self awareness and life experience to realize the truths of my statements and not promote such socialist foolishness.

It is at times when I read such literature, that I soberly realize that man( even the most brilliant) must have suicide written deeply in some recess of its genetic code.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 3 personas

great take on vampirism...definately works for me

Revisado: 11-20-19

this book is sick. brian lumley should do a modern reboot of this story. someone could also make a script out of this easily

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

TREASON AT A PRICR

Revisado: 10-03-19

IT AMAZES ME THE SORT OF CORRUPTION THSY EXISTS AMONG TOO MANY OF THE POLITICAL CLASS. I CAN UNDERSTAND MINOR INSTANCES, BUT BIDEN, CLINTON, AND THE BORDERLINE, IF. IT TREASONOUS SALE OF MISSILE TECHNOLOGY TO CHINA IN RETURN FOR CAMPAIGN DONATIONS... AS WELL AS THE URANIUM ONE DEBACLE ... I MEAN WHAT SORT OR TRAITOR SELLS US URANIUM TO A COMMUNIST COUNTRY???
I JUST WONDER HOW LONG AMERICANS WILL TIRE OF THIS INFIDELITY TOWARDS THIS GREAT NATION.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

INOT BAD BUT I TAKE POINTS OFF FOR LYING ABOUT

Revisado: 03-19-19

I take some stars off for lying about the constitutionality of Bush ..
can you believe this author gave Bush a B plus for his constitutionality rating?!?!
BUSH THE GUY WHO RAISED REGULATIONS AND TAXES. BUSH WHO GAVE US A MEDICAID EXPANSION ...MEDICAID D I BELIEVE ...BUSH THAT LITERALLY BROUGH US BAILOUTS OF BIG CORPORATIONS LEADING TO THE TOO BIG TO FAIL DOCTRINE OBAMA JUST EXPANDED AND USED TO URINATE OVER THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, SMALL BUSINESS AND COMPETITION IN GENERAL.
BUSH THE NATION BUILDER...THE CONSTITUTION S FOUNDERS ... WASHINGTON BELIEVED THAT THE NATION SHOULD ALLOW OTHER NATIONS TO GOVERN THEIR OWN AS THEY WOULD...THAT AMERICAN BLOOD WAS TO BE SHED ONLY IN THE MOST RARE CONDITIONS AS TO DEFEND AMERICAN INTERESTS. WE COULD HAVE SIMPLY DROPPED BOMBS, KILLED HUSSEIN AND LEFT THAT PLACE... YES THE VACUUM WOULD HAVE BEEN FILLED BY SOMEONE UNSAVORY BUT AT LEAST THEY WOULD RESPECT OUR POWER WHI CH IS ALL ANY LEADER IN THAT REGION IS CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING.... AND THEY'D REMEMBER...BOMB THE US AND LOSE 1000 TIMES THE SOLDIERS AND UR OWN LIVES AS THE LEADERSHIP AS WELL...AS REAGAN DID WITH IRAN. THE WAR IN IRAQ IN FACT SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST INCLUDED SAUDI ARABIA, SEEING THAT THE FUNDING FOR 911 CAME FROM SAUDI ARABIA AND MOST OF THE HIJACKERS WERE FROM SAUDI ARABIA....OH WE COULDNT DO THAT BUT FOR THE BUSH OIL INTERESTS AND A VENDETTA AGAINST HUSSEIN FOR DADDY BUSH.
I BELIEVE IRAQ // AFGHANISTAN WAS A BUSH ATTEMPT AT MAKING AN EXAMPLE FOR THE SAUDIS TO SEE ... AND IT FAILED... THE WAR WASNT THE BAD CALL AS THE WAR BILL PASSED BOTH HOUSES... THE BAD CALL WAS NOT ADDRESSING THE TRUE PROBLEM...RADICAL / ORTHODOX ISLAM, SAUDI ARABIA, AND STAYING AFTERWARDS WITHOUT EVEN TAKING PROPER COMPENSATION FOR OUR AMERICAN BLOOD SHED ... EACH FAMILY THAT LOST A SOLDIER SHOULD HAVR RECEIVED AT LEAST 10 MILLION DOLLARS AND NOT HAVING TO PAY TAXES FOR LIFE, EXTENDED TO THE IMMEDIATE FAMILY.
INSTEAD, WE STILL DO BUSINESS WITH THE HATEFUL SHAHS , MULLAHS AND HATEFUL LEADERSHIP IN SAUDI ARABIA, IRAN, ETC ...
BUSHBAMA WERE SHAMEFUL PRESIDENTS...THE MOST ELITIST, FECKLESS ONES OF THEIR OWN...
BARBARA BUSH SAID IT BEST WHEN SHE ACCIDENTALLY TOLD JEB.." WEVE HAD ENOUGH BUSHES IN THE WHITE HOUSE..." BASICALLY CONCEDING THAT HE SHOULDNT RUN.
AT LEAST ONE BUSH ISNT COMPLETELY FULL OF SHHHHHIIIIITTTT

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

amazing the truths that you need to find in a book

Revisado: 03-05-19

this book is def not fake news
congrats dan
and btw Leo is a dbag

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña