SuperFreakonomics: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes, and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance | 
| Authors: Steven D. Levitt, Stephen J. Dubner
Publisher: William Morrow
List Price: $29.99
Buy New: $10.49
as of 11/23/2009 09:22 CST details
You Save: $19.50 (65%)
New (54) Used (8) Collectible (4) from $10.49
Seller: cseereader
Rating:  100 reviews
Sales Rank: 11
Format: Deckle Edge
Media: Hardcover
Edition: First Edition, First Printing
Pages: 288
Number Of Items: 1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.1
Dimensions (in): 9.3 x 6.3 x 1.3
ISBN: 0060889578
Dewey Decimal Number: 330
EAN: 9780060889579
ASIN: 0060889578
Publication Date: November 1, 2009 (New: Last 30 Days)
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Features:
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com Review
Book Description
The New York Times best-selling Freakonomics was a worldwide sensation, selling over four million copies in thirty-five languages and changing the way we look at the world. Now, Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner return with SuperFreakonomics, and fans and newcomers alike will find that the freakquel is even bolder, funnier, and more surprising than the first. Four years in the making, SuperFreakonomics asks not only the tough questions, but the unexpected ones: What's more dangerous, driving drunk or walking drunk? Why is chemotherapy prescribed so often if it's so ineffective? Can a sex change boost your salary? SuperFreakonomics challenges the way we think all over again, exploring the hidden side of everything with such questions as: - How is a street prostitute like a department-store Santa?
- Why are doctors so bad at washing their hands?
- How much good do car seats do?
- What's the best way to catch a terrorist?
- Did TV cause a rise in crime?
- What do hurricanes, heart attacks, and highway deaths have in common?
- Are people hard-wired for altruism or selfishness?
- Can eating kangaroo save the planet?
- Which adds more value: a pimp or a Realtor?
Levitt and Dubner mix smart thinking and great storytelling like no one else, whether investigating a solution to global warming or explaining why the price of oral sex has fallen so drastically. By examining how people respond to incentives, they show the world for what it really is - good, bad, ugly, and, in the final analysis, super freaky. Freakonomics has been imitated many times over - but only now, with SuperFreakonomics, has it met its match. From Superfreakonomics: Where do you stand on the freak-o-meter?
 Four years ago, you were cool. You read Freakonomics when it first came out. You impressed family and friends and dazzled dates with the insights you gleaned. Now Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner return with Superfreakonomics, a freakquel even bolder, funnier, and more surprising than the first.
Have you been keeping up? Can you call yourself a SuperFreak? Test your Superfreakonomics know-how now: Question 1: 5 points
According to Superfreakonomics, what has been most helpful in improving the lives of women in rural India?
A. The government ban on dowries and sex-selective abortions
B. The spread of cable and satellite television
C. Projects that pay women to not abort female babies
D. Condoms made specially for the Indian market Question 2: 3 points
Among Chicago street prostitutes, which night of the week is the most profitable?
A. Saturday
B. Monday
C. Wednesday
D. Friday Question 3: 5 points
You land in an emergency room with a serious condition and your fate lies in the hands of the doctor you draw. Which characteristic doesn’t seem to matter in terms of doctor skill?
A. Attended a top-ranked medical school and served a residency at a prestigious hospital
B. Is female
C. Gets high ratings from peers
D. Spends more money on treatment Question 4: 3 points
Which cancer is chemotherapy more likely to be effective for?
A. Lung cancer
B. Melanoma
C. Leukemia
D. Pancreatic cancer Question 5: 5 points
Half of the decline in deaths from heart disease is mainly attributable to:
A. Inexpensive drugs
B. Angioplasty
C. Grafts
D. Stents Question 6: 3 points
True or False: Child car seats do a better job of protecting children over the age of 2 from auto fatalities than regular seat belts. Question 7: 5 points
What’s the best thing a person can do personally to cut greenhouse gas emissions?
A. Drive a hybrid car
B. Eat one less hamburger a week
C. Buy all your food from local sources Question 8: 3 points
Which is most effective at stopping the greenhouse effect?
A. Public-awareness campaigns to discourage consumption
B. Cap-and-trade agreements on carbon emissions
C. Volcanic explosions
D. Planting lots of trees Question 9: 5 points
In the 19th century, one of the gravest threats of childbearing was puerperal fever, which was often fatal to mother and child. Its cause was finally determined to be:
A. Tight bindings of petticoats early in the pregnancy
B. Foul air in the delivery wards
C. Doctors not taking sanitary precautions
D. The mother rising too soon in the delivery room Question 10: 3 points
Which of the following were not aftereffects of the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks on September 11, 2001:
A. The decrease in airline traffic slowed the spread of influenza.
B. Thanks to extra police in Washington, D.C., crime fell in that city.
C. The psychological effects of the attacks caused people to cut back on their consumption of alcohol, which led to a decrease in traffic accidents.
D. The increase in border security was a boon to some California farmers, who, as Mexican and Canadian imports declined, sold so much marijuana that it became one of the states most valuable crops. Answers and Scoring
Question 1
B, Cable and satellite TV. Women with television were less willing to tolerate wife beating, less likely to admit to having a “son preference,” and more likely to exercise personal autonomy. Plus, the men were perhaps too busy watching cricket. Question 2
A, Saturday nights are the most profitable. While Friday nights are the busiest, the single greatest determinant of a prostitute’s price is the specific trick she is hired to perform. And for whatever reason, Saturday customers purchase more expensive services. Question 3
C, One factor that doesn’t seem to matter is whether a doctor is highly rated by his or her colleagues. Those named as best by their colleagues turned out to be no better than average at lowering death rates--although they did spend less money on treatments. Question 4
C, Leukemia. Chemotherapy has proven effective on some cancers, including leukemia, lymphoma, Hodgkin’s disease, and testicular cancer, especially if these cancers are detected early. But in most cases, chemotherapy is remarkably ineffective, often showing zero discernible effect. That said, cancer drugs make up the second-largest category of pharmaceutical sales, with chemotherapy comprising the bulk. Question 5
A, Inexpensive drugs. Expensive medical procedures, while technologically dazzling, are responsible for a remarkably small share of the improvement in heart disease. Roughly half of the decline has come from reductions in risk factors like high cholesterol and high blood pressure, both of which are treated with relatively inexpensive drugs. And much of the remaining decline is thanks to ridiculously inexpensive treatments like aspirin, heparin, ACE inhibitors, and beta-blockers. Question 6
False. Based on extensive data analysis as well as crash tests paid for by the authors, old-fashioned seat belts do just as well as car seats. Question 7
B, Shifting less than one day per week’s worth of calories from red meat and dairy products to chicken, fish, eggs, or a vegetable-based diet achieves more greenhouse-gas reduction than buying all locally sourced food, according to a recent study by Christopher Weber and H. Scott Matthews, two Carnegie Mellon researchers. Every time a Prius or other hybrid owner drives to the grocery store, she may be cancelling out its emissions-reducing benefit, at least if she shops in the meat section. Emission from cows, as well as sheep and other ruminants, are 25 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than the carbon dioxide released by cars and humans. Question 8
C, the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines discharged more than 20 million tons of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, which acted like a layer of sunscreen, reducing the amount of solar radiation and cooling off the earth by an average of one degree F. Question 9
C, doctors not taking sanitary precautions. This was the dawning age of the autopsy, and doctors did not yet know the importance of washing their hands after leaving the autopsy room and entering the delivery room. Question 10
C, the psychological effect of the attacks caused people to increase their alcohol consumption, and traffic accidents increased as a result. Scoring
32-40: Certified SuperFreak
25-31: Freak--surprises lay in wait for you
16-24: Wannabe freak--you’ve got some reading to do
1-15: Conventional wisdomer--you’re still thinking in old ways
Product Description
The New York Times bestselling Freakonomics was a worldwide sensation, selling more than four million copies in thirty-five languages and changing the way we look at the world. Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner return with Superfreakonomics, and fans and newcomers alike will find that the freakquel is even bolder, funnier, and more surprising than the first. SuperFreakonomics challenges the way we think all over again, exploring the hidden side of everything with such questions as: - How is a street prostitute like a department-store Santa?
- What do hurricanes, heart attacks, and highway deaths have in common?
- Can eating kangaroo save the planet?
Levitt and Dubner mix smart thinking and great storytelling like no one else. By examining how people respond to incentives, they show the world for what it really is—good, bad, ugly, and, in the final analysis, super freaky. Freakonomics has been imitated many times over—but only now, with SuperFreakonomics, has it met its match.
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 100
 Freakonomics felt empty and missed the point November 23, 2009
D. N. Ivanoff (NY)
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
This book is a far cry from teaching you how you alone can benefit from economics. On top of that, enough with the commentary already, where are the practical tools that can teach us effective economic thinking summarized in a one-to-ten bullet points list? The reason for it is that if you truly want to learn how to make money in this world or the stock-market you need to read the works of Toby Crabel, Linda Rasche or some other professional traders that make living trading the market daily. Their books are very expensive because they do not right for a living, but trade for a living. I had to go find them on Ebay or Amazon. However, their writing is more focused on the techniques and ways to profit and trade any security, any time. Being very successful in this space myself, it takes a real book from a real trader these days to impress me. Reading Super Freakonomics felt rather tired and there are at least 3 other books in the space already that have become best-sellers on the same pop-economics concept.
A little too Random November 23, 2009
Ro (Los Angeles)
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
The authors were clearly over-leveraging the success of the first Freakanomics to sell this one. I found this one a bit empty-- taking their formula in a bit of a ridiculous direction...(walk drunk--drive drunk?)...is that normally the option?
It's random examples, comparisons and over-hyped stats rarely came full circle to some sort of point the average person could seriously consider....It seemed every time they started getting somewhere they contradicted themselves in the spirit of objectivity ruining the possibility of any valid perspective they could add to this hod-podge of information. Yes it makes you think...but doesn't supply a clear train of thought nor enough information to foster any type of conclusion. I can see where they were going they just never managed to get there.
 Vary Good content, but not so good printing quality November 22, 2009
Gustavo Vilardo (Brazil)
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
I've just finished the book and the content is very good, in line with the 1st Freakonomics.
But I was quite disappointed with the quality of the pages as they are badly cut in the edge, showing different sizes -it seems they were cut "by hand". The problem did not prevent me from reading, but it made more difficult to "change pages".
Good, but not super great November 22, 2009
Sam Leung (Waterloo, ON Canada)
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
Levitt and Dubner exposes another set of fascinating insights into human nature and mannerisms through economics, statistics and great storytelling. While the information presented was interesting and counter-intuitive, I found the book to be quite lean in material. I was hoping for more, but perhaps that`s why there may be a Doublesuperfreakonomics some time in the future.
Solid read, but wish there were more.
 Great Read November 21, 2009
J. Peek
2 out of 3 found this review helpful
This book, like the first one, makes you think outside of the box.
This isn't supposed to be the definitive answer to global warming or too child safety.
But it does make one consider and to look past all the politicking by Corporations, Scientists, and (of course) Politicians.
They don't consider themselves saviors or even to be the final answer. I see them as trying to liberate us from our self proclaimed boxes.
And that's what they do for me.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 100
|
|
|
|
