Child-Safety Books

A few others have reviewed this awful book with the same thing I was going to say. I really don't do reviews too often, but this book was so terrible in both it's message and lack of consequence or empathy that I specifically logged on today to do so.

So, since other reviewers have echoed my take on this book - take this review as emphasis that their reviews are correct and you should steer clear of this particular Clifford book.

What were they thinking when they published this one?!

I usually enjoy Clifford and the positive messages that typically come out of the books. I was deeply disappointed in this book and the negative message it sends to children.

1. Clifford succumbs to "negative peer pressure" not to look like a "coward" so he knowingly goes to a dangerous construction site to play with his "pals."

2. Clifford and his pals intentionally cause trouble at the site, putting themselves and the construction workers in harm's way.

3. The dogs run away from the construction site without an apology or any appearance that they were sorry for their deliberate destructive, dangerous and disobedient behavior, other than "they will never play at a construction site again."

I agree with another poster here that this is one of the worst, if not THE WORST, Clifford book I have ever encountered. Deliberate disobedience without consequence, danger without concern for others, and doing whatever you "must" to "fit in" with peers is not becoming of this otherwise well-done and positive character for children.

Join Emily Elizabeth and Clifford the big red dog as they go to a construction site with some dog friends. Clifford is so big he plays with the wrecking ball and gets his nose stuck in a huge pipe but he also gets a chance to save his friends. Oversized antics are fun! My three children love Clifford because he is huge and yet cuddly. The books are always friendly and appealing.

I disagree with the other reviews here. I think that they as adults, are missing the point. First, dogs are dogs. Clifford and his friends can't apologize for what they've done, they don't speak english. All they can do is bark! Second, the point of the story isn't about the construction workers and their loss, it is about the powerful effects of peer pressure and the dominoe effect. Clifford had good intentions, but despite this, each move he made got them in deeper and deeper. What a great discussion starter for children and their parents! A real opportunity to teach problem solving! Don't just read the book, explore it! See what the kids think. You'd be surprised how well they can figure these things out! I think Bridwell got a bad wrap for this one! The meaning of the story isn't in the words, but rather in what ISN'T written.

Don't get me wrong... I like Clifford books, but this one is contrived and pointless. Clifford's supposed "pals" break the law, and then when they are captured, they convince big loveable Clifford to help them break out. I am a kindergarten teacher, and this is one of the ONLY children's books that I refuse to read to my kids-- it sends the wrong message. Please spend your money on something with a more positive message!

At a mere 24 pages, including 1 for the contents, 9 full-page photographs of kids, and two more for the glossary and index, this book is simply pitiful.

The language and ideas in the 10 pages of text are so simple as to be useless, even for the youngest children. The book seems directed at Kindergarten-age students, but I have seen little evidence that kids at that age either bully or are bullied.

I don't know what the Conflict Resolution Library was thinking when they issued this book, but they seem to have completely missed the point. I can't recommend this book at all. Alyssa A. Lappen

This sparse book might be a good place to start when talking to children about bullying, but there simply IS NOT enough information to provide any real resolution to the problem.

Written almost as a children's book for the parents, the content of this book is simplistic, centered around a do-it-yourself guide for a few tools, toys and games. If you're looking for a scientifically based, nature-as-therapy type of resource, this is not it. Nor should this be used for public areas, due to its home-built nature. It may be a good primer for those completely unfamiliar with the concepts, but overall there are much better texts available

This book has a grand purpose, but I'm not sure it's the best resource out there. It starts out with an eye-opening introduction and then goes into a chapter on what is the Internet. Unfortunately, it explains it in very simplified and generalized terms. The next chapter explains the dangers present, which is useful information. The third tells what not to do when surfing on the Internet, and the last tells what one should do on the Internet to ensure a positive experience. Unfortunately, the book's tone gears it toward a younger audience than it appears to be made for. Few elementary students would pick up a non-fiction chapter book that sounds like it was written for their first-grade siblings. They would probably also be turned off by the pictures of computers which look like they've been around since the 80's. I would recommend a book that covers this topic in more depth and with less of a preachy tone.

This book is very basic. It deals more with sexual predators and the possibility of kids getting carried away from not knowing whom they are talking to. I received little material from this book that is adequate to prepare a youth lesson. I would suggest a book that is much more deeply though out with study questions.

Toxic Legacy is ably written. Clear writing helps navigate an arcane topic in which the author is well-versed. The book provides an interesting assortment of photographs of DDT uses during World War II and in the home. DDT's inventor received a Nobel prize for its enormous public-health contributions.

Wargo focuses on legal issues in the U.S. regarding pesticides. This sidesteps some broader scientific matters. As Wargo notes (p. 127), Bruce Ames and Lois Gold have made a case that the chemical ingredients that naturally make up our foods provide risks that dwarf those from residues of synthetic pesticides. The Ames/Gold argument meets common sense expectations, because foods are consumed in high doses for sustenance. Wargo dodges, because an implication is the triviality of risks posed by pesticide residues (the topic of his book): "it hardly seems prudent to avoid regulating synthetic toxins simply because we are commonly exposed to natural ones." This evasion is telling. Why ignore 99 percent of the risk (presented by natural ingredients in foods) and only pay attention to pesticide residues? Maybe because it is more appealing to stigmatize synthetic chemicals that protect foods supplies. Perhaps like many, the author favors natural chemicals and fears those of human invention. This is a dividing line with no intrinsic merit within pharmacology and biochemistry.

All living things constitute systems of interacting chemicals. Our choices in foods, drink, and pharmaceuticals very much influence health and development. Plants (fruits and vegetables) contain chemical ingredients to ward off predators. These toxicants collectively present much higher dose and risk than residues of synthetic chemicals used to protect crops against predators and disease agents like fungi, viruses, and bacteria. What are the health tradeoffs between disease agents versus synthetic pesticide residues? Or among various ways of protecting foods against disease agents?

Synthetic pesticides give many thoughtful people pause and can surely cause harm, if in excess dose (as with natural molecules). They deserve to be carefully managed by applicators. For decades, the U.S. has had ways of regulating pesticides to minimize unwanted impacts. Because children are more vulnerable to any and all chemicals, Wargo may contribute constructive suggestions, deep within the arcane field of pesticide regulation. Yet the strong subtitle, How Science and Law Fail to Protect Us from Pesticides, seems unjustified.

It is common for environmental scientists to analyze only a select few pesticides present within the environment. When found, these few are stigmatized and their use curtailed. This is an illusion of risk reduction, based on myopic analytic chemistry. In reality, society uses a great number of pesticides, and the residues of all could be detected, if sought. There is no holistic consideration of whether collective (unanalyzed) pesticide levels within the environment pose any greater or lesser risk than before cancelling of DDT and select pesticides. Wargo may be unmindful of this larger surrounding context, trusting in the scientific understanding within the environmental industrial complex he is endeavoring to improve. He seems conscientious in intention and this is praiseworthy.

For the reader interested in books on chemicals and health:
-- J. Rodricks. 1991. Calculated Risks: understanding the toxicity and human health risks of chemicals in our environment. Cambridge U. Press
--Geoffrey Kabat. 2008. Hyping Health Risks: environmental hazards in daily life and the science of epidemiology. Columbia Univ. Press.
-- Cass R. Sunstein. 2005. Laws of Fear: beyond the precautionary principle. Cambridge Univ. Press.
-- John Emsley. The Consumer's Good Chemical Guide. W.H. Freeman
-- W. Baarschers. eco-facts & eco-fiction. Routledge Press.
-- Aaron Wildalsky. 1995. But is it True?: a citizen's guide to environmental health and safety issues. Harvard Univ. Press.
-- John F. Ross. Living Dangerously: navigating the risks of everyday life. (Perseus)
-- National Research Council. Carcinogens and Anticarcinogens in the human diet. National Academy Press.

The lights don't make logical sense. You press the green or red button and they both blink. This really fits with the book. Because it doesn't make sense. They start off talking about different people in the community to help keep kids safe, which is nice and then switch to a brief and confusing home safety page and then switch to the last page, which talks about safety outdoors. It would have been ok, if they hadn't tried to fit so much on 2 pages. So the good and bad safety points are mixed together. I wanted to return this book, but I wouldn't have really saved any money and would have taken too much time. The publisher should have focused on one safety theme and kept with it, not try to cover everything.

Holy crap this was so bad. This author just tried to show off the stuff she knew. I was curious about school performance in developing countries, but after reading this, I really don't care. This was horrible, it would get 0 stars if that was possible.

This book is no good. There is hardly any meaningful content in Royston's words, and what is there is often false or misleading. I think our local library got a deal on books from this publisher or something, because this series is awful.

I purchased this passcode because it said 7th edition. When it arrived, I opened it, and tried to use it. I had difficulty and it would not correspond with my online course.
I further inspected the package and to my surprise it was the 6th edition.
When I was viewing it online, I KNOW it said 7th. I was very unhappy because this misleading information caused me to fall a week behind in my course. In the end, I got the correct passcode for this course from the publisher and at a less expensive rate.