Conrad Seipp, Research Associate, Health Services Research Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, reviews Paul Starr's *The Social Transformation of American Medicine* (1983). Starr, a Harvard sociologist, presents a comprehensive yet focused analysis of the transformation of the American medical profession into a sovereign entity and the emergence of a vast medical industry. The book is divided into two parts: the first explores the medical profession's rise to power and cultural authority, while the second examines the struggle for medical care and the increasing corporate influence on the medical industry. Starr highlights the profession's ability to maintain autonomy and control over health-related matters, but he overlooks key sociological issues, such as the social determination of medical knowledge and the processes of medicalization and demedicalization. He also fails to address the historical context of medical knowledge limits and the role of the medical profession in shaping social norms. Starr's analysis assumes that medical authority stems from the expansion of medical knowledge, but this is challenged by examples like the shift from home to hospital care and the neglect of prevention. While the book is provocative and important, it has blind spots that limit its depth. Despite these shortcomings, the book is a significant contribution to the understanding of the American medical system. Jack Hadley's *More Medical Care, Better Health?* (1982) argues that increased medical spending does not necessarily improve health outcomes, using data from 1970 to challenge the assumption that more money leads to better health.Conrad Seipp, Research Associate, Health Services Research Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, reviews Paul Starr's *The Social Transformation of American Medicine* (1983). Starr, a Harvard sociologist, presents a comprehensive yet focused analysis of the transformation of the American medical profession into a sovereign entity and the emergence of a vast medical industry. The book is divided into two parts: the first explores the medical profession's rise to power and cultural authority, while the second examines the struggle for medical care and the increasing corporate influence on the medical industry. Starr highlights the profession's ability to maintain autonomy and control over health-related matters, but he overlooks key sociological issues, such as the social determination of medical knowledge and the processes of medicalization and demedicalization. He also fails to address the historical context of medical knowledge limits and the role of the medical profession in shaping social norms. Starr's analysis assumes that medical authority stems from the expansion of medical knowledge, but this is challenged by examples like the shift from home to hospital care and the neglect of prevention. While the book is provocative and important, it has blind spots that limit its depth. Despite these shortcomings, the book is a significant contribution to the understanding of the American medical system. Jack Hadley's *More Medical Care, Better Health?* (1982) argues that increased medical spending does not necessarily improve health outcomes, using data from 1970 to challenge the assumption that more money leads to better health.