Books

Against the Grain: Biotechnology and the Corporate Takeover of Your Food

Average customer rating:

Fearful but Sloppy
debunks the GM myth
Right at the core, sloppy with the details.
Food for (serious) thought
Excellent Book!

Against the Grain: Biotechnology and the Corporate Takeover of Your Food
Marc Lappe , and Britt Bailey
Manufacturer: Common Courage Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Company Profiles | Biography & History | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Industrial | Management & Leadership | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Genetics | Evolution | Science | Subjects | Books

General | Science | Subjects | Books

Biotechnology | Special Topics | Medicine | Subjects | Books

General | Health, Mind & Body | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

The Code of Codes: Scientific and Social Issues in the Human Genome Project
Cracking the Genome: Inside the Race to Unlock Human DNA
In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity
Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies About the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You're Eating
Cultures of Natural History

ASIN: 1567511503

Book Description

Current Events. Science. Do genetically engineered food crops really offer the "risk-free" breadbasket for the world promised by biotechnology companies like Monsanto? Or are there serious risks to human health and the ecosphere hidden in this silent revolution? AGAINST THE GRAIN slashes through biotechnology's propaganda, revealing the science and politics behind "transgenic" foods to show how biotech companies incresingly engineer what you eat to be compatible with their chemicals -- but not necessarily good for human health. Marc Lappe holds a doctorate in Experimental Pathology from the University of Pennsylvania and currently directs the Center for Ethics and Toxics in northern California. Britt Bailiey holds a Masters Degree in Environmental Policy and is a research associate at CETOS.

Customer Reviews:

Fearful but Sloppy.......2003-02-14

The authors warn against the dangers of genetically modified (GM) grains and cotton. These dangers involve possible escape of the artificially inserted gene(s) for pesticide or insect resistance, overspray of pesticide onto non-resistant crops, insects acquiring resistance to the Bt gene, corporate control of seeds to be used with specific herbicides, failure of transgenic crops, and the lack of increase in crop yields. All of these are genuine concerns, for which the authors admit that there is no proof, just worries; but the advantages get short shrift.

No evidence is presented on actual failures except for one set of transgenic cotton plants. Escape of genes could be fought with new seeds not containing the gene. The dread that insects will build resistance to the natural bacterial toxins of the Bt gene is poorly couched, because all prior experience is that insects will do so in time, and the amount of time is all that is in doubt. Corporate control of seeds and herbicides will last only as long as the patents, and then "generics" are likely to appear. We have had corporate control of hybrid seeds and pesticides for 3/4 century as it is. If crop yields become significantly lower, the transgenic strains will be dropped. It is unlikely that all crops will fail at the same time.

Nobel Prize winner Norman E. Borlaug, the father of the green revolution, and not an inventor of transgenic plants, could have spoken against them, but has done the opposite. In the Wall Street Journal, 22 Jan 03, pA.14, he wrote: "Although there have always been those in society who resist change, the intensity of the attacks against GM crops from some quarters is unprecedented and, in certain cases, even surprising, given the potential environmental benefits that such technology can bring by reducing the use of pesticides. Genetic engineering of crops -- plant breeding at the molecular level -- is not some kind of witchcraft, but rather the progressive harnessing of the forces of nature to the benefit of feeding the human race. The idea that a new technology should be barred until proven conclusively that it can do no harm is unrealistic and unwise. Scientific advance always involves some risk of unintended outcomes. Indeed, "zero biological risk" is not even attainable.

"Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa says he's been told by anti-biotechnology groups that donated American corn is "poison" because it contains GM kernels. Based on such misinformation, he is willing to risk thousands of additional starvation deaths rather than distribute the same corn Americans have been eating for years with no ill effects."

Another cautious, reasonable view is that of Bjørn Lomborg, The Skeptical Environmentalist, Cambridge University Press, UK, 2001, pp342-348. Examples of faked data on the toxicity of GM potatoes on rats and overblown fears of the effect of Bt corn on the monarch butterfly were given. Lomborg thinks the gains are worth the risks, and advises proceeding very cautiously, thus not to drop all the GM programs.

*****
The main reason for my 1-star rating for this book is not its conclusions, but its style. Despite academic-style referencing, albeit with almost no peer-reviewed papers on the actual subject of GM foods, the authors use practically every ploy practiced by propagandists.

The herbicide bromoxynil is said to have a toxic nitrile function (p.viii). The most common nitrile, acetonitrile, has an LD50 orally in rats of 3800 mg/kg, thus is less toxic than salt!

A "...horrible debacle from overuse of DDT..." (p.16) is not exemplified, but we are to think it had to do with thinning of birds' eggshells, which was disproven before DDT was banned in the USA by the EPA.

"Many countries like India are at the balance between survival and famine" (p.17). Then how is it then that 1/2 of south Asian adults are overweight and 1/3 are obese? (Lancet 2003;361:79).

"But the metabolic fate of DBHA [metabolite of bromoxynil] in the mammalian body has never been studied -- or at least reported" (p.42). A quick search of PubMed turned up: St John LE, Lisk DJ. Fate of the herbicides bromoxynil and casseron in cows. J Dairy Sci 1967;50(4):582-4.

The paucity of chemical knowledge of these authors is shown by the following: "Bromoxynil octanoate, the active ingredient in bromoxynil, is converted into bromoxynil phenol (what we have been calling DBHA) when it is metabolized in mammals. Although this step is designed to detoxify bromoxynil and make the molecule more easily excreted by the body, the by-product remains at least as toxic as its parent compounds" (p.43-4). The octanoate ester is the oil-soluble form of bromoxynil used in formulations; it is not the active form, which is bromoxynil itself, which is a phenol, so should not be called "bromoxynil phenol". Since most bromoxynil is metabolized to its acid derivative, DBHA, this "by-product" cannot be more toxic than its parent.

"Roundup [glyphosate] may also damage many non-target plants" (p.54). Well, of course! How many of us use Roundup to knock off all plants before seasonal planting?

"In 1993, 6 out of 7 plots...showed lower yields for conventional vs. transgenic soybeans" (p.83). This is exactly the opposite of one of the main points these authors tried to make -- that GM plants give lower yields!

Several times the authors trot out the old vegetarian aphorism that cattle convert their food to meat with only 10% efficiency (p.87), with 12% efficiency (p.112,135), and with 40 % efficiency (p.147). The authors do not seem to understand that humans do not like to eat wild grass, hay, alfalfa, or soybean hulls.

Diethylstilbestrol (DES) which had been used in cattle feed with some health problems in humans is trotted out like DDT as a scare mechanism, but it is not a plant product or a result of GM foods.

The "undesirability" of corporate profits is emphasized many times.

An attempt is made to foment alarm in orthodox religionists by hinting that GM foods may not be kosher or Halal.

debunks the GM myth.......2000-10-03

In only 150 pages, "Against the Grain" debunks many of the myths surrounding biotechnology and the genetic engineering that is revolutionizing US (and world) agriculture.One of the myths which "Against the Grain" debunks is the claim that genetically engineered crops are aimed at feeding the hungry of the world. As "Against the Grain" quite lucidly points out, if genetically engineered crops were aimed at feeding the hungry of the world then companies like Monsanto would develop seeds with certain characteristics such as: the ability to grow in substandard soils; the ability for plants to produce more protein, with increased per-acre yield, without increasing the need for expensive machinery, chemicals, fertilizer or water; they would aim to favour small farms over large farms; seeds would be cheap and freely available without restrictive licensing; they would be for crops that feed people, not animals.

None of the genetically engineered crops now available have any of these characteristics. In fact new genetically engineered seeds require high-quality soils, huge investment in machinery and an increased use of chemicals.As "Against the Garin" so adeptly illustrates, the genetic engineering revolution has nothing to do with feeding the world's hungry but everything to do with enriching a priviledged few.

Right at the core, sloppy with the details........1999-09-22

As a scientist working in the bio-industry, I felt compelled to read this book. Unfortunately, while it makes a number of good points and correctly identifies areas of uncertainity, it somewhat marres the pleasure of reading it by suboptimal craftmanship - incidentally one of the criticisms that are correctly made to our industry. I resented some factual mistakes and the impression that the book was not proofread before going to print, leaving it with some contradictions and loose ends. But, I repeat, the essence is right: "wait a minute!"

Food for (serious) thought.......1999-05-21

A readable introduction to the topic of agricultural biotechnology . . . The author rationally questions the benefits touted by the seed & chemical corporations leading this market. Lappe offers data to show that there's neither nutritional benefits nor yield increases as motivating factors in this enterprise. Seeds manufactured to be pest and/or insecticide resistant sound great, but the author discusses how there may be unforeseen complications. What should happen if crop pests mutate and develop a resistance to these "built-in" defense mechanisms? Will the neighboring farmer who doesn't use the altered seed lose his entire crop to pests instead of spreading out the damage? Will farmers douse our crops with more chemicals since the plant can withstand them? What about the farm downwind whose crops may not be resistant? Also at issue is the "homogenizing" of our seed supply. If problems arise, it might not be so easy to "de-alter" supplies.

And, of course, there's the issue of corporate greed. Lappe argues that companies like Monsanto force farmers into brand-loyalty by making seeds that are engineered to respond best to certain chemicals, usually those sold by the same company selling the seed. (Shocker!)

The theme of this book is simply that there are too many unstudied potential risks to the process.

Case in point: A Cornell University study announces (just this week!) that altered corn has been poisoning Monarch butterfly larvae.

Excellent Book!.......1998-11-20

Really interesting and well-written. Easy to understand, even for someone who is not a scientist. A real look at what companies like Monsanto are doing to the world's food supply.

Books:

Books