|
December 23,
2001
What have
they done to our food?
LORDS OF THE HARVEST: BIOTECH,
BIG MONEY, AND THE FUTURE OF FOOD By Daniel Charles Perseus,
$27, 348 pages REVIEWED BY RUTH
KAVA
In the good ol' days,
say 20 or 30 years ago, gene splicing or genetic engineering of
microbes was used to create pharmaceutical agents like human insulin
and growth hormone, and few disparaged either these ends or the
means used to accomplish them. No one begrudged diabetics their
recombinant insulin or growth hormone deficient children the
possibility of normal stature. But less than 20 years ago, the
biotechnology revolution invaded agriculture. The result has been
unease and alarm that has affected business and science, and
consumer and governmental attitudes about both. Our food supply, and
our thoughts and feelings about it have been
transformed. In "Lords of the
Harvest: Biotech, Big Money, and the Future of Food," Daniel Charles
chronicles how this came to
be. First, the basic research was
needed. Millions, perhaps billions, were spent before scientists
learned how to manipulate genes and get plant cells to accept a gene
from another organism, and then to grow those cells into new plants.
Once accomplished, the challenge was to streamline the process — a
feat involving the invention of yet another biotech tool — the gene
gun. Using, of all things, potato chip bags from a local vending
machine, the gene gun allowed scientists to mass produce the altered
cells they needed in order to, in turn, mass produce gene-spliced
seeds. Scientists from both academia and industry raced to be the
first to accomplish the goals, and to patent their techniques.
Then, of course, there was the
application of these techniques to agriculture itself. Growing corn
from cells in a lab or greenhouse is substantially different from
sowing seeds in a field exposed to sun, rain and the
unpredictability of nature in general. Financier George Soros
clearly understood this fact when, in 1981, he declined to invest in
agricultural genetic engineering: "I don't like businesses in which
anything you could possibly do will be overwhelmed by the effects of
the weather." Monsanto learned
this well — after triumphing in the technology race, its leaders had
to involve the company in the arcane area of seed production, an
industry largely controlled by family-owned businesses like Pioneer
Hi-Bred International and DeKalb Genetics. This they proceeded to do
both by licensing their gene products and by acquisition, but not
without some difficulties, which Mr. Charles amply
documents. The business of
agricultural biotechnology was, of course, beset by more ills than
just bad weather. The rise of biotech was paralleled by the rise of
the anti-biotech activists. Recombinant bovine growth hormone
(rBST), injected into cows to increase efficiency of milk
production, was the first gene-spliced product to hit the consumer
market in the late 1980s, and was denounced vigorously by the
activists. Among other unsubstantiated charges, they said rBST would
cause cancer in those who drank milk from treated cows, and stress
the animals themselves. Later,
particularly in Europe, where the bureaucratic bungling of Mad Cow
Disease undercut the credibility of governmental assurances of food
safety, the anti-biotech activists seized upon consumer unease to
raise a variety of fears about foods containing gene-spliced
ingredients. Concerns about human health as well as about potential
ecological disasters were widely
promulgated. In his eminently
readable account, Mr. Charles weaves the threads of science,
agriculture, business and social activism into a coherent, if not
simple, historical tapestry. Having been raised on a Midwestern
farm, Mr. Charles has an insider's appreciation of the rigors and
rewards of agriculture, and portrays both convincingly. His take on
agriculture is prosaic, not romantic. "Agriculture, in fact, is the
single human activity that has most profoundly erased 'nature' from
the planet, with no help whatsoever from genetic engineering," he
states outright in his prologue. In
addition to his bucolic roots, Mr. Charles also paid his dues as a
science reporter and technology consultant. His lucid explanations
of the birth and development of agricultural gene-splicing are
interlaced with interviews and anecdotes that paint pictures of a
period of great intellectual excitement and achievement. It was also
a time of relentless competition to be the first to report a
scientific advance, and the first to patent a new discovery or
invention. Trying to follow the
threads of which company did what to which crop at times can be a
little confusing — and for the non-business oriented reader,
remembering that Monsanto acquired DeKalb, while Dupont bought
Pioneer Hi-Bred (plus the 10 or so other companies involved) was
also a challenge. Having a pen and paper handy to draw a chronology
— or perhaps a business genealogy — will help the reader sort it all
out. Mr. Charles gives space to
both the industry and anti-biotech sides of the issues. His
sympathies are not wholly with the corporate world by any means. He
acknowledges the professionalism of some of the anti-biotech groups,
who ran focus groups to help direct their campaigns. They learned
that health and personal safety would resonate most with consumers,
and thus emphasized these concerns over those related to potential
ecological damage (although these, of course, have not been entirely
ignored). In their zeal to push
their agendas, however, these groups tended to neglect scientific
facts. Mr. Charles relates that after demonstrators halted the World
Trade Organization meeting in Seattle, Margaret Mellon, a trained
scientist and member of an anti-biotech group, claimed to have
learned something important: "The Europeans taught us that you can
mobilize people without a shred of evidence [regarding actual harm
to human health] . . ." And the
struggle continues. Mr. Charles delineates the major issues he sees
looming. These include the battle both here and abroad over labeling
foods that contain gene-spliced ingredients, and the questions as to
whether plants engineered to contain their own pesticides (Bt
proteins) will lead to widespread resistance in their insect
targets. While the book cannot
predict the resolutions of such issues (or other ones that will
surely arise), it provides the reader with an engaging, readable,
well organized and relatively unbiased examination of the process
that got us where we are.
Ruth
Kava is director of nutrition at the American Council on Science and
Health.
|