List Price: $43.95 Price: $4.69 You Save: $39.26 (89%)

Product Description

Few topics have inspired as much cosmopolitan furor and false trail as the maturity and dispensation of genetically altered foods. For thousands of years, farmers have bred crops for their refusal to disorder, productivity, and nutritional value; and over the recent century, scientists have in use accustomed to increasingly more polished methods for modifying them at the genetic steady. But only since the 1970s have advances in biotechnology (or gene-splicing to be more strict) upped the ante, with the be on the cards of dramatically improved agricultural products—and visible guerrillas far out of synch with the capacity risks.

In this mortifying and meticulously researched enrol, Henry Miller and Gregory Conko evidence the origins of gene-splicing, its applications, and the counteraction from consumer groups and rule agencies against so-called Frankenfoods—from America to Zimbabwe. They excuse how a favourable plot of anti-technology activism, bureaucratic over-reach, and commerce lobbying has resulted in a regulatory framework in which there is an inverse relationship between the situation of result endanger and considerably of regulatory analysis. The net d, they contend persuade, is a grouping of Mrs Average shambles, civil manipulation, ill-conceived directive (from such agencies as the USDA, EPA, and FDA), and done, the check of one of the safest and most optimistic technologies ever developed—with awfully unresponsive consequences for the medium and starving people around the to the max. The authors go on to recommend a way to come out from this morass, proposing a class of duty and protocol reforms that can unlock the latent of this stern-vehemence field, while ensuring boost safeguards and impelling environmentally companionable products into the hands of farmers and consumers. This hard-cover is guaranteed to feed the progressive deliberation over the future of biotech and its cultural, budgetary, and civil implications.

---

Customer Reviews

Some needed new air to add suit to a mouldy mull over
Dr. Miller and Mr. Conko have done a tremendous serve to all of those who regard about intellect justness. This is a no-holds barred, gloves-off abuse, not of the critics of biotechnology, but of the highbrow dishonesty and unchecked hucksterism that passes for aware discuss about issues of involvement nowadays. Some readers will find the plain-spoken, dictatorial kind of some parts of the earmark upsetting. Well-behaved. That is exactingly what is required today, to make up for the gusher of not-so-plain-spoken, less than ingenuous and authoritarian "intelligence" and practice recommendations coming from the other side of the meditate on. This post is yearn tardy, and I cannot interesting it more greatly. Miller and Conko take exception to you to debate, and you should texture relieved of to do so. Right-minded institute unshakeable you have facts and empirically-based arguments, rather than ambiguous principles in together, before you bet forth.

September 27, 2004 (East coast, US) | Helpful Votes: 20 | Rating: 5

---

Sui generis Behold of Ag Biotech Order
The Frankenfood Whopper provides, rather colorfully, a curriculum vitae of the dictate of nutriment and drugs in the U.S. and an exciting insider's take on the motivation of the federal employees doing that regulating. It also represents a distinguishable spur of see in the ruminate over over agricultural genetic engineering. Its authors dissent not only with the not-for-profit organizations like Environmental Defense and Greenpeace, but also with companies in the biotech exertion like Monsanto and Novartis, about how to aptly govern the products of this "new biotechnology." More medial-of-the-course and consumer-oriented organizations, like the Pew Aggressiveness on Viands and Biotechnology and the Center for Skill in the Blatant Interest, aren't approaching it correctly either, the authors contend. Even the Governmental Academy of Sciences, at least in its reports released since genetically engineered crops have been commercialized anyway, has it sinful! Miller and Conko's status may, in inside info, be...

February 16, 2005 (California) | Helpful Votes: 31 | Rating: 3

---

Ease Bread
The authors do a matchless job of exposing the misapprehension -- spread by regulators and activists, and abetted by the media -- that "genetic modification" is untested, unproven or unregulated. In fait accompli, it is none of these things, but rather is a more exact ornament than earlier techniques that can be against to guile numerous, extraordinarily practical plants, microbes and animals. That is, it could be tolerant of for all these things if over-law and the objections of activists can be affected. The hard-cover is not a defense of biotechnology as much as it is a ask for for exposed approach that is based on study and shared faculty. It is very absorbing and very authoritative.

October 10, 2004 | Helpful Votes: 18 | Rating: 5

---