ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, April 28, 1996 TAG: 9604290138
SECTION: BOOKS PAGE: 4 EDITION: METRO
TYPE: BOOK REVIEW
SOURCE: REVIEWED BY cHIP BARNETT
OUR STOLEN FUTURE: ARE WE THREATENING OUR FERTILITY, INTELLIGENCE, AND SURVIVAL? - A Scientific Detective Story. By Theo Colborn, Dianne Dumanoski and John Peterson Myers. Dutton. $24.95.
How does one approach a science book trumpeted by the publisher with endorsements from a politician (Al Gore), an actor (Robert Redford), and a men's magazine (Esquire)? Skeptically.
The biological problem is this: Fetal development is controlled both by genes and by hormones coursing through the fetus's blood. While the genetic blueprint is fixed at conception, the hormones' effect can be warped by chemicals lurking in the mother's body, chemicals that can mimic or block natural hormones.
The result is that synthetic chemicals such as dioxin can cause not only cancer in exposed adults, but reproductive abnormalities in animals and humans exposed before birth. Fetuses genetically destined to become male can be led by environmental estrogens to develop as females or be caught in limbo with both male and female reproductive organs.
The list of familiar hormone mimics is tinged with horror: DES, dioxin, DDE (a breakdown product of DDT), chlordane, kepone, PCBs. Many of them are "persistent" chemicals, difficult to break down. PCBs, for instance, linger in animal fat, and so become enormously concentrated as they move up the food chain.
These substances are ubiquitous - not just in industrial countries, but in remote Arctic regions - and they are biologically active even in incredibly tiny amounts. Some effects are proven (birth defects, damaged reproductive organs), others still tentative (a halving in average human sperm count over the past 50 years).
The breathless writing in "Our Stolen Future" makes it hard to set aside skepticism. It is not a "scientific detective story" but rather an attempt to warn the public of a possibly catastrophic technological danger.
That attempt is successful, with a logical discussion of evidence and reasons ended by recommendations for solving the problem.
In a refreshing contrast to the outward hype, the authors are careful to identify speculation as such. But the book's greatest weakness is a failure to address its critics or the contrary evidence in any detail. While the authors refer to favorable papers in Science, they do not mention Stephen Safe or Bruce Ames, toxicologists whose opposing views are covered in the July 15, 1994, issue of Science.
Despite its pedestrian writing and one-sided arguments, "Our Stolen Future" is an important book. Anyone who cares about the health and even survival of future generations should read it. Initial skepticism will likely dissolve into wary belief, leaving a thirst for more answers - which is, after all, the authors' intent.
Chip Barnett is a Rockbridge County librarian
LENGTH: Medium: 59 linesby CNB