The Fly in the Ointment: 70 Fascinating Commentaries on the Science of Everyday Life [Paperback]

Dr. Joe Schwarcz (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: May 1, 2004 | ISBN-10: 1550226215 | ISBN-13: 978-1550226218

This entertaining examination of everyday science from the fanciful to the factual covers topics ranging from pesticides and environmental estrogens to lipsticks and garlic. Readers are alerted to the shenanigans of quacks and are offered glimpses into the fascinating history of science. The science of aphrodisiacs, DDT, bottled waters, vitamins, barbiturates, plastic wraps, and smoked meat is investigated. Worries about acrylamide, preservatives, and waxed fruits are put into perspective, and the mysteries of bulletproof vests, weight loss diets, green-haired Swedes, laughing gas, and "mad honey" are unraveled. Even those with very little knowledge of science will come away informed and delighted at those humorous and accessible explanations.

Editorial Reviews

About the Author

Dr. Joe Schwarcz is the director of McGill University's Office for Science and Society. He is the author of Dr. Joe & What You Didn't Know; The Genie in the Bottle; The Healing Power of Vitamins, Minerals, and Herbs; Radar, Hula Hoops and Playful Pigs; and That's the Way the Cookie Crumbles. "Dr. Joe" has a weekly radio program and column in the Montreal Gazette called "The Right Chemistry." He lives in Montreal, Quebec.

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.

I remember being quite taken when, as a student, I read Rachel Carson’s 1962 epic Silent Spring. As a biologist, Carson made a compelling case against the synthetic pesticides that had been introduced in the post&ndashWorld War II era. She maintained that they were responsible for fish kills, pollution of the soil, and reproductive problems in birds. DDT in particular caused thinning of egg shells and led to fewer hatchings. Ospreys, peregrine falcons, and eagles were disappearing, Carson said, and robins were being killed in misguided attempts to eradicate Dutch elm disease by spraying trees with DDT. That’s why there would eventually be no birds to sing: there would be a “silent spring.”

I was impressed by Carson’s book. I thought it was an excellent example of how we cannot always predict the consequences of a chemical intervention and how the introduction of a substance into the environment, although seemingly for all the right reasons, can backfire. Carson made an impassioned plea against putting blind faith in technology, particularly when it came to pesticides such as DDT.

This notorious compound was first synthesized in 1874 by Othmar Zeidler, who combined chloral (which later became known as a “Mickey Finn” after the Chicago bartender who supposedly used it to put his rowdy patrons to sleep), chlorobenzene, and concentrated sulfuric acid to make it. Zeidler was simply interested in making novel compounds for his Ph.D. thesis and never studied DDT further. But in 1939, Paul Muller, working for the JR Geigy Company in Switzerland, did. He was interested in moth repellants and had come across a compound called “diphenyltrichloroethane,” which was somewhat effective. Muller then did a literature search and came upon DDT, a closely related substance. He synthesized it according to Zeidler’s recipe and discovered that it was remarkably toxic to insects. And much to his satisfaction, it seemed not to have any effect on domestic animals or humans. Swiss farmers were thankful. Just a year after Muller’s discovery, DDT was used to wipe out the Colorado potato beetle, which had threatened the country’s potato crop.

By 1945 DDT was being used worldwide on numerous crops. But concerns arose with two discoveries: the chemical’s application caused it to disperse into the air and spread far and wide, and it was showing signs of toxicity in frogs and fish. By the 1950s it was apparent that DDT was building up in the fatty tissues of animals and humans. Eventually, the us Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stepped in and banned the substance. Rachel Carson had played her role, the environmental movement had begun, and a major problem had been eliminated.

I vividly recall telling this story in class when I first started teaching back in 1973. I thought Rachel Carson had done a great job. True, I had seen references to the use of DDT during the war to wipe out mosquitoes that transmitted malaria, but frankly, I didn’t pay much attention to that. After all, we didn’t have malaria in North America. It never occurred to me that maybe it was because of DDT use. After all, Rachel Carson had made DDT out to be a chemical villain, and the EPA had agreed with her. Being young and somewhat naïve, I didn’t think to check out some of Rachel Carson’s “facts.” When I finally did look into the DDT issue more deeply, I began to realize that the picture Carson had painted was not completely accurate. DDT had another side.

When the Germans retreated from the Italian city of Naples during World War ii, they dynamited the city’s water system. The inhabitants had no water to wash with, and body lice proliferated. The result was an outbreak of Typhus bellicus, or “war typhus,” a disease that in previous wars had killed millions. This time, though, the Allies had an answer. They had DDT. About 1.3 million Neapolitans were dusted with mixture of talcum powder and DDT, and within three weeks the epidemic was stopped in its tracks. But that was only the beginning. DDT turned out to be highly effective against mosquitoes that transmitted malaria. Sprayed on the walls of houses in the tropics, it would keep the insects away for weeks. In Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), where about 2.5 million cases of malaria were recorded annually in the 1950s, regular spraying led to just 31 reported cases in 1962. The world had never seen such a miraculous result.

Coincidentally, 1962 also marked the publication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, in which she described DDT as the “elixir of death.” And she wasn’t referring to insects. Carson was convinced that DDT and other similar pesticides had unleashed a catastrophic plague on the world. In addition to her prediction that wildlife would be affected to the point where no birds would be left to sing in the spring, she claimed that the accumulation of persistent DDT in the bodies of mammals would cause cancer rates to soar. She was certainly right about the persistence and accumulation of DDT. Both it and its major metabolite, DDE, persist in the environment for many years. They are essentially insoluble in water but are very soluble in fat, which means that they accumulate in fatty tissue and build up in the food chain. While plankton in water may have very little DDT, the fish that eat the plankton will have more, and birds that eat the fish more yet. We all have some DDT in our flesh that can be traced back to the massive spraying of agricultural fields and the vast amounts used in insect control efforts prior to 1972, the year when most uses of DDT were banned in North America. Indeed, in 1962, 80 million kilograms of DDT were used worldwide. Carson was absolutely correct when she said that DDT could be found in mountain lakes, in the bodies of polar bears, and at various sites far removed from where it was applied. But its presence is not enough to condemn it as a criminal. What other evidence did Rachel Carson have? Not much.

Product Details

• Paperback: 272 pages
• Publisher: ECW Press (May 1, 2004)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1550226215
• ISBN-13: 978-1550226218
• Product Dimensions: 8.2 x 5.4 x 0.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.8 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (8 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #343,334 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
  • #95 in Books > Science & Math > Essays & Commentary

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

20 of 24 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Fascinating and a Bit Irritating, January 1, 2005

By 

SHM1776 (Sudbury, MA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Fly in the Ointment: 70 Fascinating Commentaries on the Science of Everyday Life (Paperback)

This is much more than just a standard book of a scientist's essays intended to correct the flood of science misinformation to which we are relentlessly exposed. The essays are quite timely, mostly accurate in my view, and written with flair. If you liked the book "Innumeracy", or enjoy Bill Bryson, you will certainly enjoy this book, and will likely find it to be usefully educational.

An annoying typesetting feature in this book caught my eye, and may irritate you as well. The publisher (or author) seem unable to state the abbreviation "US" (for United States) in genuine capital letters, and the two letters repeatedly appear in a small font. No other country name or abbreviation is printed in this odd manner. The effect is strange, especially when it appears in a name such as "us Pharmacopeia." This is either a Canadian typesetting convention (to which I have not before been exposed), or a not-so-subliminal expression of mild contempt for the neighbor to the south.

I mention this because it did distract from my enjoyment of the book (which I had to put down several times while shaking my head in disbelief at the oddity of this typesetting approach), and forewarned, maybe you'll be able to enjoy the book a bit more.

Overall, this is well worth reading, and I intend to read the author's previous books. I'm sure the science will be very interesting (and who knows what typesetting surprises await).

7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A fun, educational leisure choice, March 13, 2005

By 

Midwest Book Review (Oregon, WI USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Fly in the Ointment: 70 Fascinating Commentaries on the Science of Everyday Life (Paperback)

What is the truth about taking garlic supplements to ward off illness and cure common diseases? What is the relationship between moldy corn and a movie? How do quacks popularize their theories, and what science is involved in corporate crime? These and other questions reveal the mysteries of science, using lively and popular topics to point out the scientific theories, quirks and misconceptions in everyday beliefs. A fun, educational leisure choice for general-interest audiences, The Fly in the Ointment: 63 Fascinating Commentaries on the Science of Everyday Life joins other similar science trivia fact guides by the venerable doctor.

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars I loved this book!, August 13, 2006

By 

David A. Fink (Federal Way WA USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Fly in the Ointment: 70 Fascinating Commentaries on the Science of Everyday Life (Paperback)

A great book that gives a reliable, skeptical, and logical look at many different ideas, partially or completely incorrect, that people have developed on scientific topics. One of the best books I have read in some time. I will be using the information gained in my classroom.