SKU: 77665950943
arsenal applicator's concentrate herbicide

arsenal applicator's concentrate herbicide Tweetmint Enzyme Plant Wash – BuildASoil

Sale price$20.28 Regular price$22.53
Save 10%

Pay in installments of $5.63 with ShopPay, AfterPay and Klarna

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Nov 11 - Nov 16

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

arsenal applicator's concentrate herbicide Tweetmint Enzyme Plant Wash – BuildASoilTweetMint Enzyme Plant Wash is the perfect household cleaning companion; safe, nontoxic and strong enough for any task. It is biodegradable and will not contaminate people or environment. Experience the awesome power of all natural activated enzyme. We were looking at enzyme cleaners for Pesticide use and came across this company along with all the TONS of free information that they publish. Because the IPM PDF they offer is so awesome we wanted to

TweetMint Enzyme Plant Wash is the perfect household cleaning companion; safe, nontoxic and strong enough for any task. It is biodegradable and will not contaminate people or environment. Experience the awesome power of all natural activated enzyme.

We were looking at enzyme cleaners for Pesticide use and came across this company along with all the TONS of free information that they publish. Because the IPM PDF they offer is so awesome we wanted to share it here with you:

FREE INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT GUIDE CLICK HERE

Useful Info

(The statements expressed herein are the personal views of author Stephen L. Tvedten, and do not reflect those of Safe Solutions, Inc. and are for informational purposes only)

Pest control expert Stephen Tvedten has patented and documented the process of using enzyme compounds as biological pesticides to achieve safe, nontoxic control of insects. Tvedten's Patented Process has 77 claims on the process of using various surfactant formulas and enzyme compositions to control a broad array of pests such as insects, arachnids, bacteria, viruses, and mold. The patent protects the use of enzyme-based compounds as a nontoxic alternative to pesticide for controlling insects and arachnids.

In The Best Control 2 IPM encyclopedia, Stephen Tvedten outlines how through years of pest control field research he has developed the use of enzyme as a natural source of pest control. He has consistently proven that enzymes make an outstanding alternative to using synthetic pesticide poisons. Pesticides are persistent and pervasively poisonous, harming not only insects, but also people and pets. Agriculture has waged a costly struggle fighting insects by constantly rotating obsolescent pesticides in a desperate strategy of chemical warfare. It is time to discover an alternative. Enzymes offer a non-toxic and safe solution to pest control, making them preferable to the health hazards of pesticides.

· Welcome to the cleaner future of pest control ·

How Enzyme Works

Insects make formidable opponents because they are protected by strong exoskeletons - hardened shells that cover them like a suit of armor and have the locomotion of a tank. It is the exoskeleton that has most challenged pest control - until now. Enzyme is the key.

Because an insect's exoskeleton is a hard shell made of non-living material, it does not grow in size with the insect's development. Therefore it is necessary for all insects to shed their exoskeletons several times during the course of their life. They accomplish this by using enzymes they create naturally to split open their exoskeleton and thus grow larger. It is during this molting phase that an insect is at its most vulnerable - susceptible to drying out or drowning since the hard shell that normally would protect them has been cast off.

The surface of every insect's exoskeleton is covered with a waxy, water-repellant patina known as the cuticle. This outer coating protects the insect from harm, and has long been an obstacle for pesticide's effectiveness - the chemicals must penetrate the cuticle in order to affect the insect, so pesticides employ a variety of volatile solvents, toxic dusts or light oils in order to cut through the cuticle and thus deliver the poison into the insect interior.

The solution to cracking the cuticle of an insect's exoskeleton was discovered through the observation of insect entomology - insects employ enzymes to escape their exoskeletons. By utilizing cultured enzymes that mimic those found in nature, a natural form of biological pesticide can be produced that has the ability to dismantle the armor of an insect instantly.

Enzyme Plant Wash digests insect's waxy cuticle on contact and dismantles their exoskeleton - effectively forcing insects into immediate molting in which the protective shell is stripped.

Using enzyme-based formulas as a form of biological pest control is an ingenious play of engaging the forces of nature to our advantage. Enzymes exist throughout the insect, plant and animal kingdoms to aid in the digestion of organic matter. Arachnids such as spiders and scorpions inject their prey with enzyme; insect larvae (maggots) also rely on enzymes to predigest their food for them. Insectivore plants also use enzymes to digest insect prey. Even cellular organisms such as bacteria, mold, mildew and yeasts all depend on enzymes to aid in the external digestion of food sources. Enzymes play a fundamental role to all life because they are a necessary catalyst to speed up the chemical reaction of metabolism. Enzymes are used by living beings to break down complex structures in food digestion.

Enzymes are used throughout the food industry to pre-digest proteins and starches: baby food manufacturers add enzymes to soften the food, bakers add protease enzyme to flour to lower protein level, and brewers add enzymes to beer during fermentation to help filter and clarify the beer. Cheese makers as well use enzymes in the ripening phase of cheese.

Why Use Enzyme

Enzyme control of insects is preferable to traditional pesticide-based approaches to pest control for several reasons, not least of which is the elimination of chemical exposure risk.

Enzyme control is non-toxic and safe for people and the environment, pesticides are not. Enzyme is a desirable alternative to pesticide control because it relies on physical biology rather than on toxic substances to achieve success. Enzyme control is universal in range - all insects are affected by enzyme - enzyme works for any pest problem encountered.

Unlike pesticides, enzyme can be adjusted in strength, allowing specific insect species to be targeted or spared according to intent. For example, one can treat an organic garden with a weak concentration in order to eliminate aphids but protect beneficial honey bees.

Unlike pesticides, enzyme control will never become obsolete. Because the biology of insects depends on the creation of enzymes in order for survival, it is impossible for insects to develop a resistance to enzyme as a method of pest control. Insects have an ability to rapidly evolve an immunity or resistance to commercial pesticides within a short time, even within a single crop cycle! This leads to a costly rotation of chemical warfare. Sadly, human beings do not have the biological tolerance to the persistent pollution of pesticides that insects do, and are often the ultimate victims of pesticide. Fortunately a consistently reliable and safe solution to pest control has been discovered - enzyme.

Enzyme control achieves safer, faster and more effective results than pesticide poisons. Replace the health risk of outdated chemical pesticides with a sure-fire and completely non-toxic alternative method for exterminating pests - TweetMint Enzyme Plant Wash.

Pest Control has long sought the perfect pesticide, an idealHoly Grail that is totally safe for humans, yet certain death to insects, and would never become obsolete. Why this had not been found was due to a lack of exploring outside the realm of traditional pesticides - which rely solely on the application of hazardous chemical poisons to kill insects. Enzyme based biological pesticides offer just such a perfect resource for non-toxic pest control.

Enzyme Pest Control

Safe Solutions Enzyme Plant Wash controls pests such as insects, bacteria, mildew and mold. The enzymes used in the formula exhibit the same properties as those that occur naturally in all insect species - causing a digestive disintegration of the exoskeleton. When enzyme makes contact with an insect, it quickly digests its exoskeleton resulting in prompt death. This process does not harm human skin and is 100% safe, non-toxic and hypoallergenic.

The ingredients of Enzyme Plant Wash are recognized as Non-Toxic, Food Grade, or GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) and are pH balanced, hypoallergenic & biodegradable.

Enzyme Plant Wash is a valuable alternative to using pesticide in situations where there are chemically-sensitive people such as those who are pregnant, infants, elderly, ill or MCS.

Typically, a dilution of 2 to 4 oz. Enzyme Plant Wash concentrate per gallon of water will kill most any insect in several seconds. Arachnids such as spiders and ticks have stronger exoskeletons than arthropods and may take several minutes to succumb to the enzyme. When spraying outdoors a dilution of ½to 1 oz. Enzyme Plant Wash per gallon of water is a better solution so that collateral damage to beneficial insects is prevented. This solution works well for organic gardening / farming or as a drench for ant or yellow jacket nests.

The dilution rate of the enzyme concentrate can be calibrated to affect only specific target species but weak enough to protect beneficial insects such as honey bees. For example, a dilution of 1 oz. Enzyme Plant Wash per 5 gallons of water can be used in organic gardening to remove softer-bodied aphids, but will not harm beneficial insects such as honey bees. Start with a weak dilution and increase concentration until the target insect is pinpointed.

Indoors, Enzyme Plant Wash is fantastic for washing floors and furniture, laundry and linens, tub and tile to remove them not only of stubborn stains but also prevent insect invaders.

Outdoors, Enzyme Plant Wash is great for organic gardening, landscaping, and lawn care. It is non-toxic and biodegradable, so it can be fogged or sprayed onto vegetables, fruit trees, orchards, crops and lake or pond water restoration without fear of contamination.

Caution: Safe Solutions Enzyme Plant Wash is a broad-range bio-pesticide and will kill all insects including beneficials, so use them outdoors with great discretion!

* Safe Solutions is currently seeking to register their Enzyme Plant Wash with the EPA as a bio-insecticide. Official pesticidal claims cannot be made until it is registered with EPA.

Because commercial pesticides are comprised of chemicals which are volatile, synthetic and poisonous, the EPA prohibits registered pesticides from claiming they are either safe or non-toxic. However, since Safe Solutions Enzyme Plant Wash is in fact a natural biological pesticide that affects insects based on physical rather than chemical properties, it is better to refer to it as a Pestisafe® rather than as a pesticide.

Be aware that not all enzyme cleaners are safe to use for non-toxic pest control, most are not designed for this purpose and many are toxic such as those purchased at swimming pool supplies or janitorial supplies, e.g. drain openers and septic tank treatment cleaners. Other biological detergents available on the market are not manufactured for pest control. Only Safe Solutions Enzyme Plant Wash is patented for the purpose of non-toxic pest control.

Summary of Patent

Pesticides present risks to human health. Although the rate of post-application degradation may vary widely, almost all pesticides present some direct risk to human health through residual toxicity, i.e. direct human contact with pesticide residues remaining after treatment, whether through inhalation of volatile toxic vapors, skin contact and transdermal absorption, or ingestion. In addition, many pesticides present indirect risks to human health in the form of environmental pollution, most notably pollution with persistent, halide-substituted organics which accumulate in the fat stores of food fish and other animals. These problems have led to complete bans on the use of some pesticides (e.g., DDT, chlordane, heptachlor, aldrin, and dieldrin); while the continued use of the remaining pesticides has produced a new problem: the increasing development of widespread resistance to pesticides in insects.

This resistance yields two results: 1) quick reinfestation by the pest insect; 2) the need and cost of continually engineering new pesticides (e.g., synthetic pyrethroids were developed because of resistance to the less toxic first generation pyrethrins). New pesticide production takes time and the new pesticides that result are almost universally more expensive than those they replace.

In this context, traditional pesticides are applied on a regular, and typically increasing, basis. For example, many schools have come to be sprayed monthly or even biweekly, and with increasing quantities of pesticides to combat endemic roach re-infestations, often to no avail. This intensifies the problem of residual toxicity to people, especially to children who, as a result, may suffer headaches, grogginess, nausea, dizziness, irritability, frenetic behavior, and an impaired readiness to learn.

Because of these effects, it has been recognized that totally new approaches must be discovered and implemented in order to effectively control invertebrate pests without destroying human health and the environment. There is a need for a quick-acting, effective, residually non-toxic method for combating insect, arachnid, and other pests which may be used as a replacement for traditional pesticide treatments and as a supplement to the arsenal of currently available IPM techniques.

Consequently, it is an object of the present invention to provide a method for combating invertebrate (i.e. insect and arachnid) and microbe (i.e. bacterial, algal, fungal, and/or viral) pests which is quick-acting, effective, and residually non-toxic and which may be used as a replacement for traditional pesticide treatments and as a supplement to the arsenal of currently available integrated pest management techniques.

It has been surprisingly found that the application of a composition comprising at least one protease enzyme is a method for exterminating pests which achieves these objectives. The enzyme component of the invention may comprise a single protease or a protease-containing mixture of enzymes, whether natural, preformed, or synthetic. In an alternate embodiment, the composition may also comprise a detergent component. This detergent component comprises one or more surfactant(s), detergent builder(s), or mixtures thereof.

(Safe Solutions, Inc. does not make pesticidal claims regarding its Enzyme Plant Wash)

Useful Info Cont.
From the FREE IPM GUIDE PDF
4) Then if you still have pest problems - use the ideal pesticide - Safe Solutions Enzyme Cleaners. So, how does the Safe Solutions enzyme cleaner safely and far more effectively control insects, arachnids, mold, fungus, bacteria and viruses? - http://www.theidealpesticide.com Basically, the same way it cleans. The various ingredients are skillfully combined to give a synergistic control of virtually all of your pest problems. The same way a boxer throws different punches/combinations to control his opponent - Safe Solutions, Inc. uses various ingredients that all have different pest control abilities to virtually control all pest problems.
Let us look at the various ingredients:
Sodium Borate — Works as a dust, liquid and/or foam. Boron in the form of sodium salt has been used as an embalming agent by the ancient Egyptians, and as a flux for welding gold. Boric acid and borax have been used as mild antiseptics, especially for burns and the eyes. For the last 200 years boric acid was used to preserve food, but this use has been stopped because it could be used to “cover up” food unfit for consumption. Boric acid has been used to alleviate burns and stings and as a powder to prevent rash. Patients have been given 10 gm. per day for extended periods, and then excreted boron after 7 weeks. The acute boron dose for an adult is 20 - 60 mg. in a single dose and infants have died with 5 gm. In many countries, boron is given as a food supplement with the claim it heals 80% - 90% of all arthritis, cardiopathiesis have been corrected, vision has improved, balance has been restored, cases of psoriasis have also been improved. Dogs, horses, cattle, deer and goats have all been healed of arthritis. Today western societies (like the U. S. A.) ingest about 2 mg. boron daily; early in the 1900s we ate about 8 mg. boron per day. It is thought 5 - 6 mg. boron per day will prevent arthritis, but a higher dose may be needed for treatment. It is a registered (non-volatile) pesticide and a lumber preservative and as a micronutrient. The disodium octaborate (Na2B8O13.4H2O) product (DOT), e.g., Tim-bor®, has been used by Stroz Services, Inc., Get Set, Inc. and many countries for years as a wood preservative and as a remedial control of wood destroying pests. Boric acid (H3BO3) and its salts, the borates, borax (Na2B4O7.10H2O) and disodium octoborate tetrahydrate (Na2B8O13.4H2O), DOT, have been used for wood protection in Australia and other countries since the 1940s. Liquid borate sprays protect the wood against decay, carpenter ants, wood boring beetles and termites. Sodium borate is currently coming into wide use as a wood preservative here in the U. S. These compounds make wood permanently resistant to fungal decay and insect damage, and also act as fire retardants. Borates are slow-acting stomach poisons to insects and contact poisons to wood destroying fungi. Borates are not directly lethal to an organism. Borates reduce the intestinal flora which allow insects to digest food. Borates deactivate enzymes by cross-linking the enzyme’s hydroxyl groups. Although borates are highly toxic to insects, they are less toxic to mammals because mammals excrete boron faster than insects. Borates are biostats rather than biocides. On fungi borates work on contact, since disrupting the enzymes in fungi stops them from extracting nutrients in the wood. Sodium borates inhibit necessary oxidative metabolic activity at the cellular level - a constant energy-producing process necessary for life. Over time inhibition of fundamental biochemical activity results in death. Tests for termite control in the 1930s had shown promise, but more toxic chemicals were introduced and these naturally-occurring controls were simply ignored by the poison applicators here, in favor of the extremely dangerous and carcinogenic termiticide poisons, e.g., chlordane, aldrin and heptachlor. To apply Tim-bor as an aqueous solution, use two applications of 10% Tim-bor solution or a single application of 15% Tim-bor, the 15% solution is created by mixing 1½ lb. of the insecticide per gallon of water and applying immediately and/or a surfactant/foaming agent can be added to create a dry foam. The Tim-bor foam may be applied directly to wood surfaces or injected into insect galleries or wall voids. Sodium borate may be applied in two ways for general control of roaches, silverfish, ants and other insects: (1) in powder form to insect harborage areas or as a crack and crevice and void treatment, or (2) as an aqueous solution for crack and crevice treatment only. The product is highly toxic to both wood-destroying organisms and general insects but has low acute mammalian toxicity and is normally excreted quite rapidly. It is environmentally sound and can be used around children and pets, with no need for evacuation. It is easy to handle and mix, requiring no harsh chemical solvents. Tim-bor® is not absorbed through unbroken skin and washes off easily with soap and water. It is also odorless and non-flammable. When you use/substitute sodium borate to create baits, use about 1/2 the amount you would with boric acid. If you mix a tablespoon of sodium borate, 1/8 teaspoon of tea tree oil or emu oil and 1/2 teaspoon of fish oil with a capsule of Not Nice to Arthritis in a cup of body lotion. Stir and heat ingredients in a microwave oven for 25 - 30 seconds until thoroughly mixed; this mix will greatly help as a topical treatment for arthritis. Caution: While borates are not known to bio-accumulate in humans or pets, and are not absorbed through intact skin, all dusts should be applied using adequate personal safety protective gear. A dust mask should be worn to protect the applicator from inhaling dust, especially in areas of poor ventilation. Rubber gloves and long sleeves are also recommended to prevent skin abrasion and dermatitis. When applying a dust, care should be taken to apply only a thin layer of the material on the surfaces being treated. When completed, the areas treated should look as if they are in need of a dusting. Dust applications should be done only in wall voids, under cabinets and shelving units and in other dead air spaces where it will not be contacted by people or animals. If you can get any insect to ingest DOT you will kill them. The dead sea will always be the dead sea - salts do not break down but they keep on killing - Death Valley is death to all because of the borax. So use sodium borates to permanently control wood-destroying insects, fungi, termites and molds. Caution: Sodium borate’s LD50 is more toxic than boric acid, but remember boron (as sodium borate) is also a food supplement, e.g., in Chroma Trim Gum®. The Author, like many people, believes that baits 1853 made with 3% or less sodium borate work better than baits made with boric acid. Sodium borate can be used for “pretreatment” baits to pretreat or control termites. In order to ensure the best control, make them at ½% to 3% and monitor them yearly. When sprayed on concrete, the Author believes DOT becomes calcium boron and will not leach - killing many pest, e.g., roaches, termites and fungi permanently. The same sodium borate formula is also sold as Solu-bor®, a fertilizer (or as an essential micronutrient to plants) and as Poly-bor®, a fire retardant. DOT also will “microencapsulate” some pesticides, e.g., pyrethrum, and keep them around in crystals for generations. When any insect rests on them it quickly dies. The Author knows of route men in Florida who routinely added sodium borate to their sprayers, that already contained (several) volatile, synthetic pesticide poisons, and have all reduced the use of volatile, synthetic pesticide poisons up to 75% the first year and up to 90% the second year. See Caution in Chapter 36. U. S. borates were being tested for termite control at least since Cel Cure® was patented to protect wood in 1933, but research was shelved in favor of more toxic substances like the cyclodiene chlorinated hydrocarbons, e.g., chlordane, heptachlor, aldrin and dieldrin. Already in the 1940s borax and boric acid and sodium borate were routinely being used to protect wood in Australia, New Zealand and Europe. Lumber was protected on a commercial scale by the dip-diffusion method in Australia in the mid-1940s and sodium borates with greater water solubility were being used in Australia and New Zealand in the 1950s. By the 1970s hundreds of research papers noted how great borates protected wood. Only after aldrin, dieldirn, chlordane, heptachlor and mirex were banned or removed in the U. S. in the 1980s did the U. S. allow these wonderful U. S. Pestisafes® to be used here. As of this writing, several states still will not allow them to be legally used to protect wood safely; these regulators still insist that the maximum rate of far more volatile and, therefore, more dangerous/toxic termiticide poisons, that do not last any where as long, or work as well (even when they are contaminating us), be “used” to protect people and their property - no matter what the people want! It is a sad fact that most U. S. homes treated with volatile, synthetic termiticide poisons or fumigants have to be routinely monitored and retreated. Not only do the volatile termiticide poisons not work, they are killing us. These regulators did not learn anything about safe termite control -
How To Use
Use 1/2 ounce per gallon of water as prevention and up to 1 ounce per gallon for eradication
Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 77665950943

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell arsenal applicator's concentrate herbicide

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.8 ★★★★★
Based on 8 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
M
Verified Purchase
mtspace
Houston, US
★★★★★ 4
Monumental Thesis, Richly Researched & Carefully Argued
Motivating this book are two questions 1) When Spanish conquistador Pizzaro encountered Inca emperor Atahualpa, how did the former, with fewer than two hundred men overwhelm the latter with over 80,000? and 2) When the Europeans set up colonies on the island of new Guinea, why was it that they had so much stuff to trade, but the natives of the island had so little? The answer to the first question is, of course, that the Spanish had Guns, Germs, and Steel. Diamond does an outstanding job arguing for the pivotal importance of Germs in the equation. He clearly explains - using the idea of germs - why Europeans overran the Americas and Australia but not Africa. His agument regarding steel is notably weaker; but I think it does support his thesis adequately. I failed to detect a compelling argument for why Europeans had guns but others did not. The book's primary focus is on how civilization got started. He looks first at the cultivation of plants and then at the domestication of animals. Examining areas in Africa, Eurasia, the Americas, and Australia, he totes up the lists of suitable flora and fauna and evaluates their merits. He notes that it was the fertile crescent that harbored the most suitable grains, legumes (or pulses), and domesticable animals. No other location comes close to having this rich combination of natural resources. He shows that this explains the very early appearance of agricutlure and therefore of writing, religion, and law in this area (and in China). He also shows how any human advancement would spread more quickly in Eurasia than it would within the Americas and Africa. This gives Eurasia a double advantage; it can harbor more people by virtue of its agricultural practices and each person has greater access to new ideas because of strong east-west trade currents. Thus cultures in Eurasia could easily adapt ideas based on those of other societies instead of creating them from scratch. He concludes that any person who accepts his thesis of the forces shaping civilization - at least the necessary precondition to get started - would necessarily conclude that civilization's advances must inevitably run quickest on the Eurasian continent. A large portion of the book is focussed on the factors influencing the establishement of an agricultural system that is capable of supporting a whole large class of non-agricultural workers. The assumption, I believe, is that we already know that this is the primary requirement for the birth of a civilization. Still I was looking forward to Diamond's take on what happens after we all learn to read and write. I was hoping he might explain the ascent of the west since 1000 BC or 1500 AD. But he does not. He does not, for instance, argue why it was the British and Spanish, not the Turks and Indians who settled Australia and the Americas. This, perhaps is a different question. Yet it seems to be linked to the idea of frontiers and access to resources. For it is always when the full set of advanced cultural practices reach populations in the richest, most uncultivated frontiers and these ideas cast anew in the light of a new environment that civilization seems to gain its greatest momentum. He uses Polynesia as a microcosm for the world. In this laboratory, a group of people with the same genetic cross-section and same cultural practices embarked on a grand venture to settle all the islands of the Pacific some two millenia ago or so. The systems of government they set up and the level of civilization they reached were highly dependent upon the agricultual productivity of their citizens. Colonists on small islands unsuitable for agriculture became hunter-gatherers and lived in egalitarian societies. Those in productive lands organized into small states with strong chiefs or kings, each with their own little standing armies. The book is richly researched and solidly argued as far as it goes. But there are a handful of quibbles one might raise. 1) The author tends to repeat himself. As the book progresses, the portion of prose that is a restatement of something said before becomes so high that this reader found himself skipping whole chapters. 2) The author fails to provide a compelling argument about why China lagged Europe at some point after 1500. One wonders why the author did not simply use the argument at hand. Colonialism provided to Europe the raw materials necessary for industrial production. China was closed until two or three decades ago and so did not have adequate access to the raw materials that vaulted Europe and North America to their current place. The opening of China to the world has quickly closed this gap. In other words, the cultural practice that gave frontier states the advantage was the high value they realized in trade: of getting required natural resources and finished goods from other places instead of being closed off. The book's central thesis is that the first and most necessary condition for the success of a society lies in its access to the required resources, and that transport of goods and ideas is crucial to the success of this enterprise. For this book to fail to make this connection I find to be an astonishing lapse. 3) Unless it is hidden in one of the skipped chapters, Diamond never starts to answer the second motivating question about 'stuff', even though it is a simple and direct extension of his fairly robust argument. This book is of crucial importance in counter-balancing our Darwinian view of the world. It was not that Europeans were better people by some genetic measure. (Darwin seemed to assume a single measure of fitness. But each environmental variable provides a different metric of fitness so the whole notion of one group being generally 'more fit' is utter nonsense.) It was that they had a body of technologies, cultural practices and diseases that naturally tended to overwhelm other groups. And that these ideas and practices (and sometimes diseases) are an inevitable advantage any agrarian or post agrarian society has over a less highly organized one. Europeans simply got a head start thanks to geography. There is much to learn, and much to contemplate in this book. Read It.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on September 7, 2005
A
Verified Purchase
A.C.E
Grantham, US
★★★★★ 5
You may never see the world the same way again
Format: Hardcover
Ok I got a lot out of this book. Like Yali, the charismatic New Guinean local politician who quizzed the author 25 years before the book was written wanting to know why Europeans developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea which had little cargo of theirs, I bought this book in a bid to understand why Africa and its inhabitants developed at a much slower pace than other continents. Was it a matter of fate? Or was the politically incorrect charge that Africans are innately inferior to their fairer skinned counterparts somewhat justified ? Jared Diamond makes a strong case for Geography's deterministic role in the evolution of societies. In other words, the rich societies of today simply won the geographical draft lottery (in terms of who got the largest continental pie/size, who got the most ideal conditions for farming, who got the most number of wild mammals suitable for domestication, and who got the widest variety of wild plant species ideal for agriculture) played over 13,000 years ago when modern man began to settle into village life in a few parts of the world. That decisive edge, reinforced over the last 13,000 years is what led to the emergence of an indomitable Europe that eventually came to lead the world due to its development of guns, germs, and steel. According to the Author, Eurasia got decisively lucky in more ways than one: The Late Pleistocene extinction decimated Eurasia's competitors by felling wild mammal species of most of North and South America and those of Africa that may have facilitated intensive farming instead of the hunter-gathering lifestyle which eventually became a big impediment to the development of rapidly evolving complex societies on those continents. Those extinctions left Eurasia with many more wild candidates for domestication than the Americas and Africas offered. Agriculture and Continental Size were huge enablers. Eurasia is twice as large as the next largest continent, Africa, and had a wide extensive landmass of fertile soil amidst a variety of wild life that were easily domesticated for animal herding and valuable crops that facilitated the development of intensive farming techniques that helped serve denser populations and formed the basis for the formation of complex organized societies. Denser populations tend to rise only under conditions of food production, populations served by food surpluses from intensive farming techniques were more likely to have non-farming specialists, technocrats, warriors and bureaucrats. In contrast, poorer societies such as hunter-gatherers without such advantages remained as hunter-gatherers living in bands which were far from ideal to produce crop surpluses available for redistribution or storage, and hence could not support and feed non-hunting craft specialists, armies, bureaucrats, and chiefs to enable them evolve complex societies. In turn, agriculture spawned lethal germs emanating from Eurasian's long advantageous exposure to domestic Animals which was as decisive in eliminating local populations in conquest as guns and steamboats were. As illustrated by the New world's conquest of almost 95 percent of the 20million American Indians; exposing the Indians to strains of germs the Indians had never been exposed to, and against which they therefore had neither immunity nor genetic resistance to. The development of writing was another essential agent in assisting the conquests of Eurasian Societies: by fostering the development of maps that were beneficial to sailors exploring new lands to conquer, by providing a new way of communicating and (through preserved records) inspiring later generations to conquest, writing played a crucial role in the course of civilization but could not have been possible without food production. Writing emerged independently only in the Fertile Crescent, Mexico, and China because those were precisely the first areas were food production arose in their respective hemispheres. I already told you that what brought me to this book was to understand why as an African, we've evolved rather slowly compared to everyone else? I got my money's worth somewhere in pg 399 where the author states that "the factor behind Africa's slower rate of Post Pleistocene development compared with Eurasia's is the different orientation of the main axes of thee continents. Like that of the Americas, Africa's major axis is north-south, whereas Eurasia's is east-west. As one moves along a north south axis, one traverses zones differing greatly in climate, habitat, rainfall, day length, and diseases of crops and livestock. Hence, crops and animals domesticated in one part of Africa had great difficulty in moving to other parts. In contrast crops and animals moved easily between Eurasian societies thousands of mile apart but at the same latitude and sharing similar climate and day lengths". In a nutshell, geography, and not biology, ultimately did us in. I found this book a bit of a slog to get through due to the author's interdisciplinary approach ( history, archaeology, evolutionary biology, sociology, cultural anthropology etc) which mirrors his career trajectory so far. One of the few bones I have to pick with the book, as so many other reviewers have already mentioned, is its lack of sources. I also thought the author strove, quite frequently, a bit too hard for political correctness in for example, sounding a bit patronizing to the plight of poor societies like mine. I admit it may amount to career suicide for a tenured professor to have done otherwise; but to my mind any reader who can't handle a little intellectual honesty no matter how inconvenient isn't ready to address the fundamental questions about the human condition. For some reason, the kindle version I purchased didn't have images due to copyright issues. A bit of a setback because I didn't have any maps handy to make sense of the strange locations that pop up at various points in this read and no thanks, I like to read with an internet connection as far from me as possible. Then lastly, there was the glossy treatment of why different parts within Eurasia developed differently which he addresses scantly in a later edition of the book. But GGS ultimately proved to be a great read for me, and highly recommended for anyone who wants a keener appreciation of the world we live in today. But be forewarned, you may never see the world the same way again which surely is a good thing.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on July 16, 2012
Z
Verified Purchase
Zachary Ruesch
Draper, US
★★★★★ 5
Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies
Format: Hardcover
Recently, I finished this great, broad, historical, and significant endeavor. Let me begin by expressing my appreciation of Jared Diamond’s wonderful ability to simplify a very complex topic and related ideas. This alone, makes this read a great one. Too, there a few gems of humor and wit within the pages which caught my eye and mind. Don’t get me wrong though. The pages are filled with complex data, examples, and comparisons. Upon more than one occasion, my understanding necessitated the rereading of paragraphs and pages. Before I proceed into deeper thoughts, I must admit the duration of this read as being conducted well over an extended timeframe. I began reading it years ago, stopped, and then started again. Over the course of the last several months, I recommitted and achieved. In thoughtful detail, Diamond seeks to explain why certain groups of people have been successful over the course of human events and history, while others, in comparison, are not. It should be noted, the idea of “success” is very subjective. So, success in this case, is related to Western ideas of technological development, exploration, and conquest - generally described as one group of people gaining control or influence over another. An effective description of this is the Spanish conquest and colonization of the “New World,” especially the Aztecs and Incas. This example, though quite large in scope, and as pointed out by Diamond, has occurred throughout human history in large and small ways involving a multitude of others groups of people, both known and unknown. In short, I believe Diamond does well in addressing the impact and luck of geography and resources, as well as, the influences of more innate human characteristics and variety. The debate of nature versus nurture is here too contained. In the past, and not only in recent history, humans have expressed understandings of success in terms of innate differences which must exist between people - obviously though, those in power and dominate are able to define and express such ideas. However, Diamond looks beyond this and recognizes the complexity, and ultimately more profound influence of reality, nurture. In this sense though, it is not simply human nurturing and choice, it is the opportunities presented to humans, in difference places, at different times, to take advantage of their earthly surroundings and the ability to nurture developments, or not. This read is filled with a plethora of well detailed examples which come to show how access, or not, to certain elements leads to the success and superiority which has been described and known by those in power, throughout history. So, today, when certain people look down upon others and their lack of some qualities or characteristics, Diamond’s historical analysis provides engaging insight beyond and through the bias. Who we are presently is the result of all the past experiences of the human ancestors who preceded us, and furthermore, our development and success, in comparison to other humans, is simply more so the result of the access we have had to a confluence of resources and circumstances which allowed us to dominate other groups of humans with less access to the same. As groups of humans defined through sociological processes, we are no more intelligent, healthy, or physiologically better than the whole of humanity understood to exist through anthropology, biology, and any other area of study. “We all know that history has proceeded very differently for peoples from different parts of the globe...Those historical inequalities have cast long shadows on the modern world, because the literate societies with metal tools have conquered or exterminated the other societies. While those differences constitute the most basic fact of world history, the reasons for them remain uncertain and controversial.” In this work, Diamond splendidly explains how, “History followed different courses for different peoples because of differences among peoples’ environments, not because of biological differences among peoples themselves.” Please give the ideas of these pages the opportunity to share with you a detailed perspective of human experience which reaches far into the depths of history, beyond even the earliest written language. Diamond’s words will likely cause you to become lost in thoughts of the past. However, at the same time, he’ll take you to definitive places of demonstrable purpose leading to a better future understood through the context(s) of human experience.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on June 27, 2016
D
Verified Purchase
D. Cloyce Smith
Chelsea, US
★★★★★ 5
Brilliant, eclectic panorama of the past 13,000 years
This intriguing and expansive book gathers knowledge from a number of fields (archaeology, anthropology, ecology, evolutionary biology, horticulture, and more). Its novelty is not in the details, any of which can be found in other books, but in the synthesis of 13,000 years' worth of human history. Diamond argues that many (but not all) of "the striking differences between the long-term histories of peoples of the different continents have been due not to innate differences in the people themselves but to differences in their environments." Diamond covers so much material that any attempt at summary would be imprecise. The sections I found most compelling dealt with agriculture and animal husbandry--two topics that would have probably induced sleep if covered by another author. For example, he presents the fascinating background that the dominant five "large" domesticated mammals--sheep, goats, cattle, pigs, and horses--originated in central Eurasia (and that no easily domesticated, large mammals were available, for example, to North Americans or Australians); that these animals include the world's only widespread "beasts of burden," giving their human handlers additional advantages in mobility and farming; and that most of the world's lethal diseases resulted from proximity to the barnyard, gradually providing Eurasians with immunity to illnesses that later wiped out entire societies upon first exposure. The minor mammals (camels, llamas, reindeer) were too limited by geography and climate to affect the course of history outside their confines. As for zebras, bears, giraffes, tigers, hippos--to this day, nobody has been able to domesticate them. While this seems intuitively obvious, no writer has so clearly and irrefutably connected the dots, showing how access to these animals gave early chiefdoms an insurmountable advantage over those human societies without them and allowed them to develop surpluses and commerce that supported the world's most enduring civilizations. Comments made by the author's critics, while few in number, nearly prevented me from reading this book and need to be addressed so other readers won't be similarly discouraged. A few readers seem offended by Diamond's self-mocking and somewhat tongue-in-cheek assertion (in the Introduction) that the natives of New Guinea have certain advantages that make them arguably more "intelligent." Yet these commentators are willfully ignoring the context: Diamond admits that "New Guineans tend to perform poorly at tasks that Westerners have been trained to perform since childhood," yet he is quite aware of how "stupid I look to New Guineans when I'm with them in the jungle." That is, if one defines "intelligence" not as the knowledge needed to use a computer or write a book review but, rather, as the ability to survive in the wild ("following a jungle trail" or identifying poisonous mushrooms, to cite two of the author's examples), then the New Guineans win hands down. To make a similarly lighthearted argument: when the house of cards we call "civilization" is threatened by the least misfortune (economic recession, power blackout, bad weather, the death of a British princess), a frightening number of otherwise "intelligent" people, instead of relying on their wits and survival skills, rush straight for their therapists. Likewise, anyone who accuses Diamond of "geographic determinism" cannot have read the epilogue, in which he clearly rejects such an extreme position. He admits that individuals and cultures--and, for that matter, pure chance--can also influence history, but "that some environments provide more starting materials, and more favorable conditions for utilizing inventions, then do other environments." The author's argument is unambiguous: while culture, as well as individual inventors and rulers, certainly influence history on a microcosmic level (during spans of centuries or millennia), there are larger factors, such as geography and ecology, at play when human history is considered as a whole over the last 13,000 years. Diamond is looking at the forest rather than the trees; thus, to fault the author for ignoring such factors as religion and politics is off the mark, since such belief systems didn't exist in anything remotely resembling their present form for most of the period under discussion. Furthermore, to identify human advances in terms of culture still fails to explain how differing cultures arose in the first place. Finally, and more easily dismissed, are those hecklers who howl "political correctness." Such critics seldom identify flaws in the author's arguments or even tell us what they insinuate by this increasingly meaningless term. Since the book's span is so sweeping and since many of Diamond's hypotheses are offered tentatively (as suggestions for a new "science" of history), there are bound to be statements or implications that may eventually prove inaccurate or too simplistic. I strongly suspect, however, that his overarching thesis will withstand the test of time; at the very least, "Guns, Germs, and Steel" will inspire open-minded thinkers to consider human history--in its broadest sense--in a whole new light.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on September 1, 2003
H
Verified Purchase
Henry Perkins
Omaha, US
★★★★★ 4
Great scope and central thesis, but tries too hard
[Strong 3.5 stars for its scope and development of the central thesis, but loses points for trying too hard to explain away non-European cultural failures.] The first line of Jared Diamond's Pulitzer Prize-winning opus is: "This book attempts to provide a short history of everybody for the last 13,000 years." His central thesis is that luck of genetic distribution of domesticable plants and animals, particularly cereals and large mammals, gave a tremendous leg up to western Eurasia in the development of civilization. In other words, it wasn't poor choices or innate inferiority that caused most of the world to be dominated by European culture -- just luck. In a book with greatly wider scope than most nonfiction Pulitzer winners, Diamond pulls together long-term threads of farming, herding, languages, disease, technology, government, and religion. He attempts to explain how trends in all these disparate areas rather inexorably led to the cultural and economic state of the world today. While many of the author's arguments are subject to debate, the writing is lucid; it's easy to see why the Pulitzer committee gave Diamon the prize. To take to task all the debatable points in "Guns, Germs, and Steel" would be a huge undertaking. I'll try to highlight a few. Diamond argues that the temperate Mediterranean climate (featuring wet winters and dry summers) of southwest Asia aided greatly in early development, then has to explain why similar climates in California, Chile, and southwest Australia didn't spur development in those places. Human actions (particularly deforestation and overgrazing) have turned what used to be called the "Fertile Crescent" into a wasteland, whereas this didn't happen in the similar southern European area. Thus southwestern Asia possessed the seeds of human development, but the locals squandered their head start. At that point Europe and eastern Asia had an equal chance of pulling ahead, and Diamond proposes that the geographical fragmentation of Europe gave it a competitive advantage over China's cohesiveness. But because he earlier claims that easy movement (for the spread of domesticable species) gave Europe a competitive advantage over America and Africa, this argument is not compelling. Diamond thinks that the different parts of the world were on a developmental par about 13,000 years ago. At that time there were many more potentially domesticable large mammals in the Americas than there are now. The evidence as to what the human presence at that time is mixed, but Diamond pushes hard to dispute evidence of any prior human occupation. He favors the "Clovis first" theory, which has humans first entering from Siberia across the ice age Bering land bridge not more than 13,000 years ago, carrying stone "Clovis point" weapons. Clovis points have been found in large numbers in mammoth carcasses in North America, and Diamond thinks they were developed in Asia and transported across Beringia. Mammoths are one of the many now-extinct large mammals. From the mammoth kill evidence, Diamond assumes hunting by immigrants from Siberia caused the extinction of not just mammoths but horses, elephants, lions, and all the other megafauna. But there are several problems with this argument. Firstly, there are more recent findings than those Diamond disputes to back up the earlier human occupation theory. Secondly, there are no Clovis points north of British Columbia, which would mean these genocidal immigrants fasted all through Alaska. And thirdly, while there are thousands of Clovis points in mammoth skeletons, to date we've found just ONE clovis point in an American horse carcass, and NONE in elephants, lions, or giraffes -- all at one time widely found in North America. All of this debate for later occupation of the Americas appears designed to buttress a secondary argument that American development got started too late to catch up with the Eurasians. But ironically, the Pleistocene overkill hypothesis, linked to a single overwhelming swarm of human invaders, argues against Jared Diamond's central thesis. If he's right, it WAS the Native Americans' own fault that they were later overrun by Europeans on horses, becaused they killed and ate all the existing horses on arrival. Diamond also has to resort to some hand-waving to explain why independent Mesoamerican invention of writing and wheels (used only in toys, rather than tools like wheelbarrows) never went anywhere. Similar weak arguments are used to explain why China went into cultural stagnation centuries ago. Ultimately, the author tries too hard to make all of history fit his model. In trying to explain why superior technology isn't necessarily accepted, Diamond trots out the old myth about the Dvorak keyboard being superior to the standard QWERTY layout, yet never finding much demand. However, Diamond's book came out in 1997, and the Dvorak myth had been debunked 7 years previously (Journal of Law & Economics vol. XXXIII (April 1990)). Diamond is left with no argument other than cultural superiority to explain why societies that adopt better technology succeed, and he rejects that position a priori. In his professional career the author has spent much time working in New Guinea. He thinks constant local warfare has made the average surviving New Guinea tribesman superior to the average descendant of European culture, and wants to explain why the people of New Guinea have so little "cargo" (wealth). But Diamond's focus on New Guinea as a model for global development is more elucidating to the author than to his readers. There are some problems with the book layout itself, including a surprisingly poor index. For instance, trying to look up horse extinctions in the Americas, I found references to horses under "Americas, animal extinctions in" that didn't appear under "horses, in Americas". Also, there are a variety of different maps with different levels of detail to show the migrations of peoples, languages, and domestic species. It's necessary to flip back and forth between the maps to follow the narrative thread. This is a good book to read, but a skeptical perspective is necessary while doing so.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 31, 2003

recommand products