Diet for a Small Planet (20th Anniversary Edition)

I ordered this book diet for a small planet spiral bound, though what I received was one in paper back not spiral bound.
I have the paper back one already . They didn't have what I ordered, what I wanted in stock.
It was a problem to return and complicated to deal with in the end I gave up and kept the book. Burr
In short I ordered this book and did not get what was advertised what I wanted.

Very disappointed with this book. It doesnt mention very much about what foods to combine for a complete protein, and recipies are hard find. When I do find them, it looks like I wont be able to afford to make them anyway with so many different ingredients in them. Also lots of research looks convincing, till you notice the dates, dont see any from the year 2000 or after. Are any of them still true? Like my old paperback edition better.

Diet for a Small Planet is a good introduction to vegetarianism. It is not an excellent introduction. Frances Moore Lappe begins her book with a political polemic arguing that Americans who eat lots of meat contribute to hunger in the third world. She points out that it takes 16 pounds of grain and soy to produce one pound of beef, and 6 pounds of grain and soy to produce one pound of pork.

If Americans ate the grain and soy, instead of feeding it to the animals and eating them, American farmers would produce a huge food surplus. Lappe would like for this surplus to be given free of charge to the hungry billions of Latin America and Africa.

I am enough of a child of the 1960’s for that argument to appeal to me, at least mildly. Most Americans will find it arrant nonsense. This may cause them to reject the rest of the book. This is unfortunate, because the book does provide valuable information. Vegetarianism has other benefits in addition to the purely altruistic.

One important concept introduced in this book is that of net protein utilization. The human body requires eight amino acids. They must be in the right proportion. If one of the eight is thirty percent short of that proportion, only thirty percent of the protein can be utilized. The rest is transformed to carbohydrate.

For example, I have on my desk a loaf of whole wheat bread. According to “Nutrition Facts” this loaf has 18 servings. Each serving has 4 grams of protein. Thus, the loaf has approximately 72 grams of protein. I also have a quart of skim milk. This quart has 4 servings. Each serving has 8 grams of protein. Thus the quart has approximately 32 grams of protein.

However, the net protein utilization of whole wheat is 60 percent. The net protein utilization of skim milk is 82 percent. Thus, from the loaf of whole wheat bread my body can utilize about 43 grams of protein. From the quart of skim milk my body can utilize about 26 grams of protein.

In this example, we can see that the net protein utilization of the animal protein in skim milk is much higher than the net protein utilization of the plant protein in whole wheat bread. That is the way it is with animal and plant protein. However, by mixing different kinds of protein we can increase the net protein utilization of protein in a meal. This is called “protein complementarity.”

For example, grains are short in the amino acid called lysine. Animal protein is high in lysine. By mixing grains with a small amount of animal protein we can increase the net protein utilization of both.

While grain is low in lysine, it is high in the amino acid called methionine. Beans are high in lysine, but low in methionine. By mixing grains and beans we can increase the net protein utilization of both.

Here Frances Moore Lappe is a bit confusing. She refers to “sulphur containing amino acids.” Of the four sulphur containing amino acids methionine is the most important.

Although the chemistry to amino acids has only been discovered comparatively recently, for thousands of years people have known that it was beneficial to mix the protein in different kinds of foods. In traditional diets animal protein is not the main course; it is a condiment added to a primarily grain diet. Orientals combine rice with tofu made from soy beans, or small amounts of meat, fish, or poultry. Italians mix pasta with small amounts of cheese or meat. From the American Indians we get succotash. This combines lima beans and corn. From New England we get baked beans and brown bread. Mexican food emphasizes corn, beans, and rice. East Indian food emphasizes bread, rice, chick peas, and lentils. Mid Eastern food emphasizes ground wheat, chick peas, broad beans, and lentils. Bread is called “the staff of life.”

An additional objection I have to Diet for a Small Planet is that Frances Moore Lappe insufficiently emphasizes the need for vitamin B 12 supplementation if one consumes no animal protein at all. Vitamin B 12 is the only nutrient that is not found in plant foods. Fortunately, vitamin B 12 pills are easy to find in drug stores, and inexpensive.

There are a number of advantages in a vegetarian diet. It can be less expensive. If done properly it is more healthful. It is low in cholesterol and saturated fat, and high in fiber. Ever since I was a child I have worried about the cruelty involved in killing and eating animals.

Americans are unlikely to substantially increase food aid to the third world. Nevertheless, if we got more of our protein needs from plant sources we would be healthier.

Like so many applied chemistry students in the 1970s, Diet for a Small Planet was among the books that made chemistry 'alive'. It brought our classroom abstractions to the kitchen table. Lappe's writing is persuasive and readable and her recipes are simple and affordable enough for a student's skill & budget.

Much of the controversy of this book arose regarding its 2 main points.
1) When proteins are assimilated or metabolized as a 'complete protein' containing all amino acids in proper proportions, there is a high 'protein utilization' by enzymes / human digestive system. (see note, this was researched and refuted in 1981)
2) The 'food chain' pyramid of feed grains to animal meat has about a 10% net protein efficiency. That is, you get 10 times more protein eating corn & beans vs. eating beef or red meat protein.

Lappe's contention that we could feed many of the world's malnourished if we in rich nations were vegetarians or used meats as seasoning rather than entrees may be a scientific & nutritional ideal. The bad news is that it is as difficult to change traditional patterns of food consumption as it is to change religion or culture. The good news is 'protein complementarity or not', combos of legumes and grains have for centuries been the traditional pattern of food comsumption by the poor in most of Latin America & Asia. whether eaten as a meal or not, the 'survival value' of these protein-rich combos made them the 'fittest' for the environment so they became traditions.

For similar food chem books, try Harold McGee or especially Shirley Corriher's classic 'Cookwise'.

Note from Wikipedia:
'In fact, the original source of the theory, Frances Moore Lappé, changed her position on protein combining. In the 1981 edition of Diet for a Small Planet, she wrote:

"In 1971 I stressed protein complementarity because I assumed that the only way to get enough protein ... was to create a protein as usable by the body as animal protein. In combating the myth that meat is the only way to get high-quality protein, I reinforced another myth. I gave the impression that in order to get enough protein without meat, considerable care was needed in choosing foods. Actually, it is much easier than I thought.
"With three important exceptions, there is little danger of protein deficiency in a plant food diet. The exceptions are diets very heavily dependent on
[1] fruit
[2] some tubers, such as sweet potatoes or cassava,
[3] junk food (refined flours, sugars, and fat).
Fortunately, relatively few people in the world try to survive on diets in which these foods are virtually the sole source of calories.

In all other diets, if people are getting enough calories, they are virtually certain of getting enough protein."[8]

On the other hand, the principle of protein combining seems to have been unknowingly recognized by most traditional agricultural societies in the form of dishes that combine legumes with grains. Examples include the traditional Indian combination of dal and rice, the Middle Eastern pairing of pita bread with hummus, ful medames, or falafel, the West African combination of rice and beans (since spread in a circum-Caribbean distribution to the Caribbean islands, Brazil and elsewhere in Latin America, and to the Southern United States where it is known as Hoppin' John), and the Mexican tradition of combining beans with tortillas and other dishes made of maize.'

Although this is the "20th anniversary edition", the book was actually written many more years ago than that. I read it in the 70"s when I was a young person and never thought about treating my body kindly. It influenced me to become vegetarian which I am to this day. Because the author emphasized complementing proteins (a theory which now has been updated so no longer necessary to eat certain foods at the same time), I really took an interest in how important it is to be informed about nutrition. Now I am a very healthy person in my 60's, an age when you really value good health. Please start when you're young. It will save you and save the planet.

Frances Moore Lappé (born 1944) is the founder of the Institute for Food and Development Policy (Food First) and the Small Planet Institute, as well as the author of books such as Hope's Edge: The Next Diet for a Small Planet,Democracy's Edge: Choosing to Save Our Country by Bringing Democracy to Life, etc. This book was first published in 1971. (NOTE: Page numbers below are for the 498-page 1982 10th Anniversary Edition.)

She explains in the first chapter, "In 1969 I discovered that half of our harvested acreage went to feed livestock. At the same time, I learned that ... it takes 16 pounds of grain and soybeans to produce just 1 pound of beef in the United States today. The final blow was discovering that much of what I had grown up believing about a healthy diet was false... Americans eat twice the protein our bodies can even use..." (Pg. 9) She added, "While most Americans believe our grain exports 'feed a hungry world,' TWO-THIRDS of our agricultural exports actually go to livestock---and the hungry abroad cannot afford meat." (Pg. 11)

She states, "for me the message of [the book] is abundance, not scarcity. The issue is how we use that abundance. Do we expand the kind of production which degrades the soil and water resources on which all our future food security rests?... The answers lie in the political and economic order we create. The 'small planet' image should simply remind us that what we eat helps determine whether our planet IS too small or whether its abundance can be sustained and enjoyed by everyone. My book might better be called 'Diet for an Abundant Planet'..." (Pg. 12)

She elaborates, "questions about the roots of needless hunger had to focus not on the simple physical limits of the earth, but on the economic and political forces that determine what is planted and who eats... the experts' single-minded focus on greater production as the solution to world hunger was wrongheaded. You could have more food and still more hunger." (Pg. 21)

Later, she adds, "The first edition of this book explained how our production system takes abundant grain, which hungry people can't afford, and shrinks it into meat, which better-off people will pay for. But I didn't fully appreciate that our production system not only reduces abundance but actually mines the very resources on which our future food security rests." (Pg. 65) She suggests, "The solution can be found only by addressing the issue of power... Democracy must be the process of moving toward genuine democracy, understood as the ever more just sharing of political and economic power." (Pg. 112)

Perhaps surprisingly, however, she states, "I am not a vegetarian. Over the last ten years I've hardly ever served or eaten meat, but I try hard to distinguish what I advocate from what people think of as 'vegetarianism.' ... what I advocate is the return to the traditional diet on which our bodies evolved... centered on plant foods, with animal foods playing a supplementary role." (Pg. 13)

This book is essential reading for progressives, ecologically-minded people, vegetarians/vegans, and lots of other people.

Frances Moore Lappé (born 1944) is the founder of the Institute for Food and Development Policy (Food First) and the Small Planet Institute, as well as the author of books such as Hope's Edge: The Next Diet for a Small Planet,Democracy's Edge: Choosing to Save Our Country by Bringing Democracy to Life, etc. This book was first published in 1971. (NOTE: Page numbers below are for the 498-page 1982 10th Anniversary Edition.)

She explains in the first chapter, "In 1969 I discovered that half of our harvested acreage went to feed livestock. At the same time, I learned that ... it takes 16 pounds of grain and soybeans to produce just 1 pound of beef in the United States today. The final blow was discovering that much of what I had grown up believing about a healthy diet was false... Americans eat twice the protein our bodies can even use..." (Pg. 9) She added, "While most Americans believe our grain exports 'feed a hungry world,' TWO-THIRDS of our agricultural exports actually go to livestock---and the hungry abroad cannot afford meat." (Pg. 11)

She states, "for me the message of [the book] is abundance, not scarcity. The issue is how we use that abundance. Do we expand the kind of production which degrades the soil and water resources on which all our future food security rests?... The answers lie in the political and economic order we create. The 'small planet' image should simply remind us that what we eat helps determine whether our planet IS too small or whether its abundance can be sustained and enjoyed by everyone. My book might better be called 'Diet for an Abundant Planet'..." (Pg. 12)

She elaborates, "questions about the roots of needless hunger had to focus not on the simple physical limits of the earth, but on the economic and political forces that determine what is planted and who eats... the experts' single-minded focus on greater production as the solution to world hunger was wrongheaded. You could have more food and still more hunger." (Pg. 21)

Later, she adds, "The first edition of this book explained how our production system takes abundant grain, which hungry people can't afford, and shrinks it into meat, which better-off people will pay for. But I didn't fully appreciate that our production system not only reduces abundance but actually mines the very resources on which our future food security rests." (Pg. 65) She suggests, "The solution can be found only by addressing the issue of power... Democracy must be the process of moving toward genuine democracy, understood as the ever more just sharing of political and economic power." (Pg. 112)

Perhaps surprisingly, however, she states, "I am not a vegetarian. Over the last ten years I've hardly ever served or eaten meat, but I try hard to distinguish what I advocate from what people think of as 'vegetarianism.' ... what I advocate is the return to the traditional diet on which our bodies evolved... centered on plant foods, with animal foods playing a supplementary role." (Pg. 13)

This book is essential reading for progressives, ecologically-minded people, vegetarians/vegans, and lots of other people.

I want to defend the recipes, after several reviewers have attacked them. I'm not saying EVERYTHING in the cookbook is scrumptious, but then again, I wouldn't say that of ANY cookbook I've ever seen. This is probably the most practical book for someone to own when they're beginning to try to cook vegetarian meals, either as an exclusive diet or as an occasional alternative to meat. Sure, Deborah Madison's VEGETARIAN COOKING FOR EVERYONE and the ubiquitous MOOSEWOOD COOKBOOK are more gourmet, but that's not an unmixed blessing for a beginning cook (or a beginning vegetarian). DIET FOR A SMALL PLANET has a variety of recipes contributed by different cooks with a variety of skill levels and tastes. Some of them are blessedly easy and quite delicious, e.g., lentil pastitsio, and Roman red beans and rice, both of which I've served at parties and seen devoured enthusiastically by non-vegetarians. It also suggests ways of sneaking some protein into unexpected places like breads and cakes--an invaluable skill for any parent of a finicky toddler, vegetarian or not. Unlike the more gourmet vegetarian cookbooks, DIET FOR A SMALL PLANET doesn't assume that you're starting with fresh heirloom vegetables from farmer's markets, gourmet cheeses, and a fully equipped chef's kitchen where you grind your own spices. If you want to make a decent meatless meal with whatever's marked down this week at the supermarket, this is your guide. Unlike the more gourmet vegetarian cookbooks I sometimes use, DIET has nutritional information to help you plan a meal that you know isn't shortchanging your family on protein. All in all, I think this is an essential book for beginners in vegetarian cooking.

Frances Moore Lappe exposes the meat industry myths in this timeless book.

I wish I had read this book when it first came out. My wife and I quit eating beef, pork and chicken months ago and we discovered this book afterwards. The information relating to grains and beans combined makes perfect sense relating to maintaining an adquate daily protein intake.

Diet for a Small Planet exposes the myths the meat industry has used to brainwash the American population in thinking that only meat can supply an adquate protein source. Furthermore, the book exposes the immense waste of land and pollution produced through the raising of cattle, swine and chickens. As more land is tied up for livestock feed, more people world wide (including the US) go hungry as the meat industry becomes wealthy from a product which is unnecessary and unhealthy.

5 stars for an old book which has good wisdom.

Lappe's original book converted me to vegetarianism in college in the early seventies. This is a very convincing argument for responsible eating. Her book was the first to my knowledge that explicitly set out how what we eat in this country affects others abroad. The most frightening aspect of our meat-eating habits then, as now, was the deforestation of huge tracts of land to make more room for raising meat sources.
Additionally, this book opened my eyes to the difference between subsistence living in 'third world' countries, as opposed to poverty in those same countries producing goods for Americans.
This book is literate and convincing for those willing to open their minds to a different world view. It's 'in your face' without being 'down your throat'.

This book provides a lot of important fundamental information about the food industry and how our greedy lifestyle negatively affects people around the world and even in our own backyards. There is a good dose of statistics and information here and a lot of it is very interesting but you can't help but wonder what kinds of changes have come across in the 20 or so years since these stats were published. The author seems to make a lot of clarifications and alterations to her original publishing, which makes this book seem a little pointless at times. I guess this book made a big impact in the food industry and to public awareness so it's worth reading about reactions to the book and stories from the author's own experience and how the book changed her life as well, but for someone who wants to get a better idea of how the world is working right now and wants more up to date information, I'm sure there are better resources out there now.

Extra star for the recipe section, which takes up nearly half the book. There are some great ideas in there.

Strictly from an "efficiency" standpoint, I would rather learn about combining my proteins from this book, eat vegetarian, and feel as if I'm doing something about acres and acres a day being lost in the the store basin, to provide cattle grazing land to feed the world's beef habits. It takes I think it's 20 acres of land to provide meat protein, and one acre of land to provide the same amount of plant-based protein. Sure, mankind can figure out how to mechanize the Earth into feeding everyone on the planet, but obviously now the Earth is suffering under the strain. Diet For A Small Planet's heart was in the right place, way back in the 70's when I bought it new. Long live vegetarianism, protein-combining (yes, it's important but not as critical as we thought before), and getting off the top of the food chain!

Excellent introductory essay goes into nutritional reasons why meat is not necessary, followed by practical recipes for everyday use. For anyone who ever thought vegetarianism would take too much time and effort. Special attention is paid to getting enough protein and B vitamins-two of the reasons most often cited by those who claim they can't do without meat. Aside from issues of cruelty and health, eating meat is just a waste of our planet's limited resources. This book offers simple step-by-step instructions on how to minimize your "ecological footprint" without giving up taste.

Way back in my late high school/early college years, this book was discussed widely in my extended family, now with several vegetarians. My Mom, a great cook, used to make Tom's True Grits most deliciously, giving me such fond memories. I looked up this book today because I have this recipe written on a recipe card for about 30 years. It is about time I got this book!

The recipes are reasonable, but the real issue in vegetarian diets isn't protein - instead the problem comes from the reduced availability of iron and other minerals.
The economics are simplistic; even if every American quit eating meat products tomorrow, the Third World countries are unlikely to quit growing cash crops and instead grow food for their populations. The sentiments are nice, and warm and fuzzy, and the author's heart, is in the right place.

I have to chuckle at all the high-falutin' reviews of this book... I admit, it was a breakthrough when it was first printed and it gave me a whole new way of looking at food back when I first bought the original edition. But it's real strength lay in the really good recipes it contained. No one was going to consider going vegetarian if the food it produced wasn't tasty and worth consuming. This book succeeded wildly in that. I loved the recipes, made them often, and found many non-vegetarians asking for them, especially the Greek Cheese and Spinach squares. The Lentil soup and pasta with clam sauce were family favorites. And therein lies my disappointment with the new edition. Somewhere along the way I lost the book (lent it to a vegetarian relative and never got it back) and so bought the new edition. But alas, my absolute favorite recipe (the clam sauce one) isn't anywhere to be found in it! I'm reduced to making it from memory which isn't turning out quite the same. And the updated Greek Cheese and Spinach 'wedges' just isn't as good as the original. I don't need more preaching. I need the same, beloved recipes untampered with. So it looks like I'm off to search in the used book markets for the original copy. (Sorry if I misnamed any of the recipes I mentioned...I'm doing this on the spur of the moment). Besides, the original book was a lot easier to read and therefore far more persuasive. They should have left well enough alone.

I encountered this book in my mom's cookbook collection in the early 80's. I was particularly drawn to the Peanut Butter Balls recipe... I was an experimental young "tween" and decided to try it. Today I got an unbelievable craving for these treats and decided to look online to see if this book still existed so I could find the recipe. I had to laugh at the reviews of this book... that the recipes tasted "earthy" and such. This Peanut Butter Balls recipe is a winner! If you get the book, you must try it! Happy to hear the book had a much larger purpose without me knowing it at the tender age of 13. I'll consider getting a copy as these are issues I'm concerned about today. Don't think I'll be trying the yogurt barley soup recipe, however... ;)

This is the cookbook that taught me how to balance my proteins and make my vegetarian meals filling and satisfying. A classic that I intend to always keep on hand. There are some great recipes in this book, but there are also some real duds.

In print for decades, this book defines the concept of complimentary protein: combining non-meat foods to get complete usable protein. Also included are many meatless recipes to incorporate complete protein into your diet. The food-combining chart alone is worth the price of the book.

In the early 1970s, I left my abusive husband, took my three kids and resumed my education (I was a high school dropout age 28 with three kids). Those were the days of "Earth shoes" that tilted your body into a more upright position, and the "discovery" of yogurt and acid rain. Although I did not realize it at the time, it was the beginning of the renewal of the Woman's movement.
My new friends included a small group of women in their late twenties and early thirties who had left abusive husbands, had small children, and were in the midst of gaining a new awareness that later on took on the sobriquet, "consciousness raising." Among other tools we acquired a number of books including, THE WOMEN'S ROOM and DIET FOR A SMALL PLANET.
DIET FOR A SMALL PLANET is a gem, not because it contains wonderful recipes (it doesn't) but because when you read it, you can get an inside view of a subculture that has disappeared. Sometimes I think the happiest moments of my life occurred in those days. I had no money, but I was in college--a life long dream my mother had and never realized--and with friends who helped me to feel good about myself for the first time in my life. DIET FOR A SMALL PLANET nourished this feeling. DIET explained how the real food chain worked and that everything we ate affected some other life form. We learned that we could eat and hurt others less, and save a few bucks because the meals were cheap.
My kids still laugh at some of the meals I served them based on the recipes in DIET. Over the years, we've had many discussions about which food was worst. They say the "yogurt and barly soup" wins hands down. This book explains how to make awful food and many better veggie books are on the market. However, you won't buy this book for the recipes, you'll buy it for it's insight. Laughing at DIET because it is naive is laughing at the Wright Brothers because they didn't build and fly a Concorde. Read DIET with an unbiased eye and understand it was the food bible for a group of young American women who were "backward" because their society wanted it that way, but believed they could become educated and help change the world for the better--and in spite of all the recent sorrow, the world for women and children is better than it was 30 years ago. PS. I don't know why the advertising says this is a 20th anniversary edition. A copy of this book was floating around 30 years ago. Could it have been printed by the "underground" press??

I decided to read this book after reading about it in Peter Singer's "Practical Ethics". I thought that it was going to be a real cow hugging grass-munching type of book. Boy was I wrong. It turns out that this book is 98% multi-national corporation/ government/ modern ranching bashing. Her research is quite extensive and thorough. She makes a solid case for the need to change the way we do things. Unfortunately, after almost 35 years of being in print, the "revolution" spoken of on the cover hasn't managed to change much. Change of the type she wants usually only comes from one of two things, big money figuring that it can profit from the change or bloody revolution. Neither one seems near.
In the 2% of the book where she talks about human biology, our nutrition and evolution, not only is it not well referenced, but also she gets it wrong. Now to be fair, she may have done her research on this in the 60's and has just not bothered to follow up. Also, some of the modern research has been published well after the book. Still, there was enough information out there beforehand for her to have studied further. Her statement that we evolved living on mostly plants is absolutely false. Anthropologists and archaeologists can tell us three things about prehistoric humans. First is that by changing our diet to mostly meat, we were able to grow our brains. Second is that the tools they find in early human and pre-human sites are all for processing of meat. Finally, it is easy to tell the difference between pre and post agricultural settlements. Before agriculture humans were taller, had healthier bones and no cavities. When it comes to diet, two recent studies of the Atkins diet have shown that a high protein, high fat, low carb diet not only helps you loose weight faster, but keeps your cholesterol down too.
All in all high on complaining, low on solutions. However, in light of some of her facts and the recent mad cow scare, I am thinking of switching to free range beef.

The idea of eating less meat has always appealed to me. I found this book in hopes of learning how to find other sources of protein. I just wanted a book to tell me some easy to read guidelines, all I found in this book was a lot of big words. You have to have a PHD in nutrition to read it. The more I read the more confused I got. This book is NOT for the casual reader.

Because Ms. Lappe had, in her words, an "aha moment," that beef production took more fossil fuels, and on from there, that Homo Sapiens should therefore become herbivores, she wrote a plethora of books advocating all the way from vegan to semi-vegetarian diets, ignoring the fact that Homo Sapiens is nearly incapable of tolerating such a diet.
Since her books and the simultaneous fad dietary movement evoking high consumption of carbohydrates, namely grains, beans, and fruits, America in particular and the rest of the western world has suffered an epidemic of obesity, metabolic syndrome, high blood pressure, heart disease, cancer and Alzheimers. The correlation cannot be denied, yet she charges ahead with book after book, pushing Americans into more and greater consumption of foods which in her words, "cows eat," but that human beings are not adapted to.
She would sacrifice the health of the species in order to prevent climate change and air pollution. I would argue to her that the destruction of the environment is not due to eating animal protein and fat, but is a result of the incredible overpopulation of the planet by Homo Sapiens. She would rather see people take diabetes drugs to control the effects of eating whole grains and fruits, rather than eat a proper animal protein diet to stay healthy, and practice birth control to control environmental damage.
This sort of unscientific approach has helped do extensive damage to Americans and others who buy into the whimsical idea that it's okay to ignore your basic diet, dictated by evolution, and at the same time to reproduce exponentially and cause irreparable damage to the planet. I cannot disagree more vehemently with her ideas and those of her followers.