Not since "Fahrenheit 9/11" and "Celsius 41.11" have I seen a documentary so biased. A big fan of documentary, I recognize that it is nearly impossible to create a film that doesn't lean towards one side of the subject. However, it is possible to let both sides have their say and allow the viewer to make up their own mind. "The Future of Food" plays more like propaganda against corporations and government than it serves as an informative piece on genetically modified (GM) food.
The good questions "Food" does raise are in conjunction with current patent and anti-trust laws. Sadly, the film attempts to construe these points as arguments against GM good and fails to see the true potential of the information.
When "Food" does bother to offer scientific support, it misrepresents and ignores. The film peddles fear by "revealing" that bacteria and viruses are used during the genetic modification process. Though technically true, "Food" fails to provide the important detail that only an enzyme from bacteria is used, not bacterial organisms or even bacterial DNA. There is also much ignorance by the filmmakers in their failure to acknowledge the extreme similarity in processes of genetic modification to natural evolution.
I am not a universal supporter of GM food, especially as it is applied in cases the film does choose to show us. However, there are many advantages to it and at least as many cases supporting its value - all which "The Future of Food" keeps off-camera.
Near the end of "The Future of Food", a farmer says that the only way to change the food industry is for the consumer to be educated and decide. It's my understanding that to be educated, you have to have ALL the facts.
The good questions "Food" does raise are in conjunction with current patent and anti-trust laws. Sadly, the film attempts to construe these points as arguments against GM good and fails to see the true potential of the information.
When "Food" does bother to offer scientific support, it misrepresents and ignores. The film peddles fear by "revealing" that bacteria and viruses are used during the genetic modification process. Though technically true, "Food" fails to provide the important detail that only an enzyme from bacteria is used, not bacterial organisms or even bacterial DNA. There is also much ignorance by the filmmakers in their failure to acknowledge the extreme similarity in processes of genetic modification to natural evolution.
I am not a universal supporter of GM food, especially as it is applied in cases the film does choose to show us. However, there are many advantages to it and at least as many cases supporting its value - all which "The Future of Food" keeps off-camera.
Near the end of "The Future of Food", a farmer says that the only way to change the food industry is for the consumer to be educated and decide. It's my understanding that to be educated, you have to have ALL the facts.