The Sociology Video Project


Find a video: by topic | by title | only the best | only Canadian  | for hearing impaired viewers

Title: The genetic takeover, or, mutant food

Rating: 2.9 out of 4

Reference: Directors & writers, Karl Parent & Louise Vandelac; producer, Eric Michel.
Montréal: French Program, National Film Board of Canada, 2000.
52 minutes
Closed-captioned
Call number: video 7064

Abstract: Have we become unwitting guinea pigs for multinationals who blithely disregard millions of years of evolution? Genetically modified plants have become part of our daily diet and are already found in 75% of processed foods. This revolution has occurred without consumer awareness or knowledge of potential risks to our health and to the environment, despite vigorous condemnation from many scientists and farmers of the absence of independent, adequate testing. In response to consumer demands, many European and Asian countries have instituted mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods, but North America has been slow to react.

Library of Congress subjects:
Food--biotechnology
Food—biotechnology--moral and ethical aspects
Plant genetic engineering
Transgenic plants
Video recordings for the hearing impaired

Sociology subjects:
Environmental issues
Globalisation & development (in part)
Health & medicine (in part)
Privatisation & restructuring (in part)
Science & technology
Work in North America and Europe (in part)

Reviews and Numerical Ratings

(2) Fine but not special, has some problems. I would not show the entire film, only parts: The film provides good background on certain issues related to GM food: the precautionary principle minute 13), corporate control of research (GM potatoes), the contrast between the European and North American approaches to regulating GM foods, insect resistant foods and pesticides. But other parts of the film are dated—most importantly, the politics of GM food in Canada. A lot has happened in the past 4-5 years, and some of the more alarming predictions made in the video about the takeover of GM foods have failed to materialize, in good part because of successful resistance to rapid adoption among consumers and activists. Monsanto and others have had some substantial setbacks, and statements to the effect that GM food will take up most arable lands by 2005 undermine the credibility of the video, since this has clearly not happened. Unfortunately these sorts of statements also undermine the better arguments. On Monsanto and the issues of licenses, a course director who showed this should probably update this information with the case of the Saskatchewan (Alberta ?) farmer who was charged by Monsanto. Ramblings at the end about democracy are not worth showing. Peter Vandergeest

(4) This film is very informational. The European context provides a very critical perspective to the science and politics of transgenetic foods. The only drawback to this film is that it relies heavily on subtitles. Yet this film effectively illustrates the frightening outcomes (on democracy, the environment, and human health) that have accompanied the development of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and effectively encourages action by emphasizing social responsibility, the power of social movements and governmental obligation to protect public good. Sarah Newman

(2.5) This video dealt with the imposition of transgenetic or GMO foods into our foods. It poses this as an issue because environmental and health risks are overlooked by producers. For example, they talked about a study showing a GM food to be detrimental to health. The multinational corporations that produce these foods literally colonize the natural processes of cultivation to provide abundant, efficiently-produced high-end food. The video exemplifies the recurring theme that sociologists often see: that everything is subject to profit, that profit supersedes humanity and human rights. The video’s especially important because GM foods affect us all. We also see how little power we have and how a small number of people are in control. Because of this, I was quite disturbed by the video’s passive voice. I’d like to see more; I’d like to see where we go from here; I’d like to see an update because the video was at least eight to ten years old. Marsha McQueen (undergraduate)

(2.5) This thoroughly serious 52-minute video explains the methods of biotech companies (emphasizing inter-species work), the growing market share of GM food, what’s known so far about the effects of GM food (i.e., an experiment showing that rats fed GM potatoes had numerous health problems after just 10 days …for which the scientist was fired), the contrast between North American and European citizens’ & governments’ attitudes & practices, and the issues for farmers & others arising from the corporatization of intellectual property. (If you wanted to show just the 1st 30 minutes, stopping as the “Hold-up on the living” section begins, the last point on this list is what would be missed.) Sometimes repetitive, as if everyone’s best turns of phrase had to be treasured, but maybe that’s ok since this video’s content is more difficult than the other GM-related ones. High reliance on predominantly-male experts, good visuals, and long. Kathy Bischoping

About the project | Book a video for class | Enter the Library Catalogue | Send us feedback | Back to main