Can GM Food Save The World?

Can GM Food Save The World?With the world shocked by rising food prices, and millions in the developing world struggling to get enough to eat, the problem of food security is right back on the world's agenda. And with the world's population likely to rise to nine billion in the next few decades, feeding the world is going to become an ever-greater problem.

Are transgenic crops the answer to the problem, or do they, as Prince Charles has argued, threaten an environmental catastrophe? What's the evidence on the success or failure of GM to date?

To some it is a powerful technology that could boost food production and prevent famines; to others it is a dangerously untested science that threatens environmental disaster.

This bbc documentary sent Jimmy Doherty - an advocate of sustainable farming - on a personal mission to get at some of the truths on GM. Can genetically modified food save the world?

Watch the full documentary now

Ratings: 6.28/10 from 18 users.

More great documentaries

84 Comments / User Reviews

  1. Douglas Fenech

    Even if GM food is bad for you (which albeit I don't really know if it is as you get opposing views from all sides though I doubt it is as many opposers seem to adopt a religious aspect to the subject) would it still not be better for a person to die of disease x amount of years later having lived a decent life rather than die of starvation now?

    I know what I'd choose. However, the people that make these decisions don't have to worry about such prospects as they always have food on their table.

  2. Tom

    The GM are not the problem, the problen lie in the US industry tht make that and sell the pesticides with, that just kill the biodiversity.

    But, who can stop these greeded industry ?

  3. Joe

    Who paid for this documentary? Its well disguised with an 'earthy' narrator who looks grungy enough to appeal to
    environmentalists but this has the stink of something paid for by Monsanto. I used to work with a PR firm and this is the kind of crap Monsanto puts out to influence people. The problem with these crops are that Monsanto will copyright the GM seeds and require farmers to buy them, creating a slave-master situation where the farmers are forced to by patented seeds and can't reuse them. This increases Monsanto's profit and decreases farmer's independence. Anyone who watches this doc should also watch "The world according to Monsanto" on this site. Its a great doc and a real eye opener. Check it out.

  4. Vlatko

    Thanks to @Tor this documentary source was replaced with MySpace source which offers the complete doc. Please be patient with the loading time.

  5. Dan

    Before any of you even begin to think that GM crops are a viable answer, please watch The World According to Monsanto or The Future of Food, both of which are available on this website. Afterward, I highly recommend researching Permaculture; something I believe to be the best solution to the food crisis and many others for that matter. You can download torrents filled with a plethora of videos both recent and decades old, as well as a heap of literature. It's a tried and true solution that doesn't lay waste to nature, and is the healthiest and most independent lifestyle one could choose.

  6. Arigato

    Vlatko you rock :) thanks a lot mate

  7. Miitig

    I agree with Joe....
    “The world according to Monsanto” is a MUST WATCH!!!! this documentary tactfully avoids and side-steps the real issues...reeks of Monsanto! Mexico hates us for wrecking their corn is a key concept that should have also been addressed...really propagandaish...

  8. anne V

    I'm not interested in eating patented food. From what I've been understanding. GM foods lack nutrients. As it would take 3GM apples to equal the nutritional value of one organic apple. So we'd basically all end up deficient in vitamins and minerals, we are already depending on supplements to get what we need. To me this is just bad news/ propaganda/.

  9. Brandon Sanders

    Upon watching this documentary on GM food crops it is clear that the film is a propaganda peice. In their attempt at faking a even handed film they completely show their true intentions by not addressing one of the scariest aspects of GM crops and that is an evil corporation like Monsanto owning the patents on the worlds food supply.

  10. Brandon Sanders

    He visits the National Agricultural Biotechnology Centre of Uganda which is also a close who knows what with or of Monsanto. On the sign outside the place you can see the emblem of NARO whom In July 2009, Uganda's National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO) began field testing insect-resistant Bollgard II and herbicide-resistant Roundup Ready Flex cotton. NARO gained access to these biotechnologies through a public-private partnership with Monsanto, the developer of the technologies.

  11. Estrella

    Yes! a great peace of propaganga. I truly agree that this is not about saving people from starvation or malnutrition. Is about control!!! He who controls the food can also control the world. Making millions!!! People may still be starving... no difference today. I worked in a dali and the amount of food that is sent to the so called "pig's bucket" is outragious!!! that said something to me, the problem is not that there is not enough food... but an excess greed.
    MG food is not good for the enviroment or for the animals who are trained to eat it, such cows and fish eating corn; not in there natural makeup to do so. Cows get an overgrowth of ecoli in their stomaghs. But from the company point of view they grow faster and can be butchered in much less time.
    Another problem is the erotion. The ground is forced to produce by an ever increasing fertilizer and pestecides!!! And where is all that quimistry ends up? right in our plates!!! What about our water supply?
    In addition to the documentaries already suggested by Joe and Dan, I would also recomend watching LIFE RUNNING OUT OF CONTROL you will get to see excellent information that will be an eye oppener as well.
    Say no to MG foods... say yes to naturally grown food. Try growing a garden, lets get in touch with nature once again.
    By the way... did anyone notice the huge mount of soy beans!!! but no mention about the already starving people. Companies do not get rich by giving their possesions; they get rich by taking, taking, taking.

  12. Joe

    Great Post Estrella,
    Thats totally true. These companies put profit above all else. I live in Tokyo and used to work for a PR firm who represented Monsanto (there are several). They try like hell to get into the Japanese market, but the Japanese can smell a rat and hardly use their products at all. Japan has the best produce, especially the stuff grown organically and has no need for some puffed up steroided tomato when they have lush, red tomatoes already. 'The World According to Monsanto' from this site really awakened me to whats really happening, basically Monsanto trying to patent the world's food supply. Check out the RBGH section of that film, it'll make you lose your lunch. The whole mentality of profit above all else is so destructive for everything: the environment, the economy and our general mental health. It has to change and is unsustainable. Its not evil people, but people need to start effecting change and creating a better world. An organization like Monsanto is not benefitting anyone on this planet, there are much better ways to feed the world. In the meantime, people need to be educated to what this company actually stands for. Don't fall for some grungy guy with a goatee as investigative reporting, its total deception and lies.

  13. Philip Van Der Mude

    a skillful use of the Confuse and Conquer by MONSANTO , if the 3rd world would move towards the " food forest " ideas of for example Bill mOllison , there would be less profit margins for some but varied food options for the masses .

  14. Tom

    Can you say propaganda ? There was absolutely no scientific data in this movie only this random guy asking peoples opinions and stating unfounded claims and in many cases outright lying. I am disgusted.

  15. Karen

    If their intent is to grow these plants in third world countries, it is to grow them as'cash crops' to sell to us! I will believe it is to help the needy when I see it! Monsanto would not have been in the business of breaking and sueing individual farmers if their agenda was serving humanity. GM technology may be a useful and safe alternative to genetically unmodified plants if it can be used to grow a more nutricious, more fruitful,etc... fruit/vegetable/grain, and if the contamination/ownership problem can be overcome. Right now GM should be handled the same way the issue of stem cell research has been handled; with caution, morals and laws that protect the people not private interests. GM would be best tested on secluded raw islands.

  16. hmm

    the guy in the docco is starting to annoy me.. what a whole lot of BS.
    .. edit is a little too squeaky clean.

  17. Caldwing

    Corporations like Monsanto are indeed evil and greedy. They do in fact use exploitative pracices on farmers all over the world.

    However it is going to be monumentally important for us as a species to distinguish between tools and the users of the tools. Genetic modification is a tool. The problems are not in any way with the science itself, but the practices of the companies that are using it. This is a legal problem, not a biological one.

    If we are to avoid mass starvation as the population inceases, moreso than we already experience, GM foods are going to be a required reality. We just need to take this revolutionary technology out of the hands of hardcore capitalists.

    There are NO health problems inherrent in GM foods. Theorestically we could of course insert a gene with a toxic product, but why on Earth would we? Anbody who understands anything about genetics knows this. Normally a transgenic organism has exactly one foreign gene inserted into its genome in order to fulfill a very specific purpose. To think this somehow taints the food is pure magical thinking.

    Also the John Innes Center is an independant publicly funded research center. The Monsanto page that was linked is just a list of biotechnology institutions that do this kind of science.

    Basically hate the companies not the science. Science is the only real hope for humanity, not some kind of return to primitive agrarianism.

  18. Falcon

    Caldwing, animals don't eat GMO unless they are forced to. If they get a choice, they will eat their natural food. There is nothing "primitive" about farmers natural selections and improvements. GMO is just a way to make more profit without knowing about the long term health effects. One big GMO product is Aspartame, created by genetically modified bacteria...what a great gift to mankind...

  19. estrella

    You are right falcon! For those of you that have not notice the change on telapia fish, next time please look at a package of telapia that has been grown in china. Telapia should not look bloody! This fish has been changed. The goal was to introduce telapia among other two kinds of fish which are popular by the end of the decade(last year?) This fish are GM modified already and a person can tell the difference. I recomend the documentary Life Running Out Of Control. The fish that has been modified is too agressive to the natural growing fish in the ocean; is a killer. The MG plants are also a danger to the environment.
    Primitive agrarianism? mmmmmm... I believe the farmers did a great job advancing the quality of food and keeping the integrity of nutrients in the food while advancing the quality of the plant and increase yield. Today the world produces more food than ever before, yet people still starving!!! Think of it... research... it will not be hard to find reports. We don't need GMO's.
    I would also recomend everyone to start buying organic seeds and learn about gardening. If big companies like monsanto get their goal acomplish, indeed we may not be able to afford buying food. They will own most seeds through patents (already in process) and will control the price. Yes... we may starve anyway no matter how much food is grown. You don't think so? look what is happening in India. I'm yet to see Monsanto's kindness.

  20. TheParadigmShift

    This film is clearly big ag propaganda. The falsehoods in this film are many. GM foods are NOT better for the environment like the guy said. GM foods require MORE pesticides and cause the surrounding weeds to become pesticide resistant and need more spraying. The problem with people starving is NOT food production, its completely politics. Starving nations like Haiti and Africa do not plant crops for local consumpton, they produce crops like soy and wheat for export and buy food like rice with the money they receive. The variable price of these crops causes the starving people to be dependant on the US and UN for food aid as they can no longer afford to buy food. The problem is not enough local production of locally consumed crops. The host of the show claims that we have been modifying crops for hundreds of years but what he didn't say is that we have NEVER mutated plants with animal DNA like the tomatoes that have fish genes in them. He did not mention the many studies that showed GM potaoes, tomatoes and corn cause lesions in the stomachs of mice and the GM corn is linked to sterility in mice. GMO's do not increase yield, in fact many studies have shown decreased yield with GM. The reason companies like Monsanto are pushing GM is to OWN ALL FOOD ON THE PLANET FOR TOTAL CONTROL OF THE EARTH'S POPULATION, NOT TO "HELP" ANYBODY.

    Skip this one and watch "LIFE RUNNING OUT OF CONTROL" instead.

  21. James

    My opinion of this video was it is pro GMO w/ a mask of neutrality. I think the U.K. has the right idea of doing years of study. I see that as a major flaw in the U.S. food system. If the tests have been run, lets see the results.I think the U.S. crops concentrating on herbicide tolerance and insect resistance GMO's isn't gonna do anything positive. The part of this video talking about the BT cotton & the scientist who said there wasn't really any dangers has not heard of the giant pigweed that has developed resistance to BT? There is something like 10,000 acres in my county that use to produce cotton or tobacco, but they had to be abandoned due to this "superweed". Proper study should be done. If it has been done, where are the results on a peer reviewed forum?

  22. Jonman

    Monsanto propoganda

  23. Ana Spence

    I don't think GM is the solution for the world feeding problem. At the end is just experimenting with Humans. And what about all the diseases that will bring out later on??? Don't mess up with the environment. That's the only safe thing.

  24. Jose Thomas

    What is being ignored is the FACT that GM food has been in use for decades. Please read up about the green revolution in India. During the seventies, when starvation related death would have caused upto a billion deaths, Norman Borlaug and his GM wheat prevented it. It is easy for us who are full of food to dismiss GM food to satisfy our need for self-righteousness. But please think about poor people who cannot afford our luxuries such as food. There is no proof that any disease has EVER been caused by GM food. "thou shalt not follow the multitudes onto evil".

  25. Epicurus

    thank you jose thomas, couldnt have said it better.

  26. Dan

    @Jose Thomas/Epicurus

    While GMO foods may not be the cause of diseases themselves (which is debatable), the act of producing GMO crops also produces disease and lowered health as a byproduct. They lack a great deal of the vitamins and other nutrients which their *real* counterparts do not, due to the soil in which they must be grown being completely dead from the chemicals applied to it. Being vitamin deficient can cause all sorts of issues, mostly to do with the immune system. Notably in the case of GMO food; they don't have the cancer fighting compounds that organic veggies do. As we know the food industry has been in bed with the cancer industry for some time now. How convenient that Monsanto also sells chemotherapy drugs.

    That brings me to my main point, that big GMO corporations aren't in the business of making food, they make chemicals. The chemicals are without a doubt the WORST thing about GMO crops. Pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, artificial fertilizers, growth hormones (chemicals originally used as nerve gas in World War 2) which are all necessary chemicals for GMO crops to grow, are certainly proven to have cause a plethora of different diseases and illnesses.

    Now that we've laid that to rest, let me state that GMO crops are not just grown for the third world, they threaten to take over GLOBAL food production, so the whole worlds population should be considered, not just the poor. What's going to happen if the entire world is immune deficient and malnourished, and consuming foods laden in carcinogens and poisons? What's going to happen to the entire world when it's lost all of its topsoil? What's going to happen to the entire world when growing your own food has been outlawed, when you have to buy all your food from a big corporation? If the poor in third world countries can't afford food, it's not because the food is scarce, its because the world economy is horribly skewed in the direction of big capitalist countries and their corporations. There IS NO SCARCITY OF FOOD, and it's the fault of huge mega-corporations like the GMO pushers that third world countries can't afford to eat. You say that we've been growing GMO for decades, yet for some reason the population of starving people around the world in every country continues to grow, and malnutrition is rampant.

    The Monsantos of the world are just trying to control world food production and destroy our health with their chemicals so they can sell us chemical drugs. They don't care about starving people, or your health. However, propaganda like this movie as well as people like you continue to grow GMO's influence around the world and doom us all. “thou shalt not follow the multitudes onto evil” -- what a cute quote, why not start living by it?

  27. Tore B. Krudtaa

    This is truly an ugly piece of GMO adverticing!

    One of the main arguments of the GMO-producers and the GMO-fanatics are that the use of GMO will feed the world.
    That statement is a total lie. There is allready to much food in the world.

    There is also to many people in this world. So a better approach to deal with a food crisis would be to make sure that the human population do not grow.
    The more people on this planet the more we will consume, the more we consume the more negative impact we will have on the environment. 2 children per family should be maximum allowed.

    Now back to this utterly incorrect documentary.
    It does not at all, in an honest way look into the risks when using GMO.

    Here is a few facts:

    The use of GMO in farming cannot coexist with other crops of same type. That means that if you introduce e.g. GMO-soy in a country, then within some years it will be impossible to grow conventional GMO. Now, if you are a farmer that still want to grow convetional soy then suddenly one day, Monsanto will come and visit, tell you that they have detected their patented gene and that they therefore own your whole crop. If you do not pay them they will take you to court. Another important aspect of this non-coexist issue is that it breaks down social structure between farmers. If your neighbouring farmer grow GMO and you do not, and then the next couple of years the GMO spread into your crop.... that have lead to lots of anger.

    When using GMO, the GMO-producers basically control what genes to be used. It is no longer a natural process. And with each new GMO-plant or animal introduced, we also introduce a lot of potential risks, both to the environment and to our health.

    One thing that the GMO-producers and the GMO-fanatics often want to tell you is that "there is basically no difference between a GMO-plant or a convetional plant". That is just one big lie.

    First. The gene(s) that the GMO-producers insert into the plant does not only produce one trait. Our scientists does not fully understand how a gene work inside the DNA. But one thing the scientists do know, is that on gene may produce many different traits (proteins). Therefore the GMO plant may produce other proteins and traits than the GMO-producers planned for. These potential new proteins may have bad effects on the environment, those that eat the plant, and even the plant itself.

    Second. A convetional agricultural plant do not produce poison. The GMO-producers have e.g. developed GM-crop that produce Bt-toxin. They do this by inserting a gene from a soil-dwelling bacterium. Then the plant produce this toxin 24 hours per day, as long as it lives. And it does not only affect the targeted insect. It affetcs life in the soil, as well as airborn insects.

    Third. Because the GMO-producers now control which genes that are to be used they basically controls life. The GMO-producers goal is to produce money. Not to feed the hungry people. The GMO-producers often fiddle with their own research and hide unwanted health effects. Why do you think that there is no labelling of GMO in the US? WHY?. Simply because the GMO-industry does not want it to be easy to link eventual health problems to GMO, as well as if the population got the choice to choose between GMO and non-gmo then a lot less GMO would be sold.

    Because the US have been eating this frankenstein food for many years, does not mean that it must be, or is healty!
    If someone get allergic reactions or in an other way get a health problem with GMO i the US.... how could anyone know what caused it. GMO is not labeled. GMO has not been tested properly, and the tests that FDA (Food and Drug Administration) base their so called risk analysis on is produced by Monsanto and the other GMO-producers. At the same time, many scientific studies produced by independent researchers indicate that something is very wrong with GMO. Animals feed with GM-corn may be sterile, produce unvanted cell growth, produce cancer and more....

    When the population are feed this shit, it will, in most cases, only add to the cases of chronic diseases. And nobody will know what caused it. And since FDA or other countries food guardians are not willing to do their own independent studies, the whole population are now a part of an incredibly large food experiment. The whole US population have now practically gotten the status as laboratory rats.

    The true effects of GMO in agriculture is in short:

    GMO spread to conventional plants. This alone should be more than enough to not allow GMO.
    Then the GMO-fanatics may tell you that you can then use their TERMINATOR technology, which means that the plant are sterile. What a joke, that still means that the GMO-producers control life, and own the seeds.

    The GMO farmer can, in many countries, no longer use their own seeds in the next year crop season. The GMO farmer have to buy the seeds from the GMO-producer.
    Say goodbye to biodiversity, and say goodbye to farmers rights.

    The use of GMO either force the farmer to use the GMO-producers pesticides, or to use plants that produce their own toxins.
    Either way the environment loose.
    In many countries where GMO has been used for years now, the use of the GMO-pesticides have produced weeds that are resistant to the original pesticides from more than one GMO-producer. This is because these weeds have gotten patented genes from more than one GMO-producer. Which have forced the farmers to use even more toxic pesticides, and a lot more of these non-environmental friendly chemicals.

    There is only one word for this documentary, and that is:



    The sad thing though, is that the GMO-industry is having a lot of money. So they are able to use an incredibly amount of money to buy people and to write articles or produce "documentaries" like this to "inform" the people.

    In the US the FDA has said that GMO are considered as GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe). That is quite an amazing statement. And it is basically because of this, that no officials care to start any independent testing. In may cases, in the US the GMO-producers, do not even have to get the GMO approved before putting it on the market.

    In Norway, while still GMO free, there is a lot of work going on by the GMO-fanatics. Even our own "Norwegian Scientific Commitee for Food Safety" are infected by people that are truly GMO-fanatics. This Commitee are supposed to be independent. But it is very hard to belive that this Commitee can be independent when people like Hilde-Gunn Sorteberg Opsahl and Audun H. Nerland can be sitting as leader of this Commitee. Both has in numerous articles spread misleading information about what GMO actually are to our population.

    This is just an example of how it works in many, many countries. People are getting positions that normally would require independent studies and minds. It practice, that is not what is happening. Far to often, people that have great interest in GMO and that will benefit if GMO are introduced are the actual decicion makers that influence if GMO are to be used or not.
    If that is the case in your country you should stand up and tell the people by writing articles and in other ways inform the population.

    The worst thing though with this whole thing is the laws that enable the GMO-producers to legally patent life. Living organisms or parts of them should never be allowed to be patented.

  28. Squiddley

    This documentary was produced by the bbc. They are funded by a license fee, not Monsanto. They're literally not allowed to be biased. So, when you see an unbiased, scientific documentary about the potentials of GM crops and dismiss it immediately as mere propaganda, you are detrimenting human progress. I'm assuming none of you are geneticists, or even botanists. Otherwise you'd know better. You should try reading a science journal for a change.

    All your points appear to be fabricated by some conspiracy machine. The suggestion that GM crops are less nutritious particularly offends me, as this is one of the reasons they were developed in the first place. Look up Golden Rice.
    Some suggest GM crops are dangerous, which isn't really true either. They go through an outrageous amount of testing to ensure they are safe for human consumption.

    It has been suggested that fish genes are inserted into plant genomes. It has been suggested that animals will not eat the food produced by GM crops unless they are forced to. It has been suggested that there is enough agricultural land on this planet for entirely organic crops to feed the rising global population. None of these things are true. And you should feel bad for believing it.

    GM researchers are creating crops that can be grown in the third world, and for you to oppose that because of some hysterical, uneducated and unscientific lies spread by greenpeace and friends of the earth regarding agricultural progress as the creation 'frankenfoods'... well, you should be ashamed of yourselves.

    I've researched parasite-resistant maize in China and virus-resistant potato in Kenya, and the benefits those crops can bring to those communities. It's all very well for you middle-class, socially-priveleged people to harp on about the benefits of organic foods, but you aren't the ones starving. You aren't in Kenya, witnessing your banana plantation, your only food and income source, succumbing to an easily preventable disease... These biochemists are doing a hell of a lot more for global welfare than you are.

    I agree with you on one thing... there needs to be a universal improvement in crop yield. There needs to be better harvesting and production processes used in the cultivation. And above all there needs to be an increase in research investment. And this all needs to be in conjunction with the use of GMOs. You look a dying child in sub-Saharan Africa in the eyes, with next to no muscles on his body and a stomach bloated by oedema... and you tell them that you oppose the technology that might feed them and their families for generations to come on purely moral grounds. I personally wouldn't be able to sleep at night.

  29. Tore B. Krudtaa

    To Squiddley

    You said:
    "Some suggest GM crops are dangerous, which isn’t really true either. They go through an outrageous amount of testing to ensure they are safe for human consumption."

    Wow ... that was quite an allegation.
    So could you please direct me to any of those testing on humans? I think you will find that quite hard. The countries that have allowed the use of GMO either in food or in agriculture have only evaluated the potential risks using "scientific studies" made by the GMO producers. These so called "scientific studies" made by e.g. Monsanto are not very scientific at all and are only produced to convince the decicionmakers.
    So please post here any scientific tests done on humans!

    You also said:
    "GM researchers are creating crops that can be grown in the third world, and for you to oppose that because of some hysterical, uneducated and unscientific lies spread by greenpeace and friends of the earth regarding agricultural progress as the creation ‘frankenfoods’… well, you should be ashamed of yourselves."

    What the GMO-producers actually do is to patent life. That is what this is all about. To control life. The GMO-producers do not give anything to the third world. Crops are growing in the so called "third world", right now, wihout the "help" fro m the GMO-producers. What really happens is that the small scale farmers are burdened by large loans because the price on the seeds has skyrocketed. One example is India, where Monsanto has convinced a lot of farmers to use e.g. Bt-Cotton, or other plants that require the farmer to use Monsanto's Roundup (or glyphosate). Either way the farmer loose. Mainly because there is no longer such things as farmers rights. Now the GMO-producers own the seeds. The farmers can no longer use the seeds from one season in the next. The seeds have to be bought from Monsanto. And if using GMO that require Roundup then the farmer spread this highly toxic pesticide on the fields.
    Who benefits: The GMO-producers, Monsanto etc.
    Who loose: Nature, enviroment, the farmer, the consumer.

    I'm not surpriced at all that many scientists love to work with this "wonder tech GMO". If you look isolated on the potential it sure sounds fantastic. The potential to raise yields, increase nutrition, more resistant crops, more food for the world.... It sounds like a dream, does it not.
    I do not doubt that there is honest scientists that truly belive that GMO will benefit the world....

    THE PROBLEM IS that with the current knowledge of what these changes made to a plant or an animal when using GMO, is not fully understood, neither by the GMO-producers or by the researchers around the world. The researchers have just managed to force these genes into an organism. And the researchers have no control on what happens in a short or long timescale.

    THE RESULT is that the farmers, the consumers, the animals and the environment are part of a huge experiment in the control of the GMO-producers.

    Here in Europe, Monsanto has now applied for patents on egg and bacon. Monsanto are no longer satisfied with the income on the patented seeds and their toxic pesticides, now they want to own the eggs and the meat that the animals that that eat e.g. Corn produced using Monsanto's seeds.

    There is only one answer to this BULLSHIT from the GMO-producers:


  30. Nootrelitei

    This film is in fact a conspiracy... Your thoughts are conspiracies to this conspiracy.

  31. Joe Ryan

    This documentary is soooo corny. Before I saw these comments as this went on I started to think the same things people are saying. The guy gives no background on his Organic farming and there's NOOOO way he wouldn't be against it or give in to it's benefits so easy, it would hurt his business to widely accept it and go against everything this fake guy is supposed to stand for.

    I especially love when he visits the Amish, lol.... soooo cheesy.

  32. Francisco

    I like the approach of the documentary and I agree with almost everything you said about OGMs. But I have different type of concerns. First of all I agree with the statement that the technology itself has not to be demonized, because of its potential. Demonizing the technology itself is exactly what companies wants, because there are not many proofs of its potential problems, making the whole debate an empty box, bringing the debate to a level of football cheering. I like it or I hate it, without trying to understand the basis of it. I would prefer much more a scenario in which every different OGM is a different case. I would prefer to have more extensive tests, without the rush for an economical return. And that is what is happening mostly, that companies press the system for quicker responses, depriving the earth with proper and long term testing. We cannot compare what is happening now with OGM with the 10000 years of domestication of natural varieties, because of the different time scale. During domestication of crops in the past, that was done in a completely different time and quantity scale, nature had time to adapt and to counter-select possible negative behaviors and effects, something that is lacking in what they call intensive testing. The scale of what has been done is scary!!!
    Back to the debate it is not the technology of making OGMs that scares me, or is the devil. In fact we use natural mechanisms for making OGM, but the fact that you can patent nature. Nature is something that we humans inherited from our ancestors, but future generations would not be provided with that inheritance if their in hand of companies. That is making future generations poorer. Immagine a possible future scenarioin which most of plants are in the hand of companies. And speaking for myself I do not trust the ethical and moral criteria of companies, that is profit only. Second, widespreading enormous quantities of transgenic crops is diminuishing substantially the biodiversity of crops itself. During the human period on earth every farmer selected the local varieties of crops that better fitted to their local environment. This multiplicity of variety helped nature to create barriers to the spreading of diseases, because different varieties had different natural resistances to different pathogen attacs. Using single varieties of OGM we are without any barrier to the spreading of the occurrence of a new disease, and at the same time we lost trace of many different natural varieties.
    In this sense we already have done a big mess on earth by increasing and pushing productivity yields.
    On another topic of the documentary it is true that africa needs research to reach better production yields, but the fact is that research has never been carried looking for development, but for profit... With low yields and lots of still unknown tropical diseases, it is an area which needs lots of research. But my concern is that if higher profits could be obtained in africa, the benefits would not be distributed to them, but land would be bought by companies to expand profits.
    What also worries me is the fact that lots of money is invested on OGM research (that offers a potential economical return) instead really fighting against global warming for instance. So what I guess is that the appeal of OGM is not putting food on each person on earth, but to maximise profits.
    First: The debate pro\against OGM is on a field that depends more on the guts of people, than on true facts. But incertanity is not a yes or not, just tells us that we need more time and more tests to see whats good and whats wrong. And that every OGM is a different case and therefore it should be tested througly before been put on the market.
    Second: We need to have more long term studies to see if there are side effects. Its true that time is money and therefore companies push heavily to have approval from regulation authorities. With the plethora of different regulation on different countries we just offer companies the perfect scenario to go along with their profit plan, without proper testing.
    Third: Research is mostly done (and financed) at a governamental level, but than researchers can sell the ideas to companies that patent them, transforming something that is nature in something they own.
    Fourth: Biodiversity is lowering drammatically on a earth scale in a very short period (not only by OGM farming), and that this diversity protects us from the sudden event of the insurgence of new diseases. OGM and high yield crops do not help us at all.
    So what is the biggest problem? I guess overpopulation, that pushes nature to no return points... and we are very close to the limit.
    We have to live in balance with nature, not pushing to hard the limits otherwise we are doomed to fail as a species.

  33. Drumm

    This whole documentary is biased garbage. It cleverly goes out of it's way to praise any little possible benefit of GM foods, while conveniently leaving out all so many negative aspects. It's made simply to mislead people into trusting these GM foods.

  34. -Mars

    this documentary... does not answer the questions.. for example he had a conversation with a scientist who studied the effect of GM cotton on caterpillars but he did not say what the effect was...

  35. junior

    I'm studying to be a Holistic Nutritionist and I have to do an investigative piece on a few different food products and I thought that i would look into this movie as well. Something fishy! Thanks for all your leads, the film makers also did a movie on this site about homeopathy and how it can't be proved. yada yada.
    Very interesting, i'm going to get to the bottom of this.

  36. kriz

    What a bunch of lies. There is no real food crisis, only engineered ones to keep food prices high and to keep pushing GM foods onto the populace...its been proven dangerous to the body. It's also twisted organic foods a.k.a food that hasn't had cr** put into it, is more expensive.

  37. Jamey

    Possibly devestating products are not the answer to starvation! We are capable of growing enough food; we have been perfecting the art since we began. The problem is the monetary system. There is more than enough food now, I'll bet most of you posting waste it all the time. There is just not enough money. Same goes for disease, homelessness, lack of water, not to mention the corruption it causes in all of our systems, business, and individuals. In the real world; the natural world, there is more than enough food to feed the 1260 children dying of starvation every minute. I urge you to look at how these children live and die, many just toddlers and babies. If it wrenches your heart in any way, don't promote giving them more problems, promote alternatives to the monetary system. Besides, we'll be eating it too, most people who get a hold of these foods will be people who are not starving now. And even if it were cheaper for a time, I strongly doubt it would last long enough to be worth while to not pave the way for future generations to have no access to food that doesn't cause disease. Does any one here realize how much the nutritional value has dropped in everything? It is a crisis now, and again a symptom of the monetary system. We are smarter than this. Let's not solve problems by replacing them with more problems.

  38. Jaak Wassmuth

    Codex Alimentarius, Monsanto, IMF, WTO, WHO: what do they have in common? I live in Southern Mexico. Genetically Modified corn is growing all round here. The indigenous population destroy these plants as soon as they are identified. Why? Because they do not produce seed that will germinate another generation and they cross pollinate with the existing crops and sterilize them. There are better, sustainable solutions to the issue that do not have the far reaching effects that GM plants pose to the planets flourish of life. (I think that we are going in the wrong direction.) The commonality of these international organizations is, they think they are gods.. They need to work on that.

  39. lola

    watch the future of food---very eye opening

  40. Healer

    Monsanto is a dirty company. I have no interest whatsoever in eating food that is produced in such a manner. Curse the day it comes to my country, that abomination you call food. But since you call your hamburger meat that gives a lot of people diseases, food, and all that shit that you try to cure yourselves with as medicinal treatments, I'm not the least bit surprised you defend this.

    Think. Why isn't the food we been eating for more than tens of thousands of years, good enough? There's not enough of it? No... there's more than enough, right now in my country 10% of people live in poverty and barely feed themselves and keep a solid roof on their heads, while truckloads of food is wasted daily because food market business doesn't want the prices any lower. It's one damnational thing, human greed. Condemn yourself with the genetically modified food if you want, but leave the innocent out of it! Leave an option for those who value their lives. Or is increasing human population in earth more important than keeping the already existing people well? Ain't there plenty of us around already?

    The corruption is too far and wide spread. Everybody knows there's some in the Balkan countries and Russia, but I wonder how many really know the whole extent of US corruption. I've been watching these documents for a few days now, heard a lot of stuff about it before, but man there's always something new. Can't people make a honest country without succumbing to this s@#$?

  41. makes no sense

    Its scary and crazy when you cant grow your own food and when food becomes just another product, it actually better to die then eat gmo food because this will effect entire human race with its unknown effects. Its a common sense thathuman popultion is the reason and problem for food long as human population will increase, there will be food shortage...GMO compaies just found the ticket so to speak in fooling people that they are the heros and that they have the right over the food....thats a real life nightmare

  42. Arthur Tesla

    This is a slick, pro-gmo video that ignores the facts. The United States has the longest history of gmo use. How is the health of the American people? Two-thirds are overweight and one-third are obese. Diabetes is at an epidemic level. One in five children will be obese by the age of four. Monsanto and genetically engineered crops have poisoned our food supply!
    A child born today, will likely have a shorter life span than previous generations.
    No mention was made of the farmer suicides in India, the reduced corn crop in South Africa in 2008 because Monsanto's gmo corn failed to pollinate or the 11 million acres of superweeds in the U.S. resistant to Monsanto's Roundup herbicide causing problems for farmers. No mention was made of secondary pests. No mention was made of Monsanto's buying out other seed companies making it difficult for farmers to find conventional seeds and the Department of Justice investigation. GMO is a huge experiment using people as guinea pigs and the environment as a trash can.
    I would have liked to see Jimmy interview Doreen Stabinsky, Jeffrey Smith and Andrew Kimbrell. I thought the interviews were stacked largely with pro-gmo people. I wonder who paid for Jimmy to travel the world?
    Consumers worldwide OPPOSE genetically engineered foods!!

  43. esaeo

    No substance. No proof or documentation. Solely anecdotal. Definitely NOT a documentary. Surely, nothing to stake one's life or livelihood on. And they never touched on an even greater issue with GMOs. Patents.

    GMO in the US is patentable, and therefore the rights of its use/propagation is under legal control of the manufacturer. And these manufacturers, in an attempt to ensure control over their patent modify the organism to be sterile perennials, ensuring that there is no capacity for farmers to collect seed for next season. This forces the farmer to become enslaved to the manufacturer of GMOs every season. Great profits for the manufacturer.... only the manufacturer.

    Now, is where the really HUGE problem comes into play. Cross pollination. Now, otherwise legitimate natural crops become INFECTED with the GMO version, crippling farmers for next year, even when they never wanted manufactured seed. And there are several instances where innocent farmers fell victim to cross-pollination and were subject by the manufacturer to destroy their crop or pay the manufacturer their fee. (Insane and an out-right abomination.) And even worse, what happens if due to economic disaster (regardless of its cause), the manufacturer collapses as a business, no longer in a position to provide next year's seeds, and all other seed, now sterile is all that's left --- obviously to yield naught. An entire crop, potentially world-wide, would be lost forever. Universal starvation -- considering that most GMOs are staple crops.

    There is no justification for GMO in any circumstance whereby sterility is built in, and patents are enforceable.

    Any GMO should be the work of science, and science ALONE. It should be illegal for any corporation to engage in profit of any genetic findings, especially when it comes to such a fundamental component to life as food. If a GMO is PROVEN in the most strict line of science to be beneficial to mankind and the environment in the long term, THEN might it be offered to the public for use WITHOUT PATENT. But even that is a risk that I don't think is really worth it.

  44. gto

    you guys are lucky nature have been nice to you, so you have many options..

    you dont have southeast asia's/china's monsoon flood, indians/chinese/african drought, and most of all farmers with great subsidized to fight pest problem with pesticides.

    so you dont need gm rice thats survive monsoon flood, maize thats resistant to parasite, wheat thats tolerant to drought. there's many others but this is the most important ones since this is the base foods of many undeveloped, have rampaging natural climate nations.. so again your lucky. but i know if nature become psycho on you like for example a mini ice age in europe.. your so-so arrogance/self rightious/greenpeace socialist religous dogma will amount to nothing when your face with starvation.. well its ok your oh so hated GM america will help you..

  45. Dan


    News Flash, America hates GM too. It's only because of a handful of above-the-law corporations that this practice continues. You don't need to genetically modify anything to deal with the weather patterns or climate in any region. There are practices in permaculture that make drought non-threatening, and floods beneficial. That's how people did agriculture in those regions for thousands of years in those regions. It wasn't until GMO green revolution type monoculture came along that these areas became so desperate. The longer we continue the chemical monoculture farming, the more desertification and erosion will spread until nothing is left but salty lifeless dustbowls. So no, I'm not lucky because I have to feel partially responsible for a rogue corporation like Monsanto which is destroying the fertility and health of the world. There is no food crisis, only a crisis of ignorance.

  46. jim

    Is this documentary brought to you by Monsanto? We dont need another brick in the wall as the song goes. We used to have numerous small farms crossing the landscapes of the Uk and the US, and Cananda. Now we have politically backed large corporations, hiding behind gestapo jackbooted legislation, running the small farmers out of business and stealing thier seed stocks. Finally the Monsanto's threaten farmers, bribe congressmen and by off easily manipulated FDA employees.
    We could have feed the world without Geo engineered foods and seed stock, now the big Corporations by design will starve the third world, and try to force the rest of the world into submission. "Us useless eaters"

  47. wutluviz

    We need to get this garbage out. We need vertical farms, entire buildings for the purpose of growing healthy, organic foods that won't be damaged by drought, flooding, etc. and will be better for us because we are not eating foods that were grown on depleted, overworked soil. It's common sense. Stop messing with our food this way.

  48. Anonymous User

    You forget the capitalist mindset. -EVERYTHING- comes down to the bottom line of profit. -EVERYTHING-. Your food, your livelihood, your life...mean nothing when compared to the all-mighty dollar.

    Welcome to Capitalism.

  49. Andries Smal

    Words of a wise man

  50. rusmus

    this documentary is done by companies producing GM. Not a word about researches that found out things like that hamsters fed just on GM in third generation couldn't produce and developed some MUTATIONS or that cows when they had a choice chose non-GM over GM and so on and so on

  51. Anaadi

    Jimmy, you need to collect facts more carefully and do better research into the subject before making such documentaries. Why did you not mention anything about the monopoly of GM soybean production in US farms, the pressure farmers are under, the cross-contamination of crops in Mexico ... Why US is number 1 in obesity, heart disease and cancer? This must ring a bell. You seem to have been very selective in your pros and cons so that you prove a point that actually, hey, GMOs are good for you!!! What a nonsense!

  52. mikenelsonmikenelson

    Watch the future of food if you want to see something totally different than this paid advertisement. That something might be something that I like to call the truth.

  53. Brenda

    No, no, NO! So wrong! GM foods need to go! Ugh!

  54. Janvi Ahuja

    Genetically Modified food isn't as bad as all of you say, it's just rearranging the DNA of a crop and replacing it with a gene with satisfies our needs. Before i was educated about it i was completely opposed but now i think it's magnificent science, maybe not the best idea however a truly ingenious discovery. Anyways who was i to oppose something that could save millions of lives only because i knew nothing about it.
    LOL. That made me sound so old ;)

  55. Zapperz Grouchers

    gm food may sound great when it is feeding starving people but remember that many reasons these people are starving have to do with the fact that these large corporations pollute and steal their land for their own needs.another reason for starvation also has to do with the fact that the spoiled countries like us/uk and so on use up more of the earths supply then they need. we overeat and get fat when all that unneeded food could go to starving people. gm is not saving anyone it is only replacing the healthy real food we used to have plenty of.

  56. Pablo Barrios (Student)

    yeah but it really does sound good when you see the people in africa and how it can solve many of their problems

  57. Michael Smith

    Brandon, I am not surprised that the expert in this film is connected with Monsanto and that this is Monsanto propaganda. As soon as I saw this was a BBC documentary I knew it was paid for by someone of that nature. It seems every time I come across a BBC documentary that is nothing more than a paid advertisement by the 1% that want the rest of us dead. Or at least highly biased by them in some way. I have not watched this film for this reason. If I get really bored some day I may watch it just to see how ridiculous it is.

  58. Trinnade Hughes

    Michael, I really think you should atleast give it a watch. This is not a one sided documentery. I very much appericated seeing both sides of the fence. In a world where we all strive for peace, we should atleat have the compassion for one another to listen to each others views and learn from each other. This young man did a very nice job of making the pro's and con's be seen from both points of view!

  59. Trinnade Hughes

    Very nicely done! I can honestly say I could have stood to watch another hour and I like how you kept it an even playing field. Two thumbs up from me!

  60. Ayo Deji

    Interesting documentary. But it is not as impartial as it seems. The sausage experiment with Gm and Non gm oil was a little bit biased. First of all the questions are coming from a known likeable celebrity and so people are going to want to believe him when he makes a suggestion. 2ndly he cannot just say ‘if I was to tell you....' and then only give one or two facts on GM food when there are so many.

    Also, when he goes on his stroll on the Dover Cliffs searching for wild products, surely we should realise that a farmer doing organic farming is not going to plant a carrot or Cabbage surrounded by weeds and only watering it depending on the weather. A farmer would ensure that all plants would be in the best condition and now weeds and the best natural fertilisers that cows and goat can poo. And so his tasting of the carrot sent out the wrong message to people who are watching as the wild fruit is not representative of the quality vegetable that a farmer would grow.

    The variety of cabbages, for example, as far as can be told, has been bred over generations and stood the test of time, not taken into a lab and had its basic structure changed and so to my understanding is not GM modified.

    And in the lab when he goes in to try and create a new plant he says 'now that wasn't difficult. I imagine that it is complicated and with a huge machine'. In saying that he is tapping into people's idea that they think it is a huge machine and that it is really complicated. The point is, it doesn't matter how complicated or how simple it is. What matters is what is happening which is the Genetic modification and its possible effect on animals and people over maybe 100s of years. Its complication or lack thereof has nothing to do with why people have a problem with it.

    As for the interview with the Amish farmer there are many unspoken questions such as impact on the environment over long periods such as 20 30 years, impact on health, and may I ask, has that farmer ever tested the crops as to their nutrition content?

    There are many other inconsistencies and bias which are too many to mention here. It does lead me to believe that this documentary was not a 50/50 documentary but one that was heavily siding with GM crops.

    I am sure that there are many benefits of GM crops even obvious ones but we do not know how safe they are and we need to know through proper long-term tests conducted by independent bodies or individuals with no conflicting interest, over a long period of time such as 30 to 50 years.

    Has this been done?

    Do we really Know?

  61. RedClothesDay

    All this stuff about safety is a red herring to distract you from the main objection to GM crops - patenting. If you are a grow organic crops near someone growing Monsanto GM crops, and their pollen blows onto your crops, then instead of the natural justice situation of suing Monsanto for polluting your organic grade crops, they get to sue you for "stealing" their patented intellectual property!

    The goal for seed companies (and they don't try and hide this) is to have all farmers dependent on them for seed. They don't want farmers keeping a portion of their seed to plant the following year, so they include a "suicide gene" which means that every year farmers have to buy more seed from the large companies.

    Every time you hear discussion about GM they will turn the focus to safety: remember it's about PATENTING.

    Feeding a starving world is also a complete non-argument. Producing more food is not going to stop people going hungry. This may sound paradoxical at first, but you need to look at the reason why there are hungry people in the particular region. E.g. they stop growing their traditional crops, over which they have control, and are forced by various means (e.g. taxes ... benign compared to what the U.S. did to Guatemala in 1954) into growing cash crops, the products of which go abroad, whilst they have to buy food. E.g. 2: they live in "marginal" regions, where with weather fluctuations they can live there for 9/10 years, but when conditions become adverse for too long e.g. drought whole populations die.

    This about power, control, dependency: when you control the food supply, you REALLY have control.

  62. MAx

    First about the safety, a lot of tests have been made (both short and long term) and proven that the transgenic food is as safe as regular food, if you are that much interest in the topic you should read some of the papers published by scientists in scientific papers.

    The reason why multinationals have a monopoly on GM plants is mainly because of the many tests that have to be made on GM food and the risks to see your field destroyed by activists, so only big companies can afford both the cost and the risk. I agree that tests have to be done in order to avoid any risk, but don't you think that once the results prove that the food is safe, it should be ok ?

    On another hand I totally agree with you with the fact that everyone should have the right to chose his seeds without having to pay Monsanto or any else for "stealing property". This technology have to be public and we should not depend on those large companies.

    There are measures to avoid the cross-pollination as special hences and minimum distance but is this the real problem? Or is it the stealing property or fear of toxicity the main problem here? Will you spit on a plant that requires less pesticide and is by extension more eco-friendly if you are not pursued because it came naturally in your field? Also I'm against this "terminator" or "suicide" gene, I think it's counter producive, but is it only for economic reason (then it should be banished) or is it because people are scared of transgenic (then it should also be banished and people should be more taght about what a GM plant is and how it is engineered because the process is not that much different than usual chemical mutagens except than for transgenic plants the transferred genes have to be identified and characteristics known beforehand in opposite with the traditional way where we don't precisely know which genes will be transferred)

    The argument of producing more food is to feed the hungry populations of the world because there is a problem, I don't know if you figure that your way of doing is letting people starving until an "equilibrium" is reached. Poor and developping countries should have access to a sustainable agriculture, transgenic plant can help thanks to drought resistance characteristic for example but they are not the only solution, traditional farming is also good as long as it can feed the population. Understand that I don't say that the whole agriculture has to become GM, every farmer can choose his preferential way of farming but with the knowledge of the available technique and technologies instead of dogmatic teachings to avoid discrimination.

    I agree that the fields of the countries should have as first aim to feed their people and then to make money with it. Unfortunately it is not the case.

    I hope this could help you having another look on GM technology.

  63. Cecilia

    'Mutated plants are not natural'. That's evolution! Mutated plants are still natural! What's not natural is the genetic materials being changed artificially!
    The cause for world hunger is having a too large world population and imbalance food distribution(too much food distributed to the developed country)instead of limited food supply. We should deal with the root of the problem first.
    Why do we need less herbicide when we're dealing with GM food? That's because the crops release its own herbicide which was intended to kill pests, and turned out to kill good insects(e.g. butterflies) too!

  64. Scott Alexander

    Loving all the haters, but let's educate.

    We simply cannot feed all of the people on the planet without GM food. Fact. I love how all of those calling for GM food to be outlawed are the very same people who go to sleep every night with a full stomach.

    The SCIENCE of GM food is a miracle.

    The ABUSE of GM food by corporations is a tragedy.

    Please, make this distinction. If you really think that GM should be abolished then go and find me 2 billion volunteers to kill themselves. Then and only then do we have a workable plan. The anti-GM crowd love to skirt around this retarded elephant in the room.


  65. Shirliekent

    You can't trust ANY "tests" done by the company making the GM product. There are MANY incidences of horror stories of death and disease related to every GM product out there. What possible good is it going to do to give these types of food to anyone unless you just want to kill them? Check your facts and NEVER believe anything the FDA or USDA or EPA says regarding GM safety they are all bought out already by the biotechnology corporation.

  66. Shirliekent

    Don't believe it for a minute. Read about India and why the Indian govt. is now suing Monanato for biopiracy!!!

  67. Shirliekent

    Check your facts again. Changing the DNA causes problems in the humans who eat this CRAP !!!

  68. louise naylor

    This is an attempt to discredit and turn people against the idea of vertical, hydroponic farming which is the only way to ensure abundance - given all current issues effecting humanity, climate etc..

    The beauty of such systems is that they will not need to be GM because they will be covered, soil-free and solar powered, they do not need to be weather resistant.

  69. mikeysbro

    tell that to the hundreds of thousands of farmers out of buisness and starving aroung the world

  70. mikeysbro

    untill one realizes rearranged dna in food effects those who eat that food..

  71. Doris

    you piss my of GM are destroying everything ,wen you are for for GM then you support Monsanto , the want to control the seed of the worlds,

  72. Marko Marjanovic IV

    hhahaha i love how people get easily confused mixing facts and what they hear from the media. Food shortages are not happening, and we do have pleeeenty of land and crops to feed the planet. Crops are being undersold just so that they can reach the markets and farmers wont have to throw all the crops away.
    Now why do people die of starvation in some countries is another question.
    However eventually when the world population is much bigger than now, lets say 20billion or more people, then we just might have a problem farming the way we are now. So far aeroponics, aquaponics and hydroponics are the best options. I hope genetically mutated foods could be properly tested for long term side effects if any, otherwise they should not be on the markets. FDA and similar companies are a fraud, as they simply work for money, and who has the most money makes the rules. Right now, the monopolistic companies, such as Monsanto.

  73. Mr. Niceguy

    We could easily feed the world without GM foods. America alone waste $165 billion worth of food a year. Problem solved. Also do you think if you are worried when your next meal will come from, you would be on a laptop or smart phone debating this? Come on now.

  74. Dill

    Sorry, but you're wrong. You'd be saying that post 1997, if not for GE foods, all our supermarkets' shelves would be bare and we'd be fortunate to eat a decent meal. When in actuallity what happened was more like big brand names bought into cheaper/alternate foods; genetically emgineered foods; and made a huge profit. There was no rare deflation in food prices once all the shelves became full of GMOs. We're being fed a world saving science at a lower cost than organic foods? Why not label it and advertise the idea so people who are buying this bull$)&@ can fund your plans of world food domination? Also, requiring disposal of future GE seed generations to force contracted farmers into buying modified seed annually is not going to help feed the world either.
    Simple fact of the matter is; like usual; it's all about the money. Label it so people can choose whether or not to buy into it.

  75. ckm

    you should watch the seeds of death it is really interesting and will give you a deeper insight into the reality of gm foods , it has become a bigger issue than food , it is in fact a form of food/seed control with patenting being the main ambition for future research it is the company's that want to promote gm that fund this research. independent researchers don't get any funding so of course it appears to be a positive asset. i always find it untruthful if the people benefiting certain results fund the people that promote such results, also when the company's that uses these product choose not to label it clearly, we should ask why is that if there ''good'' for us , we must always remember that profit is always valued over our health e.g smoking / fast food fluoride/ climate change, the list goes . gm should not be promoted in this way , always educate yourself on both sides of the argument so you can make the right choices in life and for your health.

Leave a comment / review: