Manufacturing Ignorance

Manufacturing Ignorance

2020, Science  -   16 Comments
Ratings: 7.90/10 from 31 users.

There are currently over 7 billion people in the world today. Never before has there been this many people all needing homes, food, clothing, technology and more. This unprecedented demand for essential goods now raises supply issues. Is there enough food? Enough medicines? And if we are, are we producing them safely?

A growing global concern is how much big industry is hiding regarding the safety of all these items. Is the world getting more polluted and toxic to meet our needs? Of course, for unbiased and honest answers, it is common sense to turn to science. Science - and technically scientists - suppose to be impartial. They use the scientific method to discover evidence-based truths, right?

The role of science is to solve mysteries, highlight natural occurrences and increase our understanding of how the world works. Yet, in today's technologically advanced and social media connected world, science has come under fire. Its truths, methods and practitioners are facing increasing challenges every day.

Many big companies are negatively affected when scientific evidence expose how their products or services are dangerous and harmful. To prevent the truth from coming out, an intentional, systematic and behind-the-scenes series of attacks are currently taking place to derail science.

Big industry is fighting fire with fire, debunking legitimate science - by using science itself. To be more specific, industries and corporations are systematically producing "new evidence" to refute existing and established scientific facts. A particular example would be the drop in bee populations globally.

When bees started dying in large quantities in the early 1990s, science proved that newly developed pesticides caused it. Almost immediately, the agrochemical industries - which produce these same pesticides - began to fund numerous studies to discover other causes of bee colonies' death. The research became more intensive for non-pesticide reasons. There was suddenly so much information, so much noise, that beekeepers understood less and less of what was happening. Today, 25 years later, people are still confused.

This blurring of scientific truth - by using science - is not a new method. In the 1960s, tobacco companies funded numerous studies to prove that cigarettes did not cause cancer. Their strategy was to sow doubt towards proven scientific evidence deliberately. They were also establishing controversy to distract and confuse the public.

Big Tobacco's strategy is now the ultimate playbook. It is used time and again to "debunk" anything that might get in the way of Big Industry profits, including plastics, climate change, pesticide poisoning and now the COVID-19 pandemic. It is also a winning strategy. It's working because now there is ever-growing number of people who do not believe in established science, or worse make up their own version of science, sadly amplified by social media.

Ignoring scientific truths has a human cost. Using science to undermine itself might be clever, and a means to buy time, but the truth always comes out at the end of the day. Facts will prevail.

Directed by: Pascal Vasselin, Franck Cuveillier

More great documentaries

16 Comments / User Reviews

  1. Robert W Cann

    The connection between tobacco and cancer is a very poor example because it remains at best weak. There is no question that smoking affects the heart and arteries as well as damaging the lungs leading to bronchitis and asthma but a 100 years of research looking for a lung cancer connection repeatedly failed to find it. Of those that did, almost all failed to eliminate other factors - such as the fact that people who worked in air-polluted industries such as mining, stoking and milling smoked more than those who did not - precisely because it helps "clear the lungs" by increasing phlegm. Discovering that "tobacco causes cancer" helped the asbestos and coal industries escape claims for compensation from the thousands of workers killed by other carcinogenic pollutants.

  2. PhDZombie

    Who becomes a scientist or doctor is largely a function of privilege, not talent. We have legions of trained, talent-less zombies hungry for grants from any source. That psychopaths are naturally inclined & permitted to occupy the highest reaches of these sources, and with half the population stupider than average on top of that, perversion of science is natural, and thus rightfully a natural science itself

    1. John retired in Newfoundland

      Good luck with that silly hypothesis.

  3. Eric Reinholt, Sr,

    Well, you had me on your side as a scientist. I hold a BS in Earth Science and an MS in Environmental Science. I was very impressed with your documentary, until you stated that NOT getting vaccinated is also a result of this misinformation agenda.

    If you don't know about and the nanotechnology that Biometrics and MIT along with others have done to create circuitboards within our bodies to allow us to continue to participate in society, then I question your journalistic thoroughness. Moreover, you show a picture of a child when you make that statement.

    Are you working for Bill Gates, Fauci and others to ENCOURAGE this JAB for COVID? If so, we are NOT on the same side, although you make some good points about the Environmental pollution; nevertheless, this JAB is UNTESTED nanotechnology and Gene therapy.

    I could not be further way from you on this issue.

    1. John retired in Newfoundland

      Cool credentials. What year did you graduate and where were your degrees from? Asking for a friend and everyone who thinks you're an very poor liar. The whole microchips in the vaccine trope is trivially dismissable. If they were there you could find them with a modern electronic microscope. You can't just say they 've built these devices. You need to show the existence of the supporting infrastructure. Like Edison's light bulb, you need a bunch of other stuff. Edison needed power generation, transmission, sales and billing. In this case you need to demonstrate that (detectable) wireless messaging exists along with addressing and networking infrastructure that can receive radio signals from nano-radios (with extremely low power) with unsuitably small antennae. You also have to prove that Bill Gates can release a product that just works, right out of the box.

    2. Rumpel

      Seeding doubt with your lies. Shame on you.

  4. Jay Heming-Stein

    You are peddling more propaganda under the guise of social analysis.

  5. LuisG

    Avoid send only previews or advice in advance.

  6. Aleydis

    Not even available on Amazon. What's going on?

  7. Reter

    Please advise in future emails when you are offering a preview only.

  8. RJG

    Annoying to send a preview and not the documentary


    Super lame to send me a documentary to watch and then have it just be a preview!!!!!!

  10. GunnarInLA

    "Facts will prevail" – ...unfortunately they may not – as anybody would be able to verify, "well protected falsehoods" have prevailed in spite of having been conclusively disproven...
    (..."our world" is not run by honorable, "truth and goodness loving people" is run by criminals and liars..."democracy" makes sure it stays that way...)

  11. AlbinoViper

    all a company has to say now is BLM and any bad thing they do is overlooked and defended

    1. Rick

      Spoken like a true tRUMPER LOL!!!!!!!

    2. John retired in Newfoundland

      Don't you mean BLAM? You must be a supporter of the well regulated militia.