Previous week the BBC documentary "Can GM Food Save The World" was aired twice on the norwegian television channel NRK2. I saw this documentary some months back on the Internet here: http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/can-gm-food-save-the-world/.
Viewers, unfamiliar to GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms), may probably belive all the positive allegations put forward by Jimmy Doherty. But people that has bothered to read unbiased information about the facts about GMO, will quickly understand that several of the allegations put forward in this documentary is not backed up by independent science.
Some relevant questions in relation to GMO are quite good, but when the same questions are tried beeing answered it is clear that the goal of this documentary is to give the viewer the impression that GMO is safe to use and that there is not much to worry about. One allegation put forward stands out and make the whole documentary a big flaw. Some time out in the documentary, Jimmy Doherty says: "50 scientific reviews have reached the consesus that GM crops currently on the market are safe".
I found another site on the web that also have a critical eye to the GMO-business. I asked them some questions about this documentary and the next day I got this answer:
There were a huge amount of complaints that went to the BBC about this, which they ignored. see:
http://www.powerbase.info/index.php?title=Jimmy%27s_GM_Food_Fix
http://www.powerbase.info/index.php?title=Jimmy_Doherty
-for more information.
The BBC is a state entity and therefore follows the government line on things they feel are important. This certainly includes hyping GM.
Looks like I was not the first one to be provoked by the biased journalism in this "documentary".
Today I sent a complaint to BBC using this form:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/forms/
Update (2010-12-15):
Yesterday I got a response from the director and producer of this documentary, namely Michael Lachmann.
I asked him which "50 scientific reviews" they where referring to.
Here is his answer:
"The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation report - The State of Food and Agriculture 2003-2004. Chapter 5: Health and environmental impacts of transgenic crops".
After searching the Internet I found the report he was referring to:
Chapter 5 can be found here: Health and environmental impacts of transgenic crops
Here is a link to the whole report: The State of Food and Agriculture 2003-2004
So, is there any reason to believe this allegation: "50 scientific reviews have reached the consesus that GM crops currently on the market are safe", after reading chapter 5 from the report above.
The answer is a clear NO. One of the reasons is because there has only been done one scientific study where one looks at possible health risks when humans consume GMO, and that study did not exactly put GMO in a very good light.
I will soon explain more in depth why this documentary should never have been aired and why I mean it is a huge documentary flaw.