Homo+Toxicus+CK

The film showcases some of the consequences of exposure to toxic chemicals in the environment. It tells the story of several groups of people and places in Canada that are feeling the effects of their toxic exposure. The narrator travels around the country interviewing different people that are struggling with the un-seen harmful side of modern society. The film show how the chemicals that are being released in industrial processes and daily business are causing drastic and potential irreversible damage. The concept of modern industry releasing harmful chemicals into the environment is not new. The film does show the lack of knowledge about these chemicals toxicity and their depth of invasion into the environment. One of the first examples, and probably one of the most compelling, was the directors own test results for heavy metals in her blood. She was an average middle class person in Canada. One would expect to be relatively toxic free. The test results showed high levels of several heavy metals and other chemicals in her blood. These were all below the allowable limits, but there has been no significant study on many of these compounds to prove an allowable limit. This was only one of many different examples of the toxic chemicals that are unavoidable. This lead the director to a feeling of helplessness because of her lack of power to change the situation. Many of the examples were in areas where the benefits of the chemicals were not seen, rural and remote places. The film showcases a small Inuit village in northern Canada. The children born in this area have significant hearing problems because of the large doses of mercury they are exposed to, also the high rate of ear infections that resulted. The children are forced to wear hearing aids at a young age. This then inhibits them in school, possible causing further social issues with a lack of education. The contamination of children with small doses of toxic chemicals was also linked to many other issues in villages across Canada. There were places where the birth rate for girls was twice that of boys. Many of the males that were conceived miscarried. As the film pointed out, the natural order is to have slightly more males at childhood than females, then as the males grow, they tend to die off because of riskier behaviors, leaving and even ration in the prime of life. This imbalance can change the social order of the culture, these changes were already being seen in this village. One issue that was brought before the health governing body in Canada, Health Canada, was the effect of pesticides on the frog population in many rivers. The frogs were either dying all together or growing disfigured. Health Canada’s comment of this issue was “we are not frogs”. They took this position because of pressure form the pesticide companies. This pressure leads to regulatory policy that tended to allow chemicals to be used until they were scientifically proven to be harmful. The more prudent method would be to put the burden of proof on the chemical makers to prove that the product was not harmful to the environment before it was put for sale. During the film one of the points of discussion that kept emerging was the fact that some of these chemicals do not depend on dosage to have a severe negative effect. There were cases that well under the legal limit during special times in development could have devastating effects on a person. These effects from small doses could also be felt in full grown people. One of their examples was the increase number of children with allergies and asthma. In one of the segments there was a child that had to walk to the buss with an asthma device to breath. This was the same village that had the abnormal rate of male miscarriages. These changes can even been seen in other places, children raised in cities with high levels of pollution have a higher rate of asthma. Also there is a growing number of asthma cases in the nation, show by the National Institute of Health. At one point in the film the narrator connected the increase of Attention Deficit Disorder to the increase of chemicals during childhood development. They failed to mention the other social and cultural changes that could result in such a problem. Society has changed drastically in the past decades, this has changed the way children are being raised. There is probably still some effect on the development of a child’s brain by these chemicals. However they should not be used as a scape goat when there are other social issues involved. The director of the film does an excellent job showing how everyone can be exposed to these chemicals unknowingly. For a great number of people, this is something that is never considered because they do on see the pollution or the sparing of pesticides on their food. One section that really expressed this idea was when the director herself had a heavy medal screen done and found many metals that were highly toxic. She thought of herself as someone who eats well and was in good shape. This expresses the idea that no one can really escape from these chemicals. The film did not do a good job directly showing these chemicals in southern climates. There was a lot of discussion of the chemicals in northern Canada. It would have been interesting to see if the exposure was worse in southern cities because of increase industry and farming. The film did do a good job showing the chemicals are unavoidable, but examples of the changes in exposure would have been more revealing. Especially if the toxicity was worse in southern places where more people live. One good example of intervention the film did showcase was the woman who had cancer and attributed it to the increase of hormones in her food. She was shown asking the butcher whether the meet had been injected with hormones while it was being raised. She then declined to purchase any when he revealed that it had been injected. This is something people could do in their daily lives, it may be inconvenient but valuable. The more people start to question the source of their food and demand better products the better the system will get at removing the toxicity. There was also the general theme of questioning the regulatory bodies that control the levels of toxic chemicals. Political pressure from the public on these groups will force them to change their risky habits. During the film there were several sections that suggested that asthma was linked to some of these toxic chemicals. I looked into whether asthma rates have increased with the increase of chemicals. It turns out that this is the case, a study done by the National Institute of Health, which is a part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service, showed that asthma rates for all population groups in the U.S are growing. There was a race disparity, showing that African Americans had a higher rate of increase than other groups. This could be cause by the areas that many poorer African Americans are forced to live in, places with high concentrations of pollutants. I also looked into more information about lead exposure. The article I found was by Carl Rossen from the University of Minnesota. In the article he goes through the different sources of lead contamination in the environment and the different methods humans can be exposed. Most of lead contamination is from lead base paint and gasoline with lead. Even though neither of these products has been used for many years, lead does not disperse in soil easily. The lead will stay for many years and potential contaminate the air when the soil is disturbed. There is also a great risk on contaminating ground water. Once lead enters the body it is absorbed by the bones, where it can prolong the exposure of the body causing neurological damage.
 * Title:** Homo Toxicus, 2008 Chris Knrotz
 * Director:** Carole Poliguin
 * What is the central argument of the film?**
 * How is the argument sustained?**
 * What sustainability problems does the film draw out?**
 * What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling?**
 * What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?**
 * What Audience does the film best address?**
 * What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?**
 * What kinds of actions and points of intervention are suggested by the film?**
 * What additional information has this film compelled you to see out?**

“Data Fact Sheet: Asthma Statistics” National Institutes of Health. January 2009 [] Rosen, Carl. “Lead in the Home Garden and Urban Soil Environment” University of Minnesota. 2010 []