Bens+Film+Annotation+2


 * Ben Clemence, Annotation #2**
 * Homo Toxicus**
 * October 11, 2011**
 * Word Count: 1115**


 * Title**: Homo Toxicus
 * Director**: Carole Poliquin
 * Released**: 2008


 * What is the central argument or narrative of the film?**

This film documents the process of a Montreal filmmaker getting her blood tested for toxins. After talking with a doctor that specializes in toxicology she learns that she has 110 different toxins in her body. She is also told not to worry because none of them are at a level that could be harmful to her health. Through further research the viewer is taken along as she discovers some of the sources of these hidden toxins and the research that makes them acceptable to be in humans. Through her research she is able to find connections between these toxins and serious health problems. The issue is that these toxins can be found anywhere, making them very hard to avoid.


 * How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is provided, for example? Does the film have emotional appeal?**

The argument begins with the director going to the doctor for blood tests and discovering that she has over 100 toxins in her body. From there the director takes the viewer to different parts of the world where real effects of the toxins can be observed. Inuit infants often fall victim to ear infections caused by the high levels of mercury in their area. These ear infections often lead to deafness in these children. Another study was done on the effects of PCB’s and PBDE’s and the results can be linked to an increase in troubled children or children with deficit disorders.


 * What sustainability problem does the film draw out?**

The movie draws out several problems through the directors quest to learn more about the toxins she has in her body. It begins with a general lack of knowledge not only on the part of the public, but just in research in general. In toxins it is the dose that is deadly, but there are few studies done about the actual effects of specific toxins. What makes it more difficult is that effects of these toxins are only really seen when examining a whole population, or in other words, direct links cannot be made between toxins and specific health issues, trends can only be analyzed. The second issue is the amount of control the industry has over the information released on chemicals in their products and the approval process of new products. For example, three scientists were fired for refusing to approve the bovine growth hormone which had studies done to prove that it was dangerous for human consumption. The three scientists were replaced with others who approved the growth hormone and not it is being used in milk production.


 * What parts of the film do you find more persuasive and compelling? Why?**

The parts of documentaries I often find most compelling are interviews with the companies that are being investigated. Hearing their practiced response that they have been feeding the public really makes it clear how little they care about human safety. Companies refuse to admit what they are putting in their products and their effects. In an interview with one executive, the response to most of the questions is that there is no immediate threat and that the company is looking into currently. More action needs to be taken to remove these harmful toxins from the food we eat.

The parts of the film that I was the least convinced by was the demonstration that they held out on the street where they offered passersby food that was filled with toxins. They seemed to be exaggerating the amount of chemicals in each piece of food to try and have more of an impact. There presentation would have been stronger if they included talking about real effects of the toxins and the general lack of caring from the companies that distribute these chemicals to consumers.
 * What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?**


 * What audiences does the film best address? Why?**

This film addresses the typical American consumer who is generally unaware of what sort of chemicals they are putting into their body by eating certain foods and using certain products. The fact that in her own blood test she was able to identify 110 unique toxins in her body speaks to the fact that there are a lot of them out there and many people are exposed to them.


 * What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?**

A discussion about how either hard or easy it is to ensure there are no toxins in the food you are eating would have been helpful to illustrate more of the issue. The list of ingredients on many consumer products is very crytic and complicated which does not lend itself to the consumer having a concrete idea of what they are putting in their body. Also if there were any case studies done on the products coming from a certain company and the level of toxins in them it would have added to the argument. The documentary focuses more on once they are actually in your body which was good but it would have been interesting to see more about how they got there.


 * What kinds of actions and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggests corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.**

The film suggests that the best actions to take are to make sure you are informed as a consumer about the items that you are purchasing. That way you can make choices to not put toxins in your body and also not support companies that have policies that allow for toxins in their products or production process. A possible example of places where non toxic alternative can be used is in cleaning products. Many people have switched from using chemical based cleaning products to all natural.


 * What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?**

What I had hoped the film would discuss but didn’t is toxin free alternatives so I did a little research myself on things that can be used to replace products with toxins in them. For example, lemon and salt can be used as a very effective cleaning agent for removing dirt and rust stains. Lemon also comes in handy in many other cleaning applications such as countertops, cutting boards, dishes, faucets, garbage disposals, grout, and more. Lemons are typically about $0.50 a piece making them a must cheaper and more eco friendly option for cleaning.

Sforza, Nicole. "66 All-natural Cleaning Solutions." Green Living 101. Real Simple, n.d. Web. 11 Oct 2011. .
 * References**