The 'Golden Rice' - An Exercise in How Not to Do Science

C

cancel2 2022

Canceled
The ‘golden rice’ - a GM rice engineered to produce pro-Vitamin A - is being offered to the Third World as cure for widespread vitamin A deficiency.
The audit uncovers fundamental deficiencies in all aspects, from the scientific/social rationale to the science and technology involved. It is being promoted in order to salvage a morally as well as financially bankrupt agricultural biotech industry.

The scientific/social rationalization for the project exposes a reductionist self-serving scientific paradigm that fails to see the world beyond its own narrow confines. The ‘golden rice’ is a useless application. Some 70 patents have already been filed on the GM genes and constructs used in making the ‘golden rice’. It is a drain on public resources and a major obstruction to the implementation of sustainable agriculture that can provide the real solutions to world hunger and malnutrition.

‘Golden rice’ is not a ‘second generation’ GM crop as has been claimed. It involves standard first generation technology, and carries some of the worst features in terms of hazards to health and biodiversity. Rockefeller Foundation, the major funder of the project by far has withdrawn support from it.

Read more: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/rice.php
 

A decade and a half after it was first invented, genetically engineered rice may soon grow in farmer's fields for the first time, in the Philippines. Just as some in the U.S. oppose GMO technology, however, so do some Filipinos.
After seeing the BBC's report this week that Philippine scientists are close to submitting golden rice—rice engineered to make vitamin A—for regulatory approval, I looked for local news on the development.
Farmers entered test fields and ripped up 400 experimental plants, Philippine tabloid paper Remate reported yesterday. (It was all over in 15 minutes, Malaya Business Insight reports.)
One of the farmers' worries is the cost of GMO seeds and the privatization of the nation's staple crop, spokesman Bert Autor told Remate. The International Rice Research Institute expects golden rice's price will be the same as regular rice. The rice's inventors and patent-holders arranged for their licenses to be available without royalties.
The protesting farmers uprooted nearly all of the plants in one field so that one field test can't continue, according to a statement from the Philippine Rice Research Institute. Nevertheless, golden rice research in the Philippines will continue, the institute said in another statement.
The farmers also believed that golden rice would be unsafe to eat. Others in the country share their worries. In June, a group called Green Moms held a rally in Quezon City to protest golden rice. Protestors PhilStar talked with were primarily worried about the rice's safety for kids.
Both the farmers and the Green Mom members seemed opposed to genetically engineered food generally. Many major science and health organizations say that just because a food is genetically modified doesn't mean it's unsafe. Groups such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the World Health Organization support the testing of new GMO plants as they're developed, as each could affect human health differently. Safety tests would be part of the Philippine government's approval process for golden rice, Philippine Rice Research Institute project leader Antonio Alfonso told the BBC.



http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-08/farmers-rip-golden-rice-plants-philippines?dom=tw&src=SOC
 
I can't follow if this is a good or bad idea; i'm not opposed to GMO foods on principle - the danger is messing around with mother nature.
The law of unintended consequneses comes into play.

Genetic engineering is here to stay, it's got some promise, but the patenting also coild be problematic, as the royaltys could preclude a sane decision on their use or not, in particular locales.
 
annata said:
I can't follow if this is a good or bad idea; i'm not opposed to GMO foods on principle - the danger is messing around with mother nature.
The law of unintended consequneses comes into play.

Genetic engineering is here to stay, it's got some promise, but the patenting also coild be problematic, as the royaltys could preclude a sane decision on their use or not, in particular locales.
Click to expand...

If it is such a a good idea why are Monsanto so opposed to labelling?

http://my.firedoglake.com/cranestat...ll-gmo-labeling-initiative-i-522-in-wa-state/
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
If it is such a a good idea why are Monsanto so opposed to labelling?

http://my.firedoglake.com/cranestat...ll-gmo-labeling-initiative-i-522-in-wa-state/
Click to expand...

Washington Initiative 522 (I-522) "concerns labeling of genetically-engineered foods" and was a 2012 initiative to the Washington State Legislature.[SUP][1][/SUP] As certified by the Washington Secretary of State, it achieved enough signatures to be forwarded to the legislature for consideration during the 2013 session.[SUP][2][/SUP] The legislature did not vote on the initiative, so I-522 advanced to the November 5, 2013 general election ballot. If passed into law by voters, I-522 would have taken effect on July 1, 2015. Although results have yet to be certified, it looks to have failed with 55% opposition.[SUP][3][/SUP]

The main website for the campaign, yeson522.com wrote on November 14th, even when all of the results hadn't come in: "...While it is unfortunate I-522 did not pass, it has set the stage for victory in 2016."[SUP][4][/SUP]

If approved, I-522 would have required that non-exempt foods and agricultural products offered for retail sale state "clearly and conspicuously" on the front of the package if they were genetically-engineered, contain or might have contained genetically-engineered ingredients.

With more than $17.1 million in donations opposed before September 30, I-522 set a new record for money spent against a state initiative, exceeding the $12.35 million spent in 2011 to oppose Initiative 1183, privatizing liquor sales.[SUP][5][/SUP] By late October, No On I-522 had set the all-time record for any initiative campaign with $21 million. Combined contributions of $27.7 million are still less than $32.5 million spent by both sides around I-1183.[SUP][6][/SUP]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Initiative_522,_2012
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top