| The Golden Rice project 10:46 - Mar 18 with 1266 views | StokieBlue |
Golden rice is going to be grown in Bangladesh. For those that don’t know what it is there is some information here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice
There is still a lot of opposition to it but it doesn’t have the usual issues that anti-GMO campaigners use as arguments. It’s funded by philanthropists and there are no patents. It’s being given away free so there is no lock-in prices for farmers to big companies. It’s got the support of 107 noble laureates who have written letters urging Greenpeace to drop their opposition to it’s use and it’s been cleared by the regulators of the US, Canada and Australia for use.
The main thing is this though:
“Vitamin A Deficiency (VAD) in children causes blindness and weakens immune systems, making death more likely. The WHO estimates that about 2.7 million deaths each year could be prevented if children under five years’ old were provided with sufficient Vitamin A, but crops rich in Beta Carotene (spinach, carrots) are often not available or are too expensive for many, especially rural poor in Asia.
Genetic engineers have perfected a strain of rice called Golden Rice that provides as much Vitamin A as a serving of spinach.”
It’s hard for me to see why there is any opposition to such a dynamic changing crop.
SB
|  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |  |
| The Golden Rice project on 10:54 - Mar 18 with 1216 views | Lord_Lucan |
I quite like Batchelors Golden Rice. |  |
| |
| The Golden Rice project on 11:14 - Mar 18 with 1168 views | CoachRob |
The Greenpeace "Golden Illusion" objection conclusions (2013)
After over 20 years and millions of dollars, ‘golden’ rice remains an illusion. It is simply a research project with good public relations
- GE rice will contaminate (via outcrossing and seed mixtures) traditional rice varieties, landraces, wild and weedy rice relatives, raising cultural, agronomic, environmental concerns and potentially affecting food security
- The specific pathway of beta-carotene synthesis in the plant is not well understood and the complexity of the genetic engineering increases the potential for unexpected and unpredictable effects.
- The human food safety of golden rice is unknown. There are concerns regarding unexpected changes in plant biochemistry, and technical questions over exactly what would be produced when the human body processes the beta-carotene present in golden rice. Golden rice cannot be considered substantially equivalent, meaning it cannot be assessed under existing regulations in most countries.
- GE golden rice is not a solution for VAD, no matter how much beta-carotene is in it. It is simply the wrong approach. Over the past 20 years, the world has been tackling VAD using safer and more effective techniques.
- If required, biofortification does not require genetic engineering. Non-GE biofortified crops are already in farmers’ fields and on people’s plates.
- Spending even more time and money on golden rice development is not only environmentally irresponsible, it is also a disservice to humanity
I counted 13 signatories from Economics which of course is a fake Noble prize, including Prescott and Kydland who when ever their names appear on anything it has to be grounds to challenge the science. |  | | |
| The Golden Rice project on 11:17 - Mar 18 with 1153 views | StokieBlue |
| The Golden Rice project on 11:14 - Mar 18 by CoachRob |
The Greenpeace "Golden Illusion" objection conclusions (2013)
After over 20 years and millions of dollars, ‘golden’ rice remains an illusion. It is simply a research project with good public relations
- GE rice will contaminate (via outcrossing and seed mixtures) traditional rice varieties, landraces, wild and weedy rice relatives, raising cultural, agronomic, environmental concerns and potentially affecting food security
- The specific pathway of beta-carotene synthesis in the plant is not well understood and the complexity of the genetic engineering increases the potential for unexpected and unpredictable effects.
- The human food safety of golden rice is unknown. There are concerns regarding unexpected changes in plant biochemistry, and technical questions over exactly what would be produced when the human body processes the beta-carotene present in golden rice. Golden rice cannot be considered substantially equivalent, meaning it cannot be assessed under existing regulations in most countries.
- GE golden rice is not a solution for VAD, no matter how much beta-carotene is in it. It is simply the wrong approach. Over the past 20 years, the world has been tackling VAD using safer and more effective techniques.
- If required, biofortification does not require genetic engineering. Non-GE biofortified crops are already in farmers’ fields and on people’s plates.
- Spending even more time and money on golden rice development is not only environmentally irresponsible, it is also a disservice to humanity
I counted 13 signatories from Economics which of course is a fake Noble prize, including Prescott and Kydland who when ever their names appear on anything it has to be grounds to challenge the science. |
So you're against, fine.
Do you want to expand on any of those points?
For instance, let's take this one:
"GE golden rice is not a solution for VAD, no matter how much beta-carotene is in it. It is simply the wrong approach. Over the past 20 years, the world has been tackling VAD using safer and more effective techniques."
That's provably incorrect. Nobody is saying it's a solution but it's certainly a step in the right direction which can get 60 to 70% of the required daily intake into poorer peoples diet with no changes at all required to their lifestyle.
"The human food safety of golden rice is unknown. There are concerns regarding unexpected changes in plant biochemistry, and technical questions over exactly what would be produced when the human body processes the beta-carotene present in golden rice. Golden rice cannot be considered substantially equivalent, meaning it cannot be assessed under existing regulations in most countries."
Provably incorrect as it's passed the regulations in the US, Australia and Canada.
Excluding people because you don't like them is not really meaningful in any way.
That is also all 6 years out of date and based on the strains from the 1990's. Here are some more recent responses to the points you raise:
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/02/13/golden-rice-gmo-crop-greenpeace-ha
“GE Free NZ is relying on old data based on the original Golden Rice variety from the 1990s,” Godwin said. “The new variety produces up to 23 times more beta-carotene than the original.”
“Daily consumption of a very modest amount of Golden Rice–about a cup–could supply 50 percent of the recommended daily allowance of vitamin A for an adult,”
"According to a report by VIB, a life sciences research institute in Belgium, Golden Rice’s potential to cross-pollinate other rice varieties has been studied and found to be limited, because rice is typically self-pollinated. "
SB [Post edited 18 Mar 2019 11:25]
| |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| The Golden Rice project on 11:18 - Mar 18 with 1152 views | Swansea_Blue |
Interesting Stokie. I don't know anything about this. TWTD can be a mine of information occasionally.
The trials seem reasonably positive, the aims behind it appear noble. No idea on the science behind it though and whether the cross-contamination risk is real. |  |
| |
| The Golden Rice project on 12:34 - Mar 18 with 1089 views | CoachRob |
| The Golden Rice project on 11:17 - Mar 18 by StokieBlue |
So you're against, fine.
Do you want to expand on any of those points?
For instance, let's take this one:
"GE golden rice is not a solution for VAD, no matter how much beta-carotene is in it. It is simply the wrong approach. Over the past 20 years, the world has been tackling VAD using safer and more effective techniques."
That's provably incorrect. Nobody is saying it's a solution but it's certainly a step in the right direction which can get 60 to 70% of the required daily intake into poorer peoples diet with no changes at all required to their lifestyle.
"The human food safety of golden rice is unknown. There are concerns regarding unexpected changes in plant biochemistry, and technical questions over exactly what would be produced when the human body processes the beta-carotene present in golden rice. Golden rice cannot be considered substantially equivalent, meaning it cannot be assessed under existing regulations in most countries."
Provably incorrect as it's passed the regulations in the US, Australia and Canada.
Excluding people because you don't like them is not really meaningful in any way.
That is also all 6 years out of date and based on the strains from the 1990's. Here are some more recent responses to the points you raise:
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/02/13/golden-rice-gmo-crop-greenpeace-ha
“GE Free NZ is relying on old data based on the original Golden Rice variety from the 1990s,” Godwin said. “The new variety produces up to 23 times more beta-carotene than the original.”
“Daily consumption of a very modest amount of Golden Rice–about a cup–could supply 50 percent of the recommended daily allowance of vitamin A for an adult,”
"According to a report by VIB, a life sciences research institute in Belgium, Golden Rice’s potential to cross-pollinate other rice varieties has been studied and found to be limited, because rice is typically self-pollinated. "
SB [Post edited 18 Mar 2019 11:25]
|
"Excluding people because you don't like them is not really meaningful in any way."
I am not excluding people because I don't like them I am excluding them because they are not scientists and have constantly produced papers full of falsehoods.
If you believe this science passes the falsification test by going before regulators then that is an interesting position to take.
I think some of the issues raised in "Poor Economics" by Banerjee and Duflo provide a political and economic backdrop to these kinds of issues. Fortified salt with iodine and iron was a great success and I don't recall the opposition there is to your suggestion. I would feel very uneasy recommending this course of action on the current scientific evidence. | | | |
| The Golden Rice project on 12:51 - Mar 18 with 1064 views | StokieBlue |
| The Golden Rice project on 12:34 - Mar 18 by CoachRob |
"Excluding people because you don't like them is not really meaningful in any way."
I am not excluding people because I don't like them I am excluding them because they are not scientists and have constantly produced papers full of falsehoods.
If you believe this science passes the falsification test by going before regulators then that is an interesting position to take.
I think some of the issues raised in "Poor Economics" by Banerjee and Duflo provide a political and economic backdrop to these kinds of issues. Fortified salt with iodine and iron was a great success and I don't recall the opposition there is to your suggestion. I would feel very uneasy recommending this course of action on the current scientific evidence. |
“If you believe this science passes the falsification test by going before regulators then that is an interesting position to take. “
Are you essentially saying that the regulators don’t check the research or do their own research? Would you care to provide some evidence on why the research is poor and doesn’t pass the falsification test? Thus far in both your posts you’ve not provided a single element of evidence for your positions.
“I think some of the issues raised in "Poor Economics" by Banerjee and Duflo provide a political and economic backdrop to these kinds of issues. Fortified salt with iodine and iron was a great success and I don't recall the opposition there is to your suggestion. I would feel very uneasy recommending this course of action on the current scientific evidence.”
Can you provide some quotations at least as that would seem to be geared to for-profit GMO. I’d be interested to see the economic case for something given away free. Comparing this case to ionised salt is a bit strange. There are no GMO lobbying groups against adding iodine to salt, probably because it’s nothing like the same.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| The Golden Rice project on 13:12 - Mar 18 with 1035 views | CoachRob |
| The Golden Rice project on 12:51 - Mar 18 by StokieBlue |
“If you believe this science passes the falsification test by going before regulators then that is an interesting position to take. “
Are you essentially saying that the regulators don’t check the research or do their own research? Would you care to provide some evidence on why the research is poor and doesn’t pass the falsification test? Thus far in both your posts you’ve not provided a single element of evidence for your positions.
“I think some of the issues raised in "Poor Economics" by Banerjee and Duflo provide a political and economic backdrop to these kinds of issues. Fortified salt with iodine and iron was a great success and I don't recall the opposition there is to your suggestion. I would feel very uneasy recommending this course of action on the current scientific evidence.”
Can you provide some quotations at least as that would seem to be geared to for-profit GMO. I’d be interested to see the economic case for something given away free. Comparing this case to ionised salt is a bit strange. There are no GMO lobbying groups against adding iodine to salt, probably because it’s nothing like the same.
SB |
George Stigler wrote a Noble prize winner piece on regulatory capture, I know you like Noble prize winners. I, like you, believe most regulators are very thorough and provide conclusions based on research but Stigler is a Noble prize winner so...
If you want to know the effect of giving something away free, read the book, it includes examples of malaria nets etc. You seem to be jumping on a "solution" rather than thinking about how this would work in practice. | | | |
| The Golden Rice project on 13:19 - Mar 18 with 1019 views | StokieBlue |
| The Golden Rice project on 13:12 - Mar 18 by CoachRob |
George Stigler wrote a Noble prize winner piece on regulatory capture, I know you like Noble prize winners. I, like you, believe most regulators are very thorough and provide conclusions based on research but Stigler is a Noble prize winner so...
If you want to know the effect of giving something away free, read the book, it includes examples of malaria nets etc. You seem to be jumping on a "solution" rather than thinking about how this would work in practice. |
Conversely you are assuming that there is no such thing philanthropy and that everyone has an agenda.
I re-iterate the point that historical situations are no guarantee of future conclusions - that's a fallacy.
Rather than saying read this read that can you actually provide some context and evidence? Just citing things without context isn't really making a point.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Golden Rice project on 13:23 - Mar 19 with 879 views | CoachRob |
| The Golden Rice project on 13:19 - Mar 18 by StokieBlue |
Conversely you are assuming that there is no such thing philanthropy and that everyone has an agenda.
I re-iterate the point that historical situations are no guarantee of future conclusions - that's a fallacy.
Rather than saying read this read that can you actually provide some context and evidence? Just citing things without context isn't really making a point.
SB |
I think your debates are about you being right rather than wanting to discuss the issue you raised.
Sorry Stokie but I think ethics are important in science - asking children to participate in trials without expressly telling the parents that GMO is involved is dubious ethics.
Yes I do believe companies have an agenda it is called fiduciary duty. Especially Monsanto and Bayer who as you know are fighting lawsuits against products licenced to market.
You clearly don't understand the political and economic issues of bringing a product such as this into a poorer nation that is why I referenced "Poor Economics" as a starting point - you can't just impose things on people or let the free market "work".
This poster sums up how complex and nuanced this debate is, it is not just the case of trampling opposition with your latest paper (I have no qualifications in genetics other than an A-Level in Biology; care to state your expertise?)
http://sites.middlebury.edu/politicalecologyofgmos/project/the-rhetoric-and-disc | | | |
| The Golden Rice project on 13:33 - Mar 19 with 869 views | StokieBlue |
| The Golden Rice project on 13:23 - Mar 19 by CoachRob |
I think your debates are about you being right rather than wanting to discuss the issue you raised.
Sorry Stokie but I think ethics are important in science - asking children to participate in trials without expressly telling the parents that GMO is involved is dubious ethics.
Yes I do believe companies have an agenda it is called fiduciary duty. Especially Monsanto and Bayer who as you know are fighting lawsuits against products licenced to market.
You clearly don't understand the political and economic issues of bringing a product such as this into a poorer nation that is why I referenced "Poor Economics" as a starting point - you can't just impose things on people or let the free market "work".
This poster sums up how complex and nuanced this debate is, it is not just the case of trampling opposition with your latest paper (I have no qualifications in genetics other than an A-Level in Biology; care to state your expertise?)
http://sites.middlebury.edu/politicalecologyofgmos/project/the-rhetoric-and-disc |
It’s not about being right, it’s about having a proper scientific debate about something that can really save lives. You haven’t mentioned anything about that part in any of your replies.
“Sorry Stokie but I think ethics are important in science - asking children to participate in trials without expressly telling the parents that GMO is involved is dubious ethics.”
Where was this done?
“Yes I do believe companies have an agenda it is called fiduciary duty. Especially Monsanto and Bayer who as you know are fighting lawsuits against products licenced to market. “
What does this have to do with anything I’ve written? It’s not a company, it’s a philanthropic organisation who stand to give away the seeds for free and there is no patent. It would be nice if you actually read what was posted rather than push your agenda.
“You clearly don't understand the political and economic issues of bringing a product such as this into a poorer nation that is why I referenced "Poor Economics" as a starting point - you can't just impose things on people or let the free market "work". “
Very kind of you to tell me what I do and don’t understand. Once again why don’t you summarise why it’s a bad idea rather than pointing to a textbook. You do this all the time, you are never willing to summarise, only to point people towards weeks of reading. Who is "imposing" it on Bangladesh?
I’ll read that properly when I get a chance but the fact the first two sources are “the great golden rice hoax” and Greenpeace hardly inspire the thoughts of nuanced debate that you claim.
I’ve not claimed to be an expert but that doesn’t mean one can’t call out provable falsehoods in your posts. I’ve done that and you’ve ignored it.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
