It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
How do you demonize scientists who added 3 genes to the 30,000 in rice in order to stop vitamin A deficiencies in poor countries with rice-dominated diets? There are zero pitfalls to it yet an elaborate, well-funded marketing campaign has been leveled against it.
Ingo Potrykus and Peter Beyer genetically engineered their Golden Rice, called that because the genes they used for producing beta carotene, a Vitamin A precursor, gave the rice grains a 'golden' color, and even persuaded companies to waive patent rights so that they could give the seeds away for free. No 'Monsanto is evil' nonsensical reasoning applies to this, yet 'green' juggernauts like Greenpeace and Union of Concerned Scientists have opposed it by every means possible, using lawyers and, of course, scare campaigns about biology.
How many kids have died in the 14 years this has been protested as "Frankenfood"? Estimates on deaths are always somewhat overblown but activist groups love to throw them around so let's give them one they can think about; as many as 18 million children have died due to vitamin A deficiency while they have blockaded just this one technology and another 18 million have gone blind, according to World Health Organization numbers. Deaths due to GMOs? Zero. Heck, stomach-aches due to GMOs - still zero. .
reply to post by NosmoKing
In a lot of these plants, they're engineering the herbicides and pesticides right into the plant itself, and then spraying more chemicals on it- because the bugs are overcoming their science.
Then there are cross-genus "hybridizations", i.e. fish genes in tomatoes, and who knows what else.
That's the scary stuff. If it were all so innocent as it sounds, no one would be upset.
You can even do some searching and read studies that show your body doesn't readily absorb the vitamins in 'enriched' foods.
Tufts University researchers revealed Tuesday that a member of their team violated ethics rules in a study designed to measure the nutritional efficacy of so-called “golden rice,” genetically modified rice with the nutrient beta carotene added. NPR’s science blog The Salt said that Tufts stands by the results of the study, but that one researcher in China broke the rules by not informing test subjects — who were all children — or their guardians that the food they were eating had been genetically modified. [...]
Skeptics of the program argue that no single modified crop can address the complex web of societal issues and deficiencies in public health programs that lead to widespread malnutrition in parts of the developing world. Furthermore, there are still questions about the safety of GMO (Genetically Modified Organism) foods, given that most safety studies have been sponsored by companies with a financial stake in the outcome.
With its announcement on Tuesday, Tufts confirmed accusations by Greenpeace China that scientists were using children as guinea pigs to test the safety and efficacy of golden rice without disclosing the real nature of the experiment.
An investigation by the Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) followed and, Nature magazine said, two government officials were fired for their role in the project.
Golden rice supporters were initially skeptical of the investigation, saying that the researchers were being swept up in anti-GMO hysteria. However, Tufts carefully investigated for more than a year and found that researchers in the study were out of compliance with multiple regulations and requirements.
Biotech watchdogs like GM Watch, on the other hand, have long claimed that the benefits are less than shimmering, and that instead its real significance is in expanding the reach of GM agriculture – and companies like Syngenta who push it – in the developing world. Since 2001, activist Michael Pollan, Greenpeace and others have shown that the concentration of beta-carotene is not enough to make a ‘life saving’ or disease preventing difference – a problem worsened by the fact that cooking the rice reduces the Vitamin A content by 50%.
GM Watch explained how “Golden Rice” co-inventor Ingo Potrykus acknowledged back in 2001 that Greenpeace’s argument concerning the ineffective concentrations of beta-carotene in the rice amounted to a valid concern and notable flaw.
I am happy to acknowledge, that Greenpeace is arguing on a rational basis… I also acknowledge, that Greenpeace has identified a weak point in the strategy of using Golden Rice for reducing vitamin A-deficiency… We will know for sure of course only, when all the standard biosafety assessments have been performed… we need far more data, than we have to date.
The current levels of beta-carotene produced by the heavy water “Golden Rice” would require children to eat between 100-150 grams of rice per day (or about 1/2-3/4 of a cup of cooked rice) in order to achieve 60% of the recommended daily allowance.
Even the Rockefeller Foundation, which long funded the development of “Golden Rice” – and, arguably, the entire “Gene Revolution” that brought genetically modified crops into mainstream use – conceded in a letter written by Gordon Conway in January 2001, that “we do not consider Golden Rice the solution to Vitamin A deficiency” and noting that “the public relations uses of Golden Rice have gone too far.” Conway writes:
The industry’s advertisements and the media in general seem to forget that it is a research product that needs considerable further development before it will be available to farmers and consumers.
Yet more than a decade after industry proponents tried to knock environmental watchdogs for their critique and delay of “Golden Rice,” researchers are caught fudging their data and failing to properly inform the parents of the children used in the study that the product was even genetically modified.
GMO-Labeling Supporters Now Accused of Supporting Eco-Terrorism. What’s Next?
Another recent article, published in Forbes Magazine,6 really ups the ante of the attack on health journalists and their readers with the headline: “ Domestic Eco-Terrorism Has Deep Pockets. And Many Enablers.” The article, written by Jay Byme and Henry I.Miller, reads in part:
“In recent years, [eco]terrorists have attempted to gain sympathy and “justification” for their actions by means of disinformation campaigns that relentlessly smear the safety and utility of genetic engineering applied to agriculture… “Frankenfood” headlines may sell newspapers and organic food, but this kind of “black marketing” — enhancing the perceived value of your products by disparaging those of your competitors – can also encourage serious criminal acts.
…There exists in this country a vast, well-established, highly professional, protest industry fueled by special interest groups seeking to line their own pockets… Anti-genetic engineering campaigns are openly funded and promoted by mainstream organic food marketers like Gary Hirshberg, the chairman of Stonyfield Organic, and alternative health and food-supplement hucksters Joe Mercola and Mike Adams — all cynical fear-profiteers who benefit from increased consumer mistrust in their competitors’ products… The ultimate objective, of course, is to sell more overpriced, overrated organic food…
One result of the widely disseminated disinformation effort is an environment that provides encouragement to extremists who commit criminal acts. It comes from the Facebook and Twitter followers of the genetic engineering conspiracy theorists, organic marketers and “right to know” labeling activists… Against the backdrop of this fear-mongering, hate-speech and support for acts of terror toward legal, highly regulated, safe and societally valuable R&D, we should condemn not only the perpetrators themselves but also their corporate and media enablers.”
- See more at: www.zengardner.com...
having been shown to be liars and satanic child abusers their response is to project their evil onto those who expose them, the demonization campaign-psyop goes all the way to the UN..
reply to post by Grimpachi
Is there something in the article that says growing something other than rice in China defies the laws of physics? Or maybe just poor people growing something besides rice defies the laws of physics?
You are making an appeal in the favor of greed. You realize that, right?
So they are growing other foods but they're just not eating it?
You're focusing on what the greed of the world causes in an attempt to sanctify gm foods. It's dumb...
"If you would just allow us to potentially destroy the world, there would be no more hunger!!" (That's what the argument sounds like to me.)
Why not just gm greedy people and stop all the hardships? That might as well be what you're wishing upon the poor/starving people.
Myself I was diagnosed with gluten allergy/Celiac disease about 10 years ago and my doctor then suggested I research GMO wheat and low and behold I found out there is reason to be wary of gmo wheat as the gene modification can cause allergic reactions..dun dun dun.
And where are you getting these GMO wheat products that cause you such agony? Or did you make that up too? Like what your "doctor told you".
Funny thing though, if I eat organic wheat products after a gluten free detox they don't seem to bother me but any GMO wheat product puts me in severe pain ASAP..for me that's all the proof I need. Nuff said.