Thousands of children could die after court backs campaign group over GM crop in Philippines, scientists warn

Scientists have warned that a court decision to block the growing of the genetically modified (GM) crop Golden Rice in the Philippines could have catastrophic consequences. Tens of thousands of children could die in the wake of the ruling, they argue.

The Philippines had become the first country – in 2021 – to approve the commercial cultivation of Golden Rice, which was developed to combat vitamin A deficiency, a major cause of disability and death among children in many parts of the world.

But campaigns by Greenpeace and local farmers last month persuaded the country’s court of appeal to overturn that approval and to revoke this. The groups had argued that Golden Rice had not been shown to be safe and the claim was backed by the court, a decision that was hailed as “a monumental win” by Greenpeace.

Many scientists, however, say there is no evidence that Golden Rice is in any way dangerous. More to the point, they argue that it is a lifesaver.

  • @[email protected]
    17•6 months ago

    I’d like to point out that Greenpeace or the local population doesn’t have to prove that GM rice is bad. It’s the other way around:

    Big corps have to prove that GM rice is good and has no adversarial long-term effects, which is impossible to prove.

    • @[email protected]
      26•6 months ago

      Which big corps would that be exactly?

      It’s perfectly possible to show that it’s safe to any reasonable standard: https://www.irri.org/golden-rice-faqs

      https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jafc.9b01524

      The only biologically meaningful difference between GR2E and control rice was in levels of β-carotene and other provitamin A carotenoids in the grain. Except for β-carotene and related carotenoids, the compositional parameters of GR2E rice were within the range of natural variability of those components in conventional rice varieties with a history of safe consumption.

      How exactly do you propose that the genetic makeup of the rice is going to impact the person eating it, if chemical analysis shows it’s not meaningfully different from any other rice?

      You can’t demand that people prove something beyond unreasonable doubt. At some point you have to be able to articulate a concern to justify further scrutiny.

      • @Cypher
        14•6 months ago

        That would be Syngenta, the big agricultural corp involved in the project.

        • Syngenta retains commercial rights, although it has no plans to commercialize Golden Rice.
        • “Humanitarian Use” means (and includes research leading to):
        • Use in developing countries (low-income, food-deficit countries as defined by FAO)
        • Resource-poor farmer use (earning less than US$10,000 per year from farming)

        The key part to me is the under $10,000 USD per year from farming requirement. What happens when a larger farm gets accidental cross pollination?

        What happens to farms with organic certification if their neighbours start growing golden rice and it cross pollinates?

        There is a history of Western nations using “humanitarian” outreach to sabotage developing nations.

        Assuming that Syngenta are entirely altruistic is a huge risk for developing nations.

        Source: http://www.goldenrice.org/Content2-How/how9_IP.php

        • @[email protected]English
          2•6 months ago

          This is a good point, we shouldnt use this well tested and seemingly safe life saving scientific advance to save the lives and health of children because someone might have ulterior motives. Outright ban instead of a legal framework to protect against the abuse.

    • Silverseren
      13•6 months ago

      What big corps? Golden rice is developed by scientists working for universities and distributing it via NGOs for free.

      And they’ve produced dozens of studies over the past 24 years showcasing its effectiveness and safety.

    • @[email protected]
      6•6 months ago

      Honestly, that’s where my comment started… But everything I found showed that studies had proven that it was safe. So I changed tack and started focusing on the Greenpeace side.

    • @[email protected]English
      1•6 months ago

      Big corps have to prove that GM rice is good and has no adversarial long-term effects, which is impossible to prove.

      Do you say this for every new organism that is patented or is it reserved solely for gmos?