Will Golden Rice Someday Help The 500,000 Children Who Go Blind Each Year Due To Vitamin-A Deficiency?

Please find below a representative sampling of submissions since this discussion was launched in August 2000. Some submissions have been edited for length. Submissions which were not accompanied by a name, location, and valid e-mail address and those that did not pertain to the topic or used profanity were omitted.

For sure Golden Rice will highly contribute in reducing the number of children going blind yearly due to Vit-A deficiency.

Bob
US
www@fm242.facility.pipex.com

I think if golden rice is properly grown and manufactured that it will help the millions of vitamin B deficient children around the world. I strongly support your views and opinions.

Alex Ezrati
Kent, UK
alex_ezrati@hotmail.com

Monsanto must be one of the most dispicable entities known to mankind. I don't know how anyone can go on believing that genetically altered food is a good thing. People have lived for thousands of years off of the foods they need to survive. Only the greed of money-hungry titans can supply human beings with the notion that our natural foods should be altered in any way.

It is terrifying to know that I have little choice in whether the food I put into my body is genetically engineered. It has been made extremely difficult to research what food products are being manipulated, and that in itself is highly unfair and also a violation of very basic human rights.

I think that all genetically altered foods and by products should be plainly labeled as "GENETICALLY ENGINEERED FOOD PRODUCT" be it a tomato or Kellog's cornflakes. Labeling foods will give aware and concerned consumers the knowledge needed to decide if genetically altered food is someting they want to put in their bodies. People have a right to know what they are eating.

I only hope that in the future, human beings realize the true benefits of organic foods, rather than the misleading propaganda of an industry solely focused on making money and increasing profits.

I don't believe in a christian hell, but I'm sure that the individuals responsible for Monsanto and bio-engineered goods would qualify as residents upon taking their last breath. May you all lay awake at night fully aware of what you are doing to our people and our planet. It pains me to know we breath the same air and see the same sunsets. When will you face the consequences?

Eva Rosen
East Coast, US
Dire.Faery@compuserve.com

If exploitation of the third world by first world capitalists was stopped, they could grow all their food needs without gm crops.

Marlies
London
marlies119@hotmail.com

I think that you will use the terminator gene in this "golden rice" because you care more about profits than people.

Tom
UK
tom.scambler@cliftonasset.co.uk

I have been researching Genetic Engineering as a study in Biology and have learnt a great deal from my findings. At first I was suspicious as to how Genetically modified foods may affect us in the future. But after reading others comments on the idea I have recently changed my whole outlook on the subject and am hopeful that this may someday help our race and planet in the future.

As to your question about the Vitamin A supplement I think that as long as this is thoroughly researched then I am positive it will be an excellent contribution in preventing these children who go blind from Vitamin A deficiency.

Thank you for all your great information and all the best for the future of research.--- Sincerely Tegan Howard

Tegan Howard
New Zealand
tegdude16@hotmail.com

Why does rice have to be genetically modified? If rice will grow in these areas, why not carrots?

Organic Farmer
UK
RoyalDawson@aol.com

I'm a biotechnology student. I think your site has great content and quality articles.
Thanks!

April Garza
Austin, Texas
april-s@usa.net

What crops are being genetically modified and why else does the genetically modified foods benefit??? How do you answer the problem of the industry being totally monopolised???

Linda Ho
Melbourne
clapurhandsifurhappy@go.com

Please don't think that you people are angels helping out the poor, last time i heard angels didn't have investors.

Jeffrey Harland
Oakland, Ca
stereoj@hotmail.com

There seems to be a false connection out there between the word natural and good. Not all that is natural is automatically good. Along with this is the corollary that not all that is unnatural is automatically bad. If an asteroid was going to smash into the earth and destroy all life that would be natural but not (I assume most would agree) good. If man used technology to stop that asteroid it would be unnatural but good. Saying that "golden rice" is not natural and thus bad is no argument.

Tim Folkins
Canada
folkinstimothy@hotmail.com

If there are any chances, however remote of people in the third world becoming better off with regards to their health, then that can only be a good thing. Precautions on researching into the overall environmental effects of introducing such transgenic foods into a third world environment should be taken and the political issues involved with third world debt should be carefully considered.

Kay Randles
Nottingham University, U.K
mbyuknr@nottingham.ac.uk

I have read many, many scientific articles on this subject & listened to several symposiums & speaches. All I ask if that everyone reading this to do their OWN research & talk to people who actually understand the process that Genetic Engineering uses. I don't feel like many people I meet understand this at all.

If in doubt, this should not be pushed ahead without long term studies. So many products make it on the market before proper testing & are later found to be extremely dangerous: DDT, abspestos, tabacco even... We should not be feeding GE formula to our babies & stocking our groceries stores (now 60% in US) until we know for sure... The fact the US gov't won't allow labeling of non-GE foods is amazing a direct violation of our human rights. At least in the UK your country is given more information by your media. Our media in the US won't even cover this topic. We send information to them all the time & they still refuse... This is so much bigger than the question of capitalism & whether Monsanto is coming from integrity with their motives - this is about rewriting the genetic makeup of our world... No one knows what the price will be for t! hat. How could they without proper long term studies & the regulatory agencies in the US are not even requiring testing since they say the food this technology produces is the same as naturally grown food. Then why did 39 people die from L-Tryptophan in 1989 and why did we have to recall the taco shells & why have other countries experienced toxic reactions... Only more evidence will come & then it may be too late. For what do we risk everything??? Please, please stop the insanity!!!

Hether
Denver, CO - USA
lucky1star@aol.com

I'm not a scientist or a professor but I am familiar with food biotechnology from the papers I've written for my professors. I am not totally convinced that adding beta-carotene or vitamin a to rice will help people in third world countries will help them preserve their sight. I think there are a few more things that factor in to it. I'd like to be proven wrong however.

Jonathan
Williamsport, PA.
dinjon46@email.pct.edu

It would be a bit presumptuous to make the comment that the population explosion is being perpetuated by the engineering of foods to feed the hungry. After having read that statement I felt compelled to comment. The hungry are already here so it is our responsibility to find the best possible way to meet their needs. Haven't you heard of Herzberg's Hiarchy of Needs?

Seeing starving children does not appeal to me and to think that I might do something that would interfere with their getting the foods that they need to meet basic survival is appalling. Since man has damaged so many pieces of land, new technology must be developed to make plants compatible with the existing soil, climate and other conditions that prevail in an area. Also I read the comment that Monsanto, and probably it is assumed other companies who genetically modify seeds, should donate the seeds and research to the countries. I do not believe in the companies making huge profits at the cost of the unfortunate but I also know that research is extremely expensive so this situation must be one that is a win-win happening for all parties....is such possible? Sure. If it is demanded that companies donate their research and seeds and technology without any reward for their work then companies will no longer look toward implementing research that will take care of the world's changing and growing needs. I do believe that Monsanto has stated that they are sharing the technology pertaining to the "golden rice" development with many countries and assisting with further discovery. It behooves us to be informed and stay abreast of development in the biotechnology field as well as remaining open-minded and receptive to new ideas. I, as well as anyone else, do not want to wake up to super-weeds but also I understand that too many starving humans make one heck of a revolution.

Diane
USA
destaten@juno.com

I'm certainly not a friend of Monsanto, but I'd just like to comment on some of the suggestions put forward by our environmentalist friends.

Jane Bread suggests that what Monsanto does is not natural, yet Monsanto has a reasonable argument that all modern grains are the result of hybridization - how is GM any different? Are we supposed to go back to hunting and gathering? I think this is an unreasonable premise.

Sarah from New Zealand claims that increasing agricultural production in the developing world is adding to the population explosion. Firstly, the developing world consumes far less of the world's resources than the developed world. The problem of pollution and over-consumption is due to the developed world's over-consumption of goods. We in the developed world need to assess how we can progress in terms of environmental sustainability, instead of denying poorer people the right to be fed. Secondly, who is she to declare that the hungry should die. Perhaps she'd like to join them? This argument is Malthusian eco-nazi nonsense. Thirdly, the problem in the developing world is one of land access and land use, not a lack of land fertility. The problem of malnutrition is directly related to structural changes within the world economy. Therefore, both Sarah and Monsanto are wrong.

Matthew Rochford has hit the nail on the head. Monsanto's solutions are irrelevant to the root causes of malnutrition - some of which he lists.

Dan Brett
London, England
dan@danielbrett.co.uk

I have a problem with those who argue that Monsanto is exploiting genetic engineering for profit. The world's economy is geared towards profit - that's why it is a capitalist economy. Monsanto is acting in the same way as any company or state that produces anything. Yes, it's self-interested, but it's not exceptional. It might be fashionable to lambast Monsanto for everything they do, but why not make it a general critique of capitalism? If you're going to rip up Monsanto's trial crops, why not go the full hog and rip up the capitalist system? At least you'd be consistent.

Dan Brett
London, England
dan@danielbrett.co.uk

Genetically modified rice doesn't grow naturally. If it did it would be natural and therefore not modified. What Monsanto is doing is not natural.

Jane Bread
New Zealand
jane_bread@hotmail.com

Genetically engineering food to feed the starving millions is not a solution to the world's problems. A population problem already exists on the Earth. By engineering crops to feed us humans is ethically wrong. We have done enough damage to the world as it is. Feeding the starving is just going to build stronger and potentially more dangerous threats to Mother Nature than those we live with today.

Taking over plants and creating new ones is not natural. It is not the way the Earth was meant to be. I am not a religious person, but I believe that we came upon this Earth as it was and therefore we have no right to change things. Look at all the damage we have already caused. We have killed off so many species, and polluted so much that we have to resort to going to a zoo to see nature. Monsanto is adding to the problem by creating new plants that have an unnatural ability to overcome the leathal effects of another problem that they created, namely Roundup.

Sarah
New Zealand
sarah103@hotmail.com

The truth about "golden rice" is that instead of contributing to the solution for millions on the earth it has merely helped to perpetuate the problem by ignoring the causes of malnutrition. What Monsanto has achieved in its development programme has been the development of markets which they are free (almost) to exploit. Monsanto's work is transparent to thinking people in the UK and elsewhere, i.e to seek out and exploit markets wherever possible and to invest in solutions to agri-problems which ignore the root cause.

If people in the third world were eating a balanced diet we wouldn't need unpredictable and potentially dangerous bio-technology. The energy and money expended in developing "golden rice" would have produced a radically more effective solution to malnutrition if it had been channeled into funding diversity in agriculture, organic methods and sustainable development. Third world farmers are not given a chance to exercise there wisdom and too often are forced into growing food for profit (short term) rather than for sustainable growth. Monsanto, to most peoples knowledge, do not and have not helped find solutions to the problems of sustainable agriculture as they ignore the connection between man and earth and focus only on the connection between product and profit. We do not need Monsanto or "golden rice" nor do we need genetetically engineered crops of any description. We need food that is safe to eat and grow.

Matthew Rochford
England
matt_taichi@yahoo.com

Excellent discussion on recent research.

Dr Madhusudan Dey
LS, JNU, New Delhi
deymadhu@hotmail.com

Continue