GM golden rice opponents branded 'wicked' by UK environment secretary

Owen Paterson accused of swallowing industry hype on GM crops over claim that vitamin-enriched rice could prevent blindness and death among children in poor countries

GM golden rice has been modified to contain beta carotene, a source of vitamin A. Above: Cambodian farmers grow rice in Kampong Speu. Photograph: AFP/Getty

People who oppose golden rice, a new variety of GM crop, are "wicked" and could be condemning children in developing countries to blindness and death, according to the British environment secretary.

In an emotive intervention into the polarised debate about genetically modified crops in poor countries, Owen Paterson, a known advocate of GM foods, came out strongly in favour of golden rice, which has been developed to contain beta carotene, a source of vitamin A.

Supporters of the rice, including GM company Syngenta, claim a single plateful can provide 60% of a child's daily vitamin A requirement, potentially reducing blindness and other illnesses that afflict millions of children in developing countries. According to the World Health Organisation, dietary vitamin A deficiency compromises the immune systems of about 40% of children under the age of five in the developing world.

Paterson has expressed dismay that opponents of golden rice have, as he sees it, delayed its introduction for many years.

"I feel really strongly about it," Paterson told the Independent. "I think what they [opponents] do is absolutely wicked. There is no other word for it. It's just disgusting that little children are allowed to go blind and die because of a hang-up by a small number of people about this technology."

His statement, described as personal by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, coincided with the launch of what appeared to be a co-ordinated campaign by some scientists and a handful of GM advocates in the US and UK to back golden rice.

In the past two weeks, Scientific American has accused Greenpeace and other anti-GM organisations of using "misinformation and hysteria" to delay its introduction, while a group of experts writing in Science – including Martin Rees, former president of the Royal Society – have argued strongly that it should be commercialised.

Paterson's outburst also coincided with the launch of a pro-golden rice group by the US environmentalist Patrick Moore, who accused Greenpeace of a "crime against humanity" for having tried to delay its introduction.

"Their crime is 8 million children dead," said Moore. "Golden rice is the cure for a crisis that kills more people each year than malaria, HIV/Aids or tuberculosis. The zero-tolerance policy towards GM by Greenpeace and its allies has blocked this cure, resulting in 8 million deaths, mostly among poor children. We believe this is a crime against humanity as defined by the international criminal court."

Greenpeace and development groups have fought back, however, accusing Paterson of following the GM industry line.

Dr Doug Parr, chief scientist at Greenpeace said: "Owen Paterson believes problems caused by vitamin A deficiency have one and only one solution: GM 'golden' rice. And if you don't agree with him, you are 'wicked'. There are more than half a dozen vitamin A strategies in use today. Golden rice is not one of them because it doesn't yet exist. I think he's falling into a trap over GM and I don't think he understands the issue. He's swallowed the industry spin hook, line and sinker without talking to anyone with a different view. It's the politics, not the technology, that has failed to deliver access to a healthy diet for everyone."

The World Development Movement in London said Paterson was not interested in the plight of malnourished people. "There's more than enough food to feed the world's population – the problem is access," said the group's policy officer, Christine Haigh. "Malnutrition in the global south is almost exclusively a result of people's inability to access enough food, or a sufficiently varied diet. The way to solve it is to improve incomes – not to hand power to the multinationals that already control our food system, further squeezing producers and forcing them into an industrial monoculture production that posits golden rice as a solution rather than a problem."

Scientists have pointed out that the rice is not a commercial venture and is not owned by western multinationals such as Monsanto or Bayer. "There is much public support for golden rice in Asia but, unfortunately, some western NGOs have recently influenced local activists to destroy some of the field trials in the Philippines, which is very regrettable," said Denis Murphy, a biotechnology adviser to the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation in Rome.

However, Chito Medina, environmental scientist and national co-ordinator of Masipag, a network of Filipino farmers, scientists and development workers, countered: "Vitamin A deficiency and malnutrition are complex issues that are inextricably linked to poverty and access to resources. Golden rice is a simplistic, techno-fix solution to the problem."

Others backed the introduction of vitamins into crops and foods, but said it was not necessary to do it using GM. "Golden rice is a Trojan horse for the GM industry," said Jonathan Matthews, director of GM Watch. "It's not even available yet. We do not know if it's effective. This is a feelgood product that appears to give the moral high ground to the industry. In fact, it may be diverting resources and distracting attention from farming methods that are proving themselves to be effective at both reducing poverty and improving health."

Many countries have reduced vitamin A deficiency using traditional methods. A programme by the Philippine government's Food and Nutrition Research Institute, reduced its prevalence among children from 40.1% in 2003 to 15.2% in 2008, according to the latest available figures(pdf).

Golden rice was developed in Switzerland by Igor Potrykus, a biologist at the Institute for Plant Sciences, and Peter Beyer, of the University of Freiburg, Germany. But their idea of a humanitarian GM crop whose seeds would be made freely available to poor farmers ran into problems when it was tested on Chinese children without the necessary approvals.

Since then, golden rice has gone through a multitude of regulatory processes and field trials in the Philippines. It awaits approval from the country's regulators. The Guardian

GM 'golden rice' opponents wicked, says minister Owen Paterson

Opponents of the development of a type of genetically modified (GM) rice enriched with vitamin A are "wicked", the environment secretary has said.

Owen Paterson is known as a strong supporter of GM food technology

In an interview with the Independent, Owen Paterson said they could be condemning millions of people in the developing world to a premature death.

Mr Paterson backed a letter from international scientists calling for the rapid development of "golden rice".

But campaigners say the benefits claimed for the rice are misleading.

'Dark shadow'

Mr Paterson told the newspaper: "It's just disgusting that little children are allowed to go blind and die because of a hang-up by a small number of people about this technology.

"I feel really strongly about it. I think what they do is absolutely wicked. There is no other word for it."

Mr Paterson did not specify any particular groups in his interview but also said opponents of GM technology were "casting a dark shadow over attempts to feed the world".

BBC political correspondent Carole Walker said Mr Paterson was known as a strong supporter of GM crops but his language seemed certain to raise hackles with those who took a different view.

A Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs spokeswoman said it was Mr Paterson's strong personal view.

'Cause for outrage'

People in the developed usually world get enough vitamin A from their diet by eating foods like cheese, yoghurts and eggs.

But deficiency is a common problem in developing countries, and is estimated to affect between 140 million and 250 million children under the age of five.

Vitamin A is needed for healthy skin and eyes and to help strengthen the immune system so that the body can fight infections. Deficiency can lead to blindness, illness and death.

Supplements are available and the World Health Organisation advocates routine administration of vitamin A in countries where deficiency is a problem.

High doses of vitamin A can be harmful, however, particularly in pregnancy

Meanwhile, in a letter to US journal Science, a group of leading academics has accused Western non-governmental organisations of fuelling opposition to the development of GM technologies.

They wrote: "If ever there was a clear-cut cause for outrage, it is the concerted campaign by Greenpeace and other non-governmental organisations, as well as by individuals, against golden rice."

Environmental campaigners such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth have said there are more effective solutions to vitamin A deficiency.

Mr Paterson also used the interview to defend the government's handling of the badger cull - aimed at preventing the spread of bovine TB - against criticism from animal welfare groups.

He said: "I cannot understand anyone wanting to tolerate this disgusting disease.

"I find it incomprehensible that these badger groups don't see that this is a horrendous disease for the badgers themselves."

BBC News

INDIA: Volunteers stage protest march against GM crops

Volunteers stage protest march against GM crops

Volunteers perform a skit at Marina in Chennai on Saturday to protest against GM crops and Monsanto’s forays into corporatising agriculture in the country. — DC

Chennai: Volunteers of Safe Food Alliance and around 100 Chennaiites from various walks of life on Saturday took part in a protest ma­rch against genetically modified (GM) crops and the corporatisation of food and farming systems in the country.

The protest was a part of larger worldwide protests by ‘March against Mon­santo worldwide’, a glo­bal-level network of safe food activists. The protests were organised in more than 400 cities in the world on the occasion of World Food Day on October 16. Citizens of Chennai, Tiruvarur, Er­ode and Coimbatore participated.

V. R. Ananthoo, co-ordinator for Safe Food Alli­ance in Chennai, says, “We are marching against Monsanto here today. The Central government is projecting it as a corporation that will save poor farmers. Monsanto has a record of polluting natural reso­urces and falsifying safety reports.

The government’s partnership with such corporates will jeopardise the seed sovereignty of farmers.” Vettavalam Manikandan, state president of the Tamil Nadu Farmers’ Ass­o­ciation, says, “The protest was against Monsanto, but the message is to all such corporates. We will not allow any open airfield trials of GM food crops in the state.”

Ananthoo adds, “The State government has been supportive of our stand and we expect the Centre too to follow suit.” DC

INDIA: Rallying against Monsanto

Rallying against Monsanto in Thiruvananthapuram

Participants take out ‘March against Monsanto,’ a protest event organised by Thanal and Indus Cycling Company, on Manaveeyam Road on Saturday. Photo: S. Gopakumar

‘March against Monsanto,’ a global event to coincide with the World Food Day, was organised in Thiruvananthapuram on Saturday. The event was aimed at spreading awareness about the ‘negative impact of the multinational giant’ which has interests in genetically modified crops, seeds, and fertilizers.

More than 400 cities spread across 50 countries played host to the event.

The programmes in the city were organised by Thanal and Indus Cycling Company. The programmes included a 12-hour cycle sathyagraha.

Simultaneously, a 12-hour non-stop musical protest led by singer Ganesh Kunjan, and members of Abhinaya, a city-based theatre group, was held.

Students from Fine Arts College led by Eldo Pachilakkadan and Rajesh made paintings depicting the impact of genetic modification on agriculture.

The cycling team also visited various parts of the city to spreading the message. The Hindu

Chinese general hits out at use of GM foods

Chinese general hits out at use of GM foods

BEIJING: A Chinese general has publicly criticized growing Chinese dependence on genetically modified crops. 

The general, Peng Guangqian, has said that using the method will enable western companies to take control of China's agriculture. 

"What they call 'solving the food problem for 1.3 billion people' by relying on genetic engineering is a complete lie," he wrote in the state controlled Xinhua news agency. "We can't afford to move on a trial-and-error basis." 

Peng, who holds a non-command rank equivalent of major-general of the People's Liberation Army, said 'western multinational companies' were dumping GM crops in China and thus destroying the country's traditional agriculture. This comes after vice president of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences Wu Kongming publicly called for wider cultivation of GM crops. 

Wu said China cannot afford to stick to traditional farming to feed its millions and the only way out of food shortage was to "use modern technology to support the development of our agriculture". Sources said that the outburst shows emerging differences within the government on sensitive matters and the government's readiness to allow public discussion on some developmental issues. 

China does not allow commercial plantation of GM staple crops. But plantation of GM papaya and cotton has been allowed. Several Chinese officials including those in the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences are asking for wide scale planting of GM crops. 

China relies heavily on imported GM soy beans. Customs data showed 81% of soy beans consumed in China last year were imported mostly from the US and Brazil. TOI

Global call against Monsanto and genetically modified food crops on October 12

Global call against Monsanto and genetically modified food crops on October 12

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: From a global call to march against genetically modified food cropsand Monsanto, to a concrete strategy to conserve freshwater ecosystems, scientists and activists at the international conference on ecosystem conservation, climate change and sustainable Development (ECOCASD) made it clear that indigenous biodiversity protection is crucial to sustenance. 

As part of the global call against Monsanto, participants including green activists from 400 cities across the world including Kochi and Thiruvananthapuram will organise protest marches and rallies on October 12, calling for Safe Food to prevent contamination of food by genetically modified crops and toxic pesticides. "We have no crisis in food security, it is crisis in distribution of safe food and the government has to address that," Green activist Sridhar Radhakrishnan told TOI on Friday. 

Later in the day leading freshwater conservation biologists got together calling for concrete strategies to conserve freshwater biodiversity in a symposium on 'Aichi Targets and freshwater biodiversity conservation in the Western Ghats'. Though freshwater ecosystems occupy less than one per of the Earth's surface, it harbors 10 per cent of the planet's biodiversity. Yet they are one of the most poorly protected ecosystems on earth and face various threats including pollution, overexploitation and alien invasive species. 

Dr. Jorg Freyhof, Scientist at the Leibniz Institute of Inland Fisheries in Berlin, Germany stressed the need for larger holistic data bases to convince and prioritise arguments for biodiversity conservation. He said policy makers and conservationists need to collate data that is easily available including species description, ecological trait data, threatened biodiversity, Red List assessment, protected area network and priority areas for restoration. 

Zoo Outreach Organization executive director Dr. Sanjay Molur said, prioritization of Indian Freshwater fish the AZE (Alliance for Zero Extinction) species for conservation is an achievable undertaking that will cater to Aichi Biodiversity Target 12 dealing with zero extinction. 

IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) Species Survival Commission Freshwater Fish Specialist Group-South Asia Co-Chair Dr. Rajeev Raghavan alerted the lack of attention given to freshwater fish as compared to marine fish in terms of popularity. 

Kerala University Department of Aquatic Biology and Fisheries Head Dr. Biju Kumar told TOI on Friday that the growing menace of invasive species mostly native to Amazon threatens indigenous species in freshwater systems, rivers and canals of Kerala and it needs to be addressed through policy interventions in relation to AICHI 2020 targets. 
Researcher of Conservation Research Group from Kochi, K. Krishnakumar focused on the role of communities in freshwater fish conservation action. He highlighted local communities as a treasure trove of information and community based conservation planning. TOI

Tanzania becomes a battleground in fight over genetically modified crops

Washington Post

Tanzania becomes a battleground in fight over genetically modified crops

Sharon Schmickle/For The Washington Post -

Students line up for lunch at a school in Engaruka, Tanzania in early September. Opponents of genetically modified crops have made a stand in Africa, and now villages such as Engaruka are squarely in the middle of a global ideological war over agricultural technology.

ENGARUKA, Tanzania — When the bell rang at midday, students fetched tin bowls and lined up under trees in the schoolyard for scoops of corn and bean porridge.

Not one of them displayed the food fussiness often seen in American school lunch lines.

After the rainy seasons shortchanged this Maasai village in northern Tanzania, children here suffered too many days when there was no porridge — no food at all to eat in their mud and stick huts. Drought is to blame for a good share of their suffering.

Scientists are developing drought-tolerant corn, something that could ease hunger across Tanzania and sub-Saharan Africa. But because it is genetically modified, the corn cannot be planted here. Opponents of genetically modified crops have made a stand in Africa, and now villages such as Engaruka are squarely in the middle of a global ideological war over agricultural technology.

Since U.S. farmers first adopted GM crops in 1996, 17 million farmers in 29 countries have followed suit. Europe has rejected the crops, though, arguing that farmers would be exploited by large seed companies and that more research is needed into possible risks to the environment and food safety. And European activists have pressured Africa to do the same. Just four African countries — Sudan, Egypt, Burkina Faso and South Africa — have allowed them.

No one denies Africa’s hunger. World crop production has more than doubled in 50 years, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization. But Africa has lagged behind, achieving some gains while losing ground in places such as Engaruka where drought, plant diseases and other problems have knocked down yields and depleted the available food. Now that problem takes on new urgency with U.N. projections that Africa’s population will quadruple by the end of this century.

Still, the question of which approach is best for Africa remains hotly disputed. It tears at Tanzania, where 80 percent of the people live by subsistence agriculture.

African countries and research organizations, working together in the Water Efficient Maize for Africa project, have incorporated a gene from a common soil bacterium into corn, enabling plants to produce kernels even while short of water. The GM corn is expected to increase yields by 25 percent during moderate drought.

Tanzania is a member nation in the project, but regulations it adopted in 2009 have effectively blocked GM crops.

Under a “strict liability” rule, anyone associated with importing, moving, storing or using GM products is liable if someone makes a claim of harm, injury or loss caused by the products. Such a claim could reach beyond personal loss or injury to include damage to the environment and to biological diversity.

Under that policy, no research organization has dared to introduce GM crops into Tanzania’s fields.

At the Mikocheni Agricultural Research Institute in Dar es Salaam, plant virologist Joseph Ndunguru has genetically transformed cassava to resist viruses that are devastating the crop. Instead of starting field trials, Ndunguru is waiting for new regulations.

“There is a lot of fear,” he said.

As for water-efficient corn, Alois Kullaya said research has been on hold since 2009. He is Mikocheni’s principal agricultural research officer and the Tanzanian coordinator of the corn project. Tanzanian scientists have not been able to conduct field trials with the corn they have developed in laboratories.

The scientists have urged Tanzania’s government to shift to a “fault-based” regulatory approach under which a heavier burden of proof would fall on someone claiming harm or injury.

The influence of Europe

Pushing the government from the other side is the Tanzania Alliance for Biodiversity, a coalition of environmental and organic-farming groups.

“Whoever introduces GMOs [genetically modified organisms] should be responsible for what happens on the ground,” said Abdallah Mkindi, alliance coordinator.

Mkindi said scientists serve as a front for multinational seed companies. If regulations were relaxed, he said, companies could hold small-scale farmers for ransom and food security would be threatened.

“Multinational companies are simply here to expand their business,” Mkindi said. “GMO is not a solution to famine.”

Some coalition members argue that Africa’s food sovereignty is at risk if its farmers accept seeds and plant cuttings created by large outside organizations. Some also say that a high-tech fix for Africa’s food insecurity is a false promise given the many other problems begging to be addressed — including poor access to land, water, credit, agricultural extension services, roads and markets.

Of 19 alliance members, 11 are European-based groups or have European affiliations. The expert authority the alliance cites for claims about GM crops is from London-based Earth Open Source.

Beyond grass-roots activism, Europeans have profoundly influenced African attitudes by rejecting GM crops, Ndunguru said.

“People go to the Internet, and they read the information put there by European anti-GM groups, and they ask, ‘If this technology is safe, why don’t the Europeans use it?’ ” he said.

Now, some experts are accusing European activists of placing ideology above Africa’s food security.

“Opposition to biotechnology in Africa started before there was much scientific research on the subject outside South Africa. So Africa’s first import was opposition to the technology before the products got there,” said Calestous Juma, a Harvard University professor of international development and a native Kenyan. “This was because the [European Union] constructed a resistance industry and exported it through a variety of channels.”

U.S. groups make their mark

American advocates for GM crops have been busy in Africa, too.

Support for the Water Efficient Maize project came from the U.S. Agency for International Development as well as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Howard G. Buffett Foundation. The project’s drought-tolerance gene came from Monsanto, which has said the seeds will go royalty-free to African farmers. The project also produces conventionally bred corn.

Other GM research targeted for Africa also is backed by American money and know-how.

One target has been the vitamin-A deficiency that causes blindness in millions of African children. Helen Keller International is involved in engineering orange-fleshed sweet potatoes to deliver extra helpings of the micronutrient that the body transforms into vitamin A. The St. Louis-based Donald Danforth Plant Science Center is working in Kenya and Nigeria to boost that provitamin and other nutrients in cassava.

Another goal is to address deficiencies in the resources available to African farmers. DuPont Pioneer, for example, is helping develop corn that makes more efficient use of nitrogen so farmers could get by with less fertilizer.

Behind the individual projects, GM foes suspect a conspiracy to slip American agribusiness into Africa. In 2012, the Obama administration prompted a flurry of suspicion when it used a Group of Eight summit to announce the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, with the goal of lifting 50 million Africans out of poverty by 2022.

A working group of the German Forum on Environment & Development reacted with a statement saying the initiative “paves the way for radical opening of markets for international seed and agrarian corporations in African countries.”

That response expressed the essence of the tension that persists across Africa, with American technology rolling forward against pushback from Europeans — and from some like-minded Americans.

The controversy flared again this year after the World Food Prize Foundation announced that its prestigious annual award would go to three scientists who laid the groundwork for today’s GM crops 30 years ago by developing techniques for inserting foreign genes into the DNA of plants. The recipients are to be honored at a three-day international symposium in Des Moines beginning Oct. 16.

While the global debate rages, many families in Engaruka remain perilously close to starvation after recent droughts destroyed crops and killed 65 percent of the livestock.

Before 2009, Thomas Saitoti’o owned 30 cows, he said. Now he has just two. His family lost its cushion against the next drought. The family ran out of food in April and was saved by a government handout of corn.

At the end of the dirt path leading to the next house, Juliana Saitoti sat shelling beans. Thanks to rain this year, her family had food in September, even eggs for the children.

But with the dry season, food would run out in October.

“Then we will not have enough to eat,” she said.

Reporting for this article was supported by a grant from the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting. Finnigan wa Simbeye contributed to this report.