60
submitted 5 months ago by Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 months ago

Basically, the issue is that this Golden Rice is a foreign species in Philippines. That comes with a lot of complications.

Most importantly, local farmers don't have the knowledge how to deal with this new type of rice. They are worried that their native species are being replaced and could go extinct, which would be difficult to revert. It would lead to yet another platform lock-in.

[-] treadful@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 months ago

It's important to save and continue to grow heirloom species, sure. But almost no cultivated species are native to where they're grown.

Patent bullshit aside.

[-] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 5 months ago

It's interesting about native species. Think about apple trees in the UK. They grow very well here, the climate is suited perfectly, they don't seem to be invasive (talking as a layperson here). Yet they were introduced about 2000 years ago by the Romans. Does that mean they're old enough to now count as native? I mean, if you go back far enough, everything came from somewhere else. Unless you're looking at a deep-sea vent where life very first evolved, then it has spread from somewhere else.

Maybe if I was a botanist or ecologist, I would know the actual answer. But I'm just a person who loves thinking about things in a philosophical way, without necessarily wanting to research in-depth answers for every little puzzle

[-] treadful@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 months ago

I mean, if you go back far enough, everything came from somewhere else.

The Wikipedia article on Native Species is a good start. It's a bit blurrier than I thought but I think the important part is that it's evolved along with the local ecosystem.

[-] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 5 months ago

Rice is a well-understood plant with well-understood properties. One of these properties is that it just doesn't have many vitamins. If you want vitamins, you have to get another plant as a side-dish.

What these mad scientists propose is to change the very nature of rice to make it something that it is not, to solve a problem (Vitamin A deficiency) that could be approached with much less severe measures (like, growing carrots as a side-dish).

Agriculture is like medicine: You should always attempt to use the approach that is least invasive and has the smallest possible impact, while still solving the problem. This way, you minimize complications and reduce risks.

[-] BottleOfAlkahest@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

I think you may need to consider the cost and shelf life difference here. Suggesting "what if they just ate a more expensive vegetable more" seems like a pretty callous take.

I know they grow carrots in the phillipines but they definitely aren't native to there either.

[-] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Why can’t they just fortify their caviar with vitamin a?

[-] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago

Indeed, "eating more food" is generally agreed to be the best way to remedy childhood malnutrition and food insufficiency. It's hands down agreed upon to be the best possible approach.

Unfortunately, children who suffer from these maladies often lack additional food to eat, which is why there are several lines of inquiry for solving this problem:

  • can we make it so more food?
  • can we make the food better?
  • can we make the food faster?

Inevitably, that means things like "vegetables that tolerate bad soil", "vitamin fortified rice", or "fast growing wheat", or "crazy fertilizer strategies".

It's a sad reality that most places that can't grow enough food to properly feed children typically lack the ability to just grow more, to say nothing of diversifying into more resource intensive crops. otherwise they would probably do that.

[-] Murvel@lemm.ee -1 points 5 months ago

Rice, no matter the type isn't a native species to the Philippines, what the fuck are you talking about?

this post was submitted on 26 May 2024
60 points (89.5% liked)

News

23274 readers
1084 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS