Golden Grain or Glitter?

In the hot controversy over gene manipulated organisms it is very difficult to distinguish between basic issues involving the organisms themselves and issues around the way they are being developed and used commercially. It is therefore refreshing and clarifying to consider Golden Rice, a GMO with a number of differences.

Golden Rice really is golden in color, the result of the insertion of two genes that are naturally involved in the synthesis of β –carotene, the precursor of Vitamin A. Golden Rice is seen as a future substitute for white rice in areas in the developing world where Vitamin A deficiency is rampant. Vitamin A is important for a strong immune system, and the World Health Organization estimates that 40% of children in developing nations have weakened immunity because of a deficiency of this vitamin. Their natural protection against disease is thus compromised, leading to illness and death.

We see immediately one difference between this rice and the GMOs we hear the most about: Golden Rice is meant for the consumer in the poorer parts of the world, whereas Monsanto’s Roundup Ready, for instance, is meant for farmers and for increased sales of Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup. There are other differences as well, most notably that free distribution of Golden Rice is planned, with a number of organizations and foundations footing the bill. Farmers will then be able to reuse the seed year after year. It does not displace traditional foods, a plus in highly conservative areas of the world. Because it is free it does not create dependency.

This sounds like a panacea, and indeed, proponents of Golden Rice see it as a major step forward in the battle to improve the diets of the poor. Why then are there detractors in several camps, not just that group that objects to the very idea of gene manipulation? Perhaps most convincing is the argument that it is a technical fix that does nothing to solve complex political, economic and social problems. A far better use for the money that will go into distributing Golden Rice would be expanding the diet of the proposed recipients to include vegetables with plentiful β –carotene, fortifying existing foodstuffs or distributing supplements. Indeed, a number of international agencies report success with just such programs, and at far lower cost than the money that has been poured into the development of Golden Rice.

Other opponents cite the over-corporatization of farming and fear that opening the door to Golden Rice will let in other GMO foodstuffs as well. They see it as a Big Aggie solution in a world in which local farming should be encouraged. They fear the loss of biodiversity that the introduction of this rice would bring.

The most telling of opposing arguments, however, concern the value of the rice itself. Will the original carotenoid levels in the rice remain after storage and cooking? Will the carotenoid really be “bioavailable” for malnourished systems? Will there be unknown health risks to consuming Golden Rice? Will developing world populations be used as guinea pigs to test this product, without being thoroughly informed about its possible dangers? The answers to these questions are as yet largely unknown. 

Opponents claim that we do not need to know the answers; we already know them for foodstuffs with naturally occurring Vitamin A; carrots and sweet potatoes, for instance, let’s encourage the planting of these vegetables instead.

What do you think about Golden Rice? Expensive, tech fix or the answer to a poor developing country’s prayers?