“Golden Rice” that could address vitamin A deficiencies remains controversial

20 Jun 2024 --- The so-called “golden rice” is a genetically modified variety of the staple crop developed by the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology to address vitamin A deficiencies in low-income regions through the addition of genes from daffodils and bacteria. These provide the rice plant with enzymes that allow it to produce beta-carotene, which the human body converts into vitamin A.

In 2021, The Philippines became the first country to approve the commercial cultivation of the rice variety, but in April of this year the nation’s Court of Appeal made a ruling against commercial activities relating to genetically modified (GM) crops, including golden rice.

Greenpeace Southeast Asia, a major proponent of the ban on golden rice, celebrated the decision. Wilhelmina Pelegrina, a campaigner for the organization, says: “This decision is a monumental win for Filipino farmers and Filipino people who have for decades stood up against GM crops.”

Yet, some have questioned the validity of criticisms against golden rice. Plants for the Future European Technology Platform (Plant ETP), an NGO based in Brussels, Belgium, representing agriculture-focused academia, industry and farming communities, tells Nutrition Insight that multiple independent scientific studies and assessment reviews by governmental agencies support the safety and efficiency of golden rice.

Health and safety
Arguing in favor of the cultivation of the crop, Plant ETP points out that approximately 100 – 150 g of boiled golden rice can provide 60% of the daily recommended intake of vitamin A for a child.

Approximately 100–150 g of boiled golden rice can provide 60% of the daily recommended intake of vitamin A for a child.According to the WHO vitamin A deficiency is the leading cause of childhood blindness. Among the children who develop blindness due to this deficiency, half die within a year of losing their eyesight.

In 2020, prior to the commercial authorization of the crop in the Philippines, a team of researchers in the country conducted a molecular characterization and safety assessment of the biofortified provitamin A rice. Their study, published in nature, points to a “lack of any identifiable hazards for both proteins and in combination with other existing comparative analyses provided assurance that food derived from this rice is safe.”

Another study conducted in the country in 2019 and published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry reached a similar conclusion. “Samples of straw and bran were analyzed for proximates and minerals. The only biologically meaningful difference between GR2E and control rice was in levels of β-carotene and other provitamin A carotenoids in the grain.”

Safety assessments have also been carried out by regulatory agencies in the US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, allowing the sale of golden rice.

Controversy
In the Philippines and elsewhere, opposition against golden rice stems from its development through genetic modification and the associated fears about safety, despite research disputing such concerns.

For example, following the most recent ruling in the Philippines, Pelegrina stated: “Greenpeace has constantly noted that GM crops have been approved in the Philippines despite the lack of robust data on safety assessments submitted by proponents. GM crops have never been proven safe and have hindered necessary progress on climate resilient ecological agriculture that keeps the control of seeds on our farmers.”

“We reiterate our stance — the involved companies and agencies have yet to show concrete evidence that these crops would be in the best interest of Filipinos, our environment and our agricultural sector,” she adds.

Proponents of golden rice emphasize its humanitarian goals, particularly in addressing vitamin A deficiency in developing countries.Proponents of golden rice, such as Plant ETP, argue that such arguments are often fueled by misconceptions about the development of the crop and its potential impacts, pointing out that genetic modification is not a new or unnatural process.

Pelegrina further argues: “There are specific problems with Golden Rice farmers who brought this case with us — along with local scientists — currently grow different varieties of rice, including high-value seeds they have worked with for generations and have control over.”

“They’re rightly concerned that if their organic or heirloom varieties get mixed up with patented, genetically engineered rice, that could sabotage their certifications, reducing their market appeal and ultimately threatening their livelihoods.”

Well-known agronomist and geneticist Dr. Gurdev Khush responds to these fears. “The population of the Philippines was 30 million during the 1960s, and farmers used to grow low-yielding heirloom rice varieties,” he explains. “Now, the population of the Philippines is 120 million, and farmers have switched to growing high-yielding rice varieties, which produce three to four times more rice.”

“Since farmers no longer plant heirloom varieties, the Philippines Department of Agriculture does not have any program for certification of heirloom varieties. There are no organic rice varieties, either. Any variety, whether heirloom or high-yielding, if grown without fertilizer and pesticides, produces organic rice,” he continues.

“Therefore, there is no danger of contamination. Moreover, it should be emphasized that there is no patent on golden rice and farmers can grow golden rice without paying extra fees.”

A 2022 report by VIB (Vlaams Instituut voor Biotechnologie) similarly highlights the safety of golden rice while pointing out that there are countries in Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas with severe (more than 20% of the population) vitamin A deficiencies. Experts question the effects that the golden rice ban in the Philippines may have in other societies where access to the vitamin is a concern.

By Milana Nikolova

To contact our editorial team please email us at editorial@cnsmedia.com