Sensible Decision-Making

After years of considering the safety of GMO products through research and innovation, the European Commission concluded "there is, as of today, no scientific evidence associating GMOs with higher risks for the environment or for food and feed safety than conventional plants and organisms."

Genetically modified plants meant for human consumption have been viewed with suspicion by a great many environmental organizations, by many considering themselves health critics, by governments whom GMO critics advise.  GMO food production, however, has undeniably resulted in higher crop yields with the capability to feed more people than ever before.

The controversial environmentalist and author Bjorn Lomborg points out that opponents of genetically modified foods have been successful in keeping a new cultivar of rice, called "golden rice" from markets requiring them.  "Golden rice" is a biogenetically engineered type of rice scientifically geared to biosynthesize beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A.

The point of producing this variety of rice was to produce a fortified food capable of acting as a dietary supplement in areas of the world where vitamin A is in short natural dietary supply.  Lack of vitamin A in countries like the Philippines puts children's health at risk. According to the World Health Organization vitamin A deficiency causes 250,000 to 500,000 children to go blind every year.

Half of these children suffering from vitamin A deficiency will die. The medical journal The Lancet estimates its own figures, that vitamin A deficiency kills 668,000 children under the age of five globally, every year. Anti-GM campaigners refuse to accept that golden rice represents a solution to vitamin A deficiency in parts of the world where it is a dreadful health problem for children.

Because the rice has been genetically modified, these campaigners insist they should not be used, that other, more conventional supplementation programs can help to combat vitamin A deficiency; handing out vitamin pills or adding vitamin A to staple products.  The problem with these alternatives is that they are infinitely more expensive to launch and to put in place than the vitamin A-enhanced golden rice.

Worth noting is that there has never been any documented deleterious human-health effects associated with GM foods intake. Food scientists and nutritionists are constantly assuring the public that genetically modified foods are safe and effective, and just as nutritional if not more so than conventionally grown plants.

An understandable enough antipathy toward the producers of GM seeds, large multinationals who stand to gain financially through the replacement of conventional seeds by more expensive, but also more productive GM seeds, aids in suspicion of the seeds. But the thing of it is, there is so much immediate benefit to be had by implementing distribution of golden rice for vitamin A deprived children that its usefulness cannot be denied.

We should be vigilant about the replacement of conventional food products with engineered types. But we should also be rational and intelligent about our decision making and acceptance if and when it is warranted. As it most definitely appears to be now, in this particular instance, when golden rice has the potential to save children's lives.