![]() |
A sample of Golden Rice
compared to conventional rice
|
By Edel-Quinn Agbaegbu
Last week, the print and electronic media in Nigeria were
awash again with a major propaganda news item on Genetically Modified Foods.
This time, a false alarm was raised by unidentified sources that Dangote and
Nigerian government have flooded Nigerian market with GMO rice. The news item
was followed with a warning that ''eating GMO rice is as bad as eating rice
laced with rat poison popularly known as sniper in Nigeria''. The news item was
clearly the handiwork of uninformed groups and persons who have consistently
been waging war against the policy of the Federal Government of Nigeria in
joining many forward-looking countries of the world to fight poverty and hunger
through modern Biotechnology. The propaganda is bound to fail because it is a
product of falsehood and the National Biosafety Management Agency in Nigeria
has reacted by unequivocally debunking the fake news.
This article is meant to lead readers to have a deeper
insight on the issues at stake and the inherent falsehood in the raging
propaganda. The controversial commodity is called Golden Rice (GR).
The idea behind Golden
Rice is to improve the food that people have access to or can grow themselves.
The intention of using rice as a vehicle to address micronutrient deficiencies
dates at least to the early 1980s. The idea emerged within the Consultative
Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) system and led to the
conventional breeding efforts to increase iron and zinc in rice in the 1990s.
In 1982, from David Dawe of Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) case study, researchers in Indonesia found that child mortality is
reduced by 30% by distributing vitamin A supplement in poor villages. With
support from the Rockefeller Foundation (RF) in the 1990s, Professor Ingo
Potrykus at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and Peter Beyer at the
University of Freiburg, Germany collaborated to the creation of vitamin A
fortified rice. In 2000, after years of research, these scientists successfully
produced the first strain of golden rice, using daffodils genes and bacteria.
This genetically modified rice that contains beta-carotene is widely referred
to as Golden Rice (GR).
Subsequent research by Syngentia has utilized cereal genes
rather than daffodil genes to generate much higher levels of beta-carotene in
so-called GR2 Lines (Paine et al., 2005). In these lines, the enzymatic
activities in the genes found within maize or rice is utilized to produce much
higher levels of beta-carotene in the rice grain which are 20 times higher than
the original line.
In
September, 2004, the first GR field trial in the world was harvested in Crowley
Louisiana, USA. It took several years before GR could be planted in an open
field. This delay was because the target countries, with high rice consumption
and high vitamin A deficit did not have biosafety regulations in place. This is
a necessary condition attached to the agreement with GR licensees that no field
releases may take place in the absence of a national regulatory framework.
As
at 2013, Philippines has completed its multi-location field trials and is in
the process of feed testing. The International Rice Research Institute and the
Philippines Rice Research Institute are working to commercialize this GR this
2016.
Golden
Rice is genetically modified to provide beta-carotene in the rice grain and it
could potentially address widespread vitamin A deficiency in poor countries
were rice is a staple. Very significantly, GR improves vitamin A status so that
it could become a solution to address vitamin A supplementation, the promotion
of breastfeeding, nutrition education, homestead food production and food
fortification. In 2012, a study by Tang et al, found that 100-150g of cooked GR
provides 60% of the Chinese recommended intake of vitamin A.
Creating
rice with beta-carotene content was not possible until the advent of
biotechnology. Much of the current funding for development comes from various
foundations and institutions including United State Agency for International
Development (USAID) and Monsanto.
The polished rice grain does not contain beta-carotene, a
vitamin A precursor, which the body converts into vitamin A. In low-Income
populations were rice is the primary staple, several micronutrient deficiencies
are chronic problems including Vitamin A Deficiency (VAD) which is often a
problem where rice gruel is used as a weaning food. Such deficiencies are
particularly pronounced in children who need greater nutrient density in food
to meet their high nutrient needs. VAD is responsible for 500,000 cases of
irreversible blindness and up to 2 million deaths each year and this was
referred to as “Nutritional Holocaust”. Particularly susceptible are pregnant
women and children. Across the globe, estimated 19 million pregnant women and
190 million children suffer from the condition. The good news however is that
dietary supplementation of vitamin A can eliminate VAD.
While the link between VAD and blindness captures public
attention, VAD is widely recognized as a globally significant problem. The
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (2004, p.4) estimates that “Vitamin A
Deficiency is compromising the immune systems of approximately
40% of the developing world’s under-fives and leading to the deaths of an
estimated one million young children each year”. This situation unfortunately
has not changed over the past decades.
Although scientists, multi-nationals, seed companies and the
CGIAR genuinely believed in the positive humanitarian potential of this
technology, negative reactions to GR were immediate and in many cases quite
emotional. All the opposing groups agree that VAD is an important problem but
objected to GR either as an inappropriate or ineffective solution based essentially
on the three points listed as follows:
i). That GM foods are inherently unsafe to human health and
the environment. GR poses risks of these kinds and thus will not achieve its
humanitarian goals.
ii).That rice is directly consumed by the poor, and thus the
poor would be "guinea pigs" for any human health impacts. Either GR
will not provide enough vitamin A to do any good or will provide too much,
resulting in vitamin A toxicity.
iii). That GR is part of the continued use of "Green
Revolution" technologies that are unsustainable and harmful to the poor.
In furtherance of their argument, they raised alarm in
Nigeria last week through online sources. They posted thus: "Alarm...
Dangote and Nigerian government have flooded Nigerian market with GMO rice, pls
note: eating GMO rice is as bad as
eating rice laced with rat poison popularly known as sniper in Nigeria, GMO
products are banned all over Europe due to its deadly effects, pls share this
info to create awareness and save lives... Sent as received. thanks"
Those opposed to GM technology allegedly for ethical,
environmental or health concerns seem to have felt that this represented a
commercial conspiracy to win over the public. They wanted to debunk this
technology because of perceived diversion of attention from potential negative
impacts to positive impacts. It is unfortunate that this scientific
breakthrough generated so much attention when it remained fairly far from
implementation.
The suspicion often caused by the anti-globalization activists
against GMO crops (but not GMO processed foods like cheese and beer or medical
applications like insulin and many new drugs) paradoxically reinforced an
"environmentally justified" set of regulatory hurdles which only
large companies can afford. As such, they end up shooting themselves at the
foot while the farmers and consumers who would benefit from those crops are
collateral victims as there seems to be no scientific justifications for these
high regulatory costs.
In a press briefing on September 7, 2016, by Dr. Rufus
Ebegba, Director General/CEO, National Biosafety Management Agency
unequivocally stated that there is no iota of truth in the issues raised in the
alarm against alleged imported GM rice. ''As a Regulatory Body established by
the government to regulate the activities of modern biotechnology and the
release and use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in the country to
ensure safety to the environment and human health, the NBMA wishes to
unequivocally state that, there is no iota of truth in the said post and
reinstates that no GM Rice has either been imported or released officially into
the country.''
He further stated that "It will suffice you to know that
there is no GM rice that has been commercially released anywhere in the world.
It should also be recalled that government has banned the importation of rice
in Nigeria. This ban was widely publicized in the media and there are no
indications that the ban has been lifted." The DG therefore enjoined
Nigerians to disregard the post and join hands with the agency in its quest to
ensure safety in the practice of modern biotechnology in Nigeria in line with
global best practices.
GR has the potential to reach the important sub-populations
that have not been targeted by current interventions in parts where rice is the
predominant staple and weaning food. Several studies are currently trying to
assess the potential benefit of GR using different economic methods and
building their analysis on some strong assumptions about nutritional benefits.
Because GR is still so far from actual production and consumption, little is
known about bioavailability, losses in storage or cooking or many other factors
that would influence the actual delivery of vitamin A. These studies are
beginning and will help define the deployment options of the product.
It is instructive to note also that the pro GMO advocacy has
been growing from strength to strength globally. This summer, 110 Nobel
Laureates signed a letter urging Greenpeace to end its efforts to stop GR from
coming into the market. Earlier, on November 7, 2013, Pope Francis also gave
his personal blessing to GR.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please restrict your comment to the subject matter.