Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Over 80 percent of Americans support "mandatory labels on foods containing DNA" [View all]Major Nikon
(36,843 posts)85. All of those options are far more expensive, and it's not even close
The propaganda you are promoting is both outdated and just plain wrong
The New York Times Magazinereported in 2001 that one would need to eat 15 pounds of cooked golden rice a day to get enough vitamin A. What was an exaggeration then is demonstrably wrong now. Two recent studies in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition show that just 50 grams (roughly two ounces) of golden rice can provide 60% of the recommended daily intake of vitamin A. They show that golden rice is even better than spinach in providing vitamin A to children.
Opponents maintain that there are better ways to deal with vitamin A deficiency. In its latest statement, Greenpeace says that golden rice is neither needed nor necessary, and calls instead for supplementation and fortification, which are described as cost-effective.
To be sure, handing out vitamin pills or adding vitamin A to staple products can make a difference. But it is not a sustainable solution to vitamin A deficiency. And, while it is cost-effective, recent published estimates indicate that golden rice is much more so.
Supplementation programs costs $4,300 for every life they save in India, whereas fortification programs cost about $2,700 for each life saved. Both are great deals. But golden rice would cost just $100 for every life saved from vitamin A deficiency.
To be sure, handing out vitamin pills or adding vitamin A to staple products can make a difference. But it is not a sustainable solution to vitamin A deficiency. And, while it is cost-effective, recent published estimates indicate that golden rice is much more so.
Supplementation programs costs $4,300 for every life they save in India, whereas fortification programs cost about $2,700 for each life saved. Both are great deals. But golden rice would cost just $100 for every life saved from vitamin A deficiency.
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-costs-of-opposing-gm-foods-by-bj-rn-lomborg
Anti-GMO organizations are spending millions on disseminating Golden Rice false propaganda. To use your economic argument, why aren't they spending that money buying and distributing vitamin supplements?
Most ironic is the self-fulfilling critique that many activists now use. Greenpeace calls golden rice a failure, because it has been in development for almost 20 years and has still not made any impact on the prevalence of vitamin A deficiency. But, as Ingo Potrykus, the scientist who developed golden rice, has made clear, that failure is due almost entirely to relentless opposition to GM foods often by rich, well-meaning Westerners far removed from the risks of actual vitamin A deficiency.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
104 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Over 80 percent of Americans support "mandatory labels on foods containing DNA" [View all]
alp227
Jan 2015
OP
I am going to go out on a limb and assume that this is seen as a great reason to not label
djean111
Jan 2015
#1
Obviously not all illnesses are either acute or fatal + chronic diseases are exploding in the US.
proverbialwisdom
Jan 2015
#59
www.FoodDemocracyNow.org:"Dan Quayle & Michael Taylor's Nightmare Lives On - 20 years of GMO Policy"
proverbialwisdom
Jan 2015
#72
If the choices you are advocating are either NO GMO labeling or SOME GMO labeling,
djean111
Jan 2015
#7
Thanks for that, I will wash the fruit more thoroughly. You have been very helpful.
djean111
Jan 2015
#40
"It's had a gene inserted that causes it to produce vitamin A, a common malnutrition problem"
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#13
of course we do. We're one of the reasons some people in other countries don't eat a varied diet.
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#29
Did you miss the part about how Golden Rice wasn't developed by any corporation?
Major Nikon
Jan 2015
#66
First, I never claimed it was "developed by a corporation". I said "the corporate solution is..."
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#67
So since Bill Gates funds Golden Rice research, he must want to make money off the 3rd world
Major Nikon
Jan 2015
#70
out of all that, you pulled out gates? There's a web of interests involved, and not charging
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#71
Believe it or not you can send them a check and your name will be added to the list
Major Nikon
Jan 2015
#76
if i send them a very BIG check, sure. but i'm not a 1%er, so i can't. wouldn't want to anyway.
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#77
You claimed it was a "corporate solution" which is an assertion you have yet to support
Major Nikon
Jan 2015
#79
I already responded to you about the "corporate solution". The technology is donated just
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#80
By faster and cheaper options, i'm referring to the use of fortified oils, fortified sugar, and
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#83
1) I said nothing about how much rice you'd have to eat to get some effect. I noted, however,
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#86
Sure, everyone who disagrees with Greenpeace is a "shill for business interests"
Major Nikon
Jan 2015
#94
Not sourcing it was my oversight. my apologies. Lombord is still a political scientist, not an
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#95
'The Black Swan' author Nassim Nicholas Taleb & team prove risks of GMOs are severely underestimated
proverbialwisdom
Jan 2015
#48
Practically no farmer has ever grown any foodstuff for any reason except profit.
goldent
Jan 2015
#10
so what? are you recommending we replace what's left of democracy with the dictat of the
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#53
a lot of those same people don't know much about vitamins and minerals either, but we have food
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#56
As opposed to giving equal weight to informed and uninformed opinion? N.T.
Donald Ian Rankin
Jan 2015
#97
so said those who took the vote from blacks in the south. "They're too stupid and uniformed to
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#98
January 15, 2015: "Tyrone Hayes on crooked science and why we should shun GMOs"
proverbialwisdom
Jan 2015
#42
Oh no, he can't be a scientist. He disagrees with the prevailing "wisdom" and all the "scientists"
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#57
Not if you called it water. But of course, if the intent is to "prove" that most people are stupid,
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#87
i don't know many 8 year olds who know what dihydrogen monoxide is. I'd guess we live in
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#89
what i feel sorry for is people who'd have the public believe that questions of public policy are
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#91
True, but if you want to get into ppb, you can say that about practically everything
Major Nikon
Jan 2015
#84
Clumsily phrased but I think folks want to know if their pears are spliced with spiders
TheKentuckian
Jan 2015
#22
I'm sure a roach and a banana have common marker too but it doesn't follow that I want
TheKentuckian
Jan 2015
#102