Talk:Golden rice
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Golden rice is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
 To-do list for Golden rice: |
edit · history · watch · refresh | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|||
| Priority 5 | |||
Contents |
[edit] Nutritional Value
Do the proponents of golden rice really say that golden rice is a viable option instead of eating better and more diverse food than just a bowl of rice a day? BedrupsBaneman GMT 17:36 2005-04-08
If you read the article, you'll notice the statement is not that golden rice is better than a mixed diet, but that it's better than ordinary rice for people who can get rice but can't get a mixed diet.--85.210.167.89 12:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
How many beta-carotene pills can you buy for the cost of the research behind the golden rice?
- Running a Vitamin A supplementation program in 3 countries-Ghana, Nepal, and Zambia, is estimated to cost USD2.9 million a year [1], its not just the pills that the money its the entire distribution network. Vitamin A deficency is a public health problem in 118 countries, so its probaly at least 100 million a year to supplement the way its done now. Golden rice has not had 100 million invested in tis development.--nixie 23:30, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Let me rephrase my question above: How many carrots a day will give a sufficient amount of beta-carotene? Just to give a tool for understanding the benefits or lack thereof of golden rice. Bedrupsbaneman 16:12, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
That objection is currently expressed in the article:
"Vandana Shiva, an Indian anti-GMO activist, argued that the problem was not
particular deficiencies in the crops themselves, but problems with poverty
and loss of biodiversity in food crops. These problems are aggravated by the
corporate control of agriculture based on genetically modified foods. By
focusing on a narrow problem (vitamin A deficiency), Shiva argued, the golden
rice proponents were obscuring the larger issue of a lack of broad availability
of diverse and nutritionally adequate sources of food."
- Bevo 18:34, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
You don't need a lot of vegetables to get enough beta-cartoene, but in many parts of the developing world over 80% of the diet consists of rice because people simply don't have the money to buy vegetables or have access to land to grow them themselves. The supporters of golden rice aren't arguing that golden rice is better than a balanced diet, they are trying to provide a tool that will improve nutrition for millions of people, for no charge. --nixie 23:59, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
By playing with numbers on the golden rice and vitamin articles (and external links) it seems that circa 180grams of golden is enough to reach the RDA of vitamin A. But also look at the NIH page linked in the vitamin A article, it gives figures that indicate that one carrot per day is more than enough. Nixie says that 80% of the food is rice, what is the other 20%? One kilo of carrots costs ca 1USD in the EU/US. How much does it cost in the areas of high incidence of VAD compared to the cost of rice? i.e. mainly south and east asia?
The golden rice will not be free of charge for the consumers. It will have a price tag just as normal rice. The no-charge is the free license given to anyone selling less than 10 000 USD of golden rice annually. See the article.
That someone cannot afford to buy one carrot a day seems really staggering to me. Which makes me ask myself: Who are they, where do they live, and how and why did they end up in this dilemma? I.e. more precisely, who are the intended customers for the golden rice? Bedrupsbaneman 5 July 2005 17:46 (UTC)
It easy to ignorant about just how bad poverty in the developing world is, read the WHO for the extent of VAD. It not just malnutrition that contributes to the problem, its also chronic starvation, the latest UNICEF put the number at 90 million starving children worldwide. If is was as easy as replacing some rice with some carrots, I'd have though there wouldn't still be this problem (FAO is down so I can't get calorie breakdown now). I see golden rice as somce extra bang for you buck.--nixie 5 July 2005 22:12 (UTC)
From the FAO food security statistics for some countries in Southeast Asia that are targets for Golden Rice. Share in total Dietary Energy Consumption (percent) 2000-2002 and prevelance of undernutrition in children under the age of 5 (years vary with last survey); Bangladesh, Rice 72%, vegetables 2%, 47.9% children underweight; Cambodia, Rice 70%, vegetables 1%, 45.2% children underweight; Laos 65% rice, vegetables ~8%, 40.4% children underweight ; Myanmar, rice 70%, vegetables 1%, 36% children underweight. The rest of the calories come mostly from vegetgable fats, with some animal protein/dairy, and some legume consumption. On a grams per day it roughly 500g of rice to about 50g of starchy vegetables (potatoes etc) and 30g of other vegetables in the case of Bangladesh, keep in mind these are averages and may be reduced due to wastage. I weighed an average size carrot from my fridge, its about 120g, clearly these people are eating less vegetables than that daily. --nixie 13:37, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
How would the nutritional value of these people be affected if they ate unpolished rice instead of polished rice? There probably are a lot of micro-nutrients including pro-vitamin A in the removed parts.Bedrupsbaneman 11:16, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
Rice is polished to improve the shelf life - it doesn't have anything to do with the preference of westerners. It would ridiculous to harvest tonnes of rice and have it go rotten in half the time. This would worsen the food security situation somewhat don't you think? All rice producers polish between 60-70% of the rice they produce [2]. Also, according to the nutritional data, now added to the article, both brown and white rice lack beta carotene, but brown rice does contain more of other micronutrients. --nixie 00:29, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
I had a look around on the www and found at that it is oils only present in brown rice that oxidises and thus lower the quality of the brown rice if stored in contact with air. Solution: keep the brown rice away from air by putting it into airtight containers, or even replace air with nitrogen in the atmosphere in the package. This will increase the shelf life from 6 months to at least one year for both consumption and seeding. For example see GrainPro . Many sites mention putting the rice in a fridge but that is not really an feasible option in this case. Bedrupsbaneman 18:50, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
Btw: Is it not usual to have two and even three harvest per year in south east asia? Harvests going bad or being eaten by insects, fungi and rats etc are probably amazingly common in south east asia if the harvested crops are not properly stored. I do not know how much money and resources there are to save if all the harvested crops were well stored. Bedrupsbaneman 18:17, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
I am currently reading an anthology over the use of transgenic organisms (GMO) with regards to farming and environment etc. Most of the the authors are positive to use of GMO for increasing the technical qualities (excluding poison resistance). However, in paragraph the word "rice fish" appeared. A quick look at www showed that were rainfall in consistent one often have fish in the rice paddies to control pests but also as an extra food source. Nowadays, NGOs and governmental agencies in south east asia are involved on a local basis to also make this possible in areas where rainfall is not always consistent. This will not increase the amount of the vitamin A in the diet but it will make it easier to adsorb any vitamin A that already is in the diet.
193.137.16.173 09:43, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] "yet" is TOO correct grammar! (even if this talk page section isn't...)
Okay, User:Petaholmes, "yet" is grammatically correct and also implies that Golden rice might eventually be available for human consumption. Saying something is not available for consumption makes it seem like it's possible that it was at one time available, as opposed to not "yet" available for consumption, which correctly implies that Golden Rice has not been available, but that it's expected as possible that it will be available for consumption in the future. (Sorry for the poor quality of this post. I'm really tired.) Robotbeat 09:59, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Since this is an encyclopedia it is best not to speculate about forthcoming events, golden rice probably won't actually be available for at least 3 or 4 years. Alluding to that fact is not encyclopedic writing.--nixie 10:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- I know, but the intent of the production of the rice is clearly for human consumption, which is made more obvious by the inclusion of the word "yet." I really don't care that much about it. I was really tired when I wrote this talk section last night. In fact, I don't think that this is worth spent another second arguing about. Sorry for wasting your time. Robotbeat 21:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] fumento.com addition
Golden Rice -Milled rice does not contains bets-cartene -Vitamin A defincency Afflicts over 200 million children and woman -About 500,000 children go blind (60 every hour!) -2 million chilren under 5 years die each year [www.fumento.com/img4/goldenrice.jpg]
- I moved the above because it was poorly formatted and likely in the wrong spot. Could be integrated into the article if it doesn't repeat anything, and can be sourced. - RoyBoy 800 20:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I would be interested in your thoughts on the following. I do feel we may be using a reductionist model when talking about golden rice in the context of its effectiveness. We should be looking at it at a higher level ie the root cause of the problem which is socio economic. In a world where obesity reigns in developed countries why do we have the complete opposite in developing ones? The following is a paper I wrote on the subject.
Journal of Nutritional & Environmental Medicine
Publisher: Taylor & Francis Issue: Volume 13, Number 3 / September 2003 Pages: 169 - 184 URL: Linking Options DOI: 10.1080/13590840310001619414
Vitamin A Deficiency and Golden Rice--A Literature Review
Nilva E. Egana A1
Abstract:
Purpose: To present one possible framework by which to appraise the potential for golden rice to prevent vitamin A deficiency (VAD)/xerophthalmia.
Design: Literature review.
Method: Twenty-nine articles were read and the term 'issue' was used for factors that the authors of the articles or secondary sources identified as being either causative or protective of VAD/xerophthalmia. The term 'issue' was not used exclusively to indicate that the factor caused VAD/xerophthalmia.
Setting: VAD and xerophthalmia in developing countries.
Main Outcome Measure: The number of issues identified and the frequency with which they occurred.
Results: Twenty issues were identified with varying degrees of frequency. Socio-economic/environmental, parasitic infestation and dark green leafy vegetables were the issues mentioned most frequently. Each issue was addressed in relation to golden rice. It is difficult to ascertain whether the frequency with which an issue was raised is relative to how important it is in relation to the other issues. It is interesting to note that socio-economic/environmental factors are regarded as the fundamental causes of VAD/xerophthalmia and in this review it was one of the most frequently occurring issues in the 29 articles.
Conclusions: It appears that the elimination of VAD/xerophthalmia in developing countries is not likely in the foreseeable future, even with the introduction of golden rice. This genetically modified rice does little more than add another supplement to the market. The World Health Organization and the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund have failed to eliminate VAD/xerophthalmia through the use of supplements, fortification and dietary modification. So of interest is the rationale behind spending public money to develop rice which has been genetically modified with pro-vitamin A when other supplements have failed. It is the socio-economic/environmental issues which impact on whether a population has VAD/xerophthalmia and these are not being addressed.Ginger28 13:53, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Greenpeace & GMO
Does Greenpeace indeed oppose all GMOs? http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/genetic-engineering says this: "We believe: GMOs should not be released into the environment as there is not adequate scientific understanding of their impact on the environment and human health."
I get the impression that Greenpeace does not oppose GMOs which are kept isolated from the natural enviroment, like GMOs that are kept only in laboratories. Greenpeace just opposes the use of GMOs out in the natural world. Shubi 23:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nutritional testing
I have removed the following statement because it is broad, unsubstantiated, and contrary to other cited information.
"Golden rice and Golden rice 2 have not yet undergone nutritional testing."
It is unclear what type of nutritional testing this statement refers to. Many references have cited information indicating that there has been testing done to determine Beta-carotene levels. If there are other specific tests which ought to be performed, but haven't been, this information ought to be included with a citation. If the statement was meant to refer more generally to a process of regulatory approval (e.g. deregulation by the FDA) which may include nutritional testing, then this too should be included with a citation. AAMiller 22:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bias
Sorry I'm new to editing Wikipedia so for now I'd just like to point out this statement, in the 'Opposition section':
Opponents of genetically modified foods, however, have yet to propose or act upon a viable solution to the problem of malnutrition.
The statement seems to be a 'weasel statement', unsourced, unverifiable, and biased. Really it reads like it's coming straight out of a press release defending GM foods. --ThanatosUroboros (talk) 03:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
