Escamilla, Irish E.

BSN 1-YA-33

Final Activity No.2 : The Biodiversity and Healthy Society

Impacts of GMOs on Golden Rice

Golden rice is a biofortified, genetically engineered rice. Crops that have been biofortified
have a higher nutritional value. Golden rice has been genetically modified to produce
beta-carotene, an antioxidant that isn't ordinarily found in rice. When beta-carotene is
digested by the human body, it becomes vitamin A. Vitamin A is necessary for healthy skin,
immune systems, and vision.

Golden rice has the potential to save millions of lives and reduce the suffering of children
and adults in underdeveloped countries who suffer from VAD and micronutrient
malnutrition. Allowing it to develop further may also open up new opportunities for
improving genetically modified, biofortified crops to alleviate micronutrient deficiencies in
developing nations, which is golden rice's main benefit. Supporters of the project feel that
the benefits of golden rice exceed the hazards it poses to poor countries' public health.

The Golden Rice Project was marketed as an intriguing solution to VAD in developing
countries when it was originally presented. However, opposition to the GMO arose, halting
the project's expansion. Friends of the Earth, MASIPAG, a farmer-led network of groups
based in the Philippines, and Greenpeace were among the many people and organizations
who tried to stop the Golden Rice Project. Simultaneously, proponents of the project, such
as the International Rice Research Institute or IRRI and the Humanitarian Board for Golden
Rice, continued to laud its advantages. It is evident that the golden rice controversy is about
more than just golden rice; it is also about genetically modified organisms in general.

Many anti-GMO activists fear that planting and eating golden rice would have severe
implications. Allergies or antibiotic resistance are two possible risks. Inadvertently
introducing genetically modified foods into the food supply is also a possibility when GMO
crops are planted near non-GMO crops without the knowledge of consumers. There are
concerns about the impact of genetically modified crops on the environment because they
would have to be farmed. Is it possible that the crops will have a negative influence on
biodiversity? When genetically engineered crops crossbreed with wild species, a potential
threat to biodiversity occurs. Another issue is the proliferation, emigration, or
cross-pollination of genes from genetically engineered crops. This could result in pesticide or
herbicide resistance, which would be undesirable. There's a chance that other creatures that
eat genetically engineered crops may be impacted, just as there's a chance that humans will
be. There have been few studies on the long-term effects of cultivating and eating golden
rice.
reference:

Tang Grusak MA. (2009) Golden rice is an effective source of vitamin A

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/89/6/1776/4596817

https://med.nyu.edu/departments-institutes/population-health/divisions-sections-centers/m
edical-ethics/education/high-school-bioethics-project/learning-scenarios/gmos-the-golden-ri
ce-debate

Impact of GMOs on Bt Corn

There is a case to be made to call on the Department of Agriculture to review the permits
given to glyphosate producers, particularly Monsanto Corp., in view of the health and
environmental issues being hurled against its glyphosate product Roundup around the
world.
Most recently, Monsanto’s parent company, Germany-based conglomerate Bayer, has faced
stockholder criticism over thousands of cancer lawsuits in the United States tied to its
weedkiller.

The wave of stockholder pressure was due to forty-percent devaluation of its stock value
since acquiring Monsanto last year.

The string of lawsuits had been ongoing in the US, with a minimum of 13,400 plaintiffs, with
two California juries finding that Roundup indeed caused cancer. Damien Conover, an
analyst who covers Bayer for Morningstar, estimates that it could wind up paying €2 billion
($2.2 billion) in costs related to glyphosate litigation.

This is a situation that could similarly be seen in the Philippines, given the strong positioning
of Monsanto in the country’s agriculture sector.
Proactive policy regulations on pesticides should DA Secretary Emmanuel Pinol to undertake
preliminary inquiries on the extent of the use of Roundup in the Philippines and conduct
testing to validate the claims of plaintiffs around the world. In fact, no less than the World
Health Organization has labeled glyphosate as probably carcinogenic.

This is therefore no small matter that should be only left to middle-level executives within
the agriculture agency, as this may affect not only the health of our farmers, but also the
consuming public in general. It should be noted that world agriculture leader France has
decided to ban glyphosate for its main uses by 2021, and for all its uses within the next five
years. A Brazilian court has also suspended all new products containing glyphosate.

These developments should most certainly give the Philippine government pause in further
allowing the permits for Monsanto’s weedkiller.

reference:

https://www.france24.com/en/20191209-france-glyphosate-weedkiller-bayer-monsanto-rou
ndup-cancer-ban-eu-european-union-macron-health-environment-anses