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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Editorials & Other Articles
In reply to the discussion: Nobel Award Winners ask Greenpeace to stand on scientific consensus, instead of against it [View all]kristopher
(29,798 posts)7. Genetically modified Golden Rice falls short on lifesaving promises
Genetically modified Golden Rice falls short on lifesaving promises
GMO activists not to blame for scientific challenges slowing introduction, study finds
By Gerry Everding June 2, 2016
Heralded on the cover of Time magazine in 2000 as a genetically modified (GMO) crop with the potential to save millions of lives in the Third World, Golden Rice is still years away from field introduction and even then, may fall short of lofty health benefits still cited regularly by GMO advocates, suggests a new study from Washington University in St. Louis.
Golden Rice is still not ready for the market, but we find little support for the common claim that environmental activists are responsible for stalling its introduction. GMO opponents have not been the problem, said lead author Glenn Stone, professor of anthropology and environmental studies in Arts & Sciences. (Emphasis added - k)

...GMO proponents often claim that environmental groups such as Greenpeace should be blamed for slowing the introduction of Golden Rice and thus, prolonging the misery of poor people who suffer from Vitamin A deficiencies.
In a recent article in the journal Agriculture & Human Values, Stone and co-author Dominic Glover, a rice researcher at the Institute for Development Studies at the University of Sussex, find little evidence that anti-GMO activists are to blame for Golden Rices unfulfilled promises.

The rice simply has not been successful in test plots of the rice breeding institutes in the Philippines, where the leading research is being done, Stone said. It has not even been submitted for approval to the regulatory agency, the Philippine Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI).
....
GMO activists not to blame for scientific challenges slowing introduction, study finds
By Gerry Everding June 2, 2016
Heralded on the cover of Time magazine in 2000 as a genetically modified (GMO) crop with the potential to save millions of lives in the Third World, Golden Rice is still years away from field introduction and even then, may fall short of lofty health benefits still cited regularly by GMO advocates, suggests a new study from Washington University in St. Louis.
Golden Rice is still not ready for the market, but we find little support for the common claim that environmental activists are responsible for stalling its introduction. GMO opponents have not been the problem, said lead author Glenn Stone, professor of anthropology and environmental studies in Arts & Sciences. (Emphasis added - k)

Golden Rice on Time cover
Proclaimed as a potential life saver 16 years ago on the cover of Time, Golden Rice may still be years away from approval.
...GMO proponents often claim that environmental groups such as Greenpeace should be blamed for slowing the introduction of Golden Rice and thus, prolonging the misery of poor people who suffer from Vitamin A deficiencies.
In a recent article in the journal Agriculture & Human Values, Stone and co-author Dominic Glover, a rice researcher at the Institute for Development Studies at the University of Sussex, find little evidence that anti-GMO activists are to blame for Golden Rices unfulfilled promises.

Washington University anthropologist Glenn Stone, shown here with an agricultural field agent, has studied rice cultivation and research in the Philippines since 2013. (Photo: Glenn Stone)
The rice simply has not been successful in test plots of the rice breeding institutes in the Philippines, where the leading research is being done, Stone said. It has not even been submitted for approval to the regulatory agency, the Philippine Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI).
....
https://source.wustl.edu/2016/06/genetically-modified-golden-rice-falls-short-lifesaving-promises/
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
31 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
Nobel Award Winners ask Greenpeace to stand on scientific consensus, instead of against it [View all]
HuckleB
Jul 2016
OP
Hardly, although you said that about me on a thread yesterday and on another the day before that.
proverbialwisdom
Jul 2016
#11
No, I am not "being quite disgusting." It is regrettable that you or anyone might feel that way.
proverbialwisdom
Jul 2016
#14
The content of your constant spam posts promoting debunked views is very disgusting.
HuckleB
Jul 2016
#17
I POST SOLIDLY VETTED INFORMATION ONLY, not opinion. Disregard or explore, as you wish. nt
proverbialwisdom
Jul 2016
#21
A cherry picked opinion piece by someone not even in the field is your defense of the indefensible.
HuckleB
Jul 2016
#16
It's peer reviewed work by a highly regarded anthropologist working on this specific problem.
kristopher
Jul 2016
#18
The mouthbreathers are just gonna try to say that the Nobel laureates are
Dr Hobbitstein
Jul 2016
#9