GM(Genetically Modified) Rice Amidst Question
A new perspective on genetically modified rice answers some controversial questions.
It could feed the hungry world, bring around vitamin and mineral deficiency, and cease crop failure. Altogether, these promises of the genetically modified (GM) rice still couldn’t lurch some non-government organizations.
Scientists at the Philippine Rice Research Institute have embarked on a seven-year (2004-2011) project to develop golden grain wonder called “3-in-1 rice.” Aside from being resistant to Tungro Rice Disease and Bacterial Leaf Blight, one such crop is also fortified with Vitamin A, iron and zinc.
Nowadays, most children and pregnant women around the world lack these minerals and vitamin. According to the Golden Rice Network, about one billion pregnant women in Asia are iron deficient; another 2billion people lack zinc; and an estimated of about 250 million children are Vitamin A deficient.
“The 3-in-1 rice is expected to provide direct benefits to consumers, such as increased levels of micronutrients, in the hopes of boosting the nutrition of a rice-dependent population like the Philippines,” said Alicia Ilaga, Department of Agriculture’s (DA) Biotechnology Program Office (BPO) director.
With the 3-in-1 rice, Ilaga added that it can withstand attack from pests, diseases and hostile environments. It increases producer profitability, she says, through cost reductions or higher yields.
A study from the DA’s BPO revealed that more farmers are eager to try the new rice variety hoping to reduce their costs and losses that are brought about by pests. “The stakeholders survey on rice biotechnology indicated that there is awareness among rice farmers and consumers on the emerging GM rice,” said Ilaga.
Majority, or 66% of the respondents affirmed their acceptance of the 3-in-1 rice and are willing to sell, plant or buy them.
In terms of willingness to pay for price increases of this rice, using Vitamin A-adequacy and no use of pesticide or insecticide, the results indicated that 29% of respondents are not willing to pay any incremental price.
On the other hand, 51% are willing to pay price increments of 1% to 10% for pro-Vitamin A rice and pest or insect-resistant 3-in-1 rice.
Ilaga said that the impact study of the 3-in-1 rice covered close to 1000 farmers and consumers, randomly picked in the provinces of Isabela, Nueva Ecija, Iloilo, Davao del Sur and Davao del Norte.
With all the favorableness, the world’s leading environmental non-government organizations, however, aren’t plainly swayed. Greenpeace, Wild Worldwide Fund (WWF) and Friends of the Earth still believe that traditional farming should remain as it has been proven successful for centuries.
Greenpeace claimed that there are as many as 140,000 varieties of rice, which have been developed without genetic tampering to resist particular diseases or pests and to survive calamities such as drought.
“No one knows what the long-term health impact of GM rice is, and using GM rice seeds leads to the trap of having to buy the chemicals sold by the companies selling the seeds,” Greenpeace said.
The International Rice Research Institute, located in the Philippines reduced its insecticide use by 95% between 1993 and 2003, “with no yield loss” and a further study found that 80% of pesticide sprays used in the Philippines were “unnecessary,” Greenpeace pointed out.
But, according to a study of DA’s BPO, consumption of 3-in-1 rice could not lead to intoxication due to overdose in Vitamin A. “It only contains Vitamin A precursor betacarotene, which is utilized by the body only when it suffers from Vitamin A deficiency,” Ilaga said.
In addition, the 3-in-1 rice will undergo rigorous environment and food safety evaluations before it would be released for commercial use. The conduct of studies under the supervision of the National Commission on Biosafety of the Philippines and the DA should adequately, said Ilaga, address concerns regarding the biosafety of the 3-in-1 rice.
“The future commercialization of 3-in-1 rice remains uncertain,” Ilaga noted, “given the current social environment surrounding GM crops in general and the likely tendency of society to be skeptical of their potential benefits.”
After all, Greenpeace argues it is not anti-science or anti-biotechnology and encourages the use of techniques such as Marker-Assisted Selection, which allows scientists to breed pest- or weather-resistant crops by identifying which gene is responsible for the resistance, then repeatedly cross-breeding and backcrossing them to eliminate undesirable inherited traits until the desired crop has been achieved.
Meanwhile, WWF said the system of rice intensification (SRI) can save “billions of cubic meters” of water every day, or 40% less than conventional methods, while increasing yields by more than 30%.
SRI is based on farming methods first adopted in Madagascar in the i98os, which include the developing of nutrient-rich, unflooded nurseries; planting of rice seedlings further apart from each other; using composts or manure instead of chemical fertilizers; and controlling the amount of water the rice receives.
WWF says that if this method was implemented, not only would it save water and bring food security, it would also help the environment. “SRI rice fields do not emit methane,” stressed WWF.
Standing for the work of 8.25 million farmers in 17 countries, there is approximately 81-million hectare worth of GM crops presently being grown in the world, seed producer Syngenta disclosed.
They are spread primarily between five countries such as the United States, Canada, Argentina, China and Brazil. According to TheCampaign.org, these countries account for 98% of the $44 billion GM crop market.
Definitely, WWF showed that rice is the most significant crop because more than 50% of the world’s population and 2 billion people in Asia have relied on this. Asia, which is cultivating and consuming 90% of the world’s rice, is the globe’s biggest rice market, said Greenpeace.
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations said we will globally produce about 633 million tons of rice this year. However, after 20 years, such production wouldn’t be sufficed, the European Association for Bioindustries, or EuropaBio, lamented.
While the population continues to grow, the rice industry will have new customers, reaching 1 billion annually and needing 200 million tons more of rice than what we have today. In meeting the nutritional needs of these people, EuropaBio said that food production will have to “more than double” in under 40 years.
