The campaign for genetically modified rice is at the crossroads

A critical look at Golden Rice after nearly 10 years of development

<http://www.foodwatch.de/foodwatch/content/e6380/e23456/e23458/GoldenRice_english_final_ger.pdf>

Christoph Then, www.scouting-biotechnology.net, January 2009

Commissioned by foodwatch in Germany

A preliminary stocktaking

What began in 1999 with a surprising success in technology has nowforced the hand of both advocates and critics of agricultural genetechnology. Critics are aware of the drastic consequences of vitamin A deficiency for many people. They face the reproach that their criticism of the development of Golden Rice has led to delays and that they therefore share the responsibility for the fate of humans affected by VAD. Advocates have thus turned the introduction of GM rice rather into a test of conscience. But a closer look at the situation reveals that this argument has in the meantime turned back on itself.

Golden Rice was supposed to solve all problems at once - find acceptance for GM food, solve a real problem, simplify approval procedures, and muzzle opponents. Under the pressure of self-created expectations, the project seems to have partially slipped out of its managers' hands. Plans to conduct trials with schoolchildren in China at the present moment in the project's development are scientifically and ethically questionable and should lead to scientists and financiers fundamentally rethinking the whole project. If some kind of success is being sought in such a rush, the project seems to have far less to do with concern about humans affected by VAD than about implementing a certain technology.

If recipes for Golden Rice are posted on the Internet without at least some information being provided on how much carotene is in the rice after four weeks of storage and 20 minutes of cooking, then the projec tmust face the suspicion that it is not about pursuing science to solve the problem of hunger but about making claims it cannot meet. If the project is to continue, scientists and financiers are best advised to make all data and information on its research absolutely transparent. Since the product is allegedly not being seen through for commercial interests, there is no reason to keep secrets. In addition, a broader and more participatory discussion process should be introduced in those regions of the world for which this product is intended, a debate in which critics and independent experts speak and in which the effort invested and the yield, risks and sustainability of the project are investigated from the bottom up. The managers of the project should take to heart the fact that, according to Science, specialists from WHO attribute more success to distributing vitamin tablets, fortifying normal food with vitamin A, and teaching people how to cultivate carrots and certain green vegetables, than to using gene technology. (Enserink 2008.)

SOURCE: http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=554

Anti-GM Rice Activists Arrested in Jakarta!

8 April 2008 : Fifteen people from six countries were arrested today in Jakarta (Indonesia) by Polda Jaya (the Police Corps of Jakarta Raya Territory) for participating in a peaceful people’s gathering to voice their protest against GM rice and call for saving the diversity of local rice to ensure people’s food security.

The demonstration, part of WORA (Week of Rice Action) that celebrates the rice culture of Asia, was jointly organized by Koalisi Rakyat untuk Kedaulatan Pangan (KRKP), Aliansi Gerakan Reforma Agraria (AGRA), Gabungan Serikat Buruh Independen (GSBI), Front Mahasiswa Nasional (FMN) and the Workers’ Union.

Those arrested include Sarojeni Rengam (PAN AP, Malaysia) and Rhoda Gueta (Asian Peasants’ Coalition) and 13 others, all foreigners, from Malaysia, Philippines, Korea, Thailand, India and Pakistan.

They were present at the demonstration as observers and were waiting in the bus, following the discussions between Ir. Anton Aprijantono, the Minister of Agriculture (Indonesia), and the 300-400 demonstrators, outside the Ministry, when they were suddenly forced to follow the police car to the police station, and where at the point of writing, they are still detained for the last five hours. They are being charged with violating the immigration laws of the country and contravening the “social” status of their visas.

Witoro of KRKP said that this is an over-reaction by the police who had been duly informed of the rally and the presence of international delegates in it. The organizers of the demonstration stated that the Indonesian police was abusing the people’s freedom of speech and demanded that all arrested be released immediately without any charge.

* * *

Reference: Biju Negi, PAN AP

Email:panap@panap.net
Tel: 0060-46570271/124949680

The Week of Rice Action (WORA) 2008 brings together farmers, rural communities, and other sectors of society to celebrate and protect rice culture. WORA 2008 “No to GE Rice in Asia” is being celebrated in Indonesia from 2-8 April.

WORA, initiated in 2007, is organised by Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific (PAN AP) and its partner organisations in Asia. Besides organizing a multitude of activities, it collected over a million signatures for the "People's Statement” on Saving the Rice of Asia" calling on policy-makers worldwide to protect Asia's rice heritage and food sovereignty.

IRRI Inc

http://www.grain.org/articles/?id=33

IRRI Inc

Consultative Group's rice research institute goes into business

GRAIN

The International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) has worked harder than any other institution, outside of China, to put hybrid rice [1] in Asia's paddy fields. For over twenty years now, the CGIAR [2] centre has bred parental lines, shared these with national agricultural research stations (NARS) and campaigned to the best of its ability to convince policy-makers of their importance. And now, after years of frustrating failures, hybrid rice is finally enjoying a mini-boom, with several countries in Asia now bankrolling their commercialisation and production and with the world's biggest seed companies, along with some emerging seed tigers in Asia, making big moves to take-over the market. [3]

The problem for IRRI though is that the boom is leaving them in the dust. Most of the deals happening in Asia are with Chinese corporations, utilising Chinese hybrid varieties. The few others are deals between the NARS and private companies, with the NARS collecting royalties on germplasm initially supplied by IRRI. To top it off, IRRI's own funding for hybrid rice has completely dried up, with no signs of any donors coming to the rescue; even long-time supporters like the Asian Development Bank are no longer interested in hybrid rice. [4]

Not wanting to close-up shop on its hybrid rice work, IRRI decided that something needed to be done to restore its central place in the hybrid rice world. One option, on the table for several years, was to take a more aggressive approach and start selling exclusive licenses to its hybrid parental lines. In other words, start acting like a regular seed business. ICRISAT, another CGIAR centre, had already gone in this direction-- creating a consortium of private sector companies that could bid for the rights to its hybrid lines for sorghum, pigeonpea and other crops. [5] But IRRI refused to follow.

"We will not give anybody exclusive rights to our seeds," IRRI's lead hybrid rice breeder SS Virmani told GRAIN in September 2004. "We want to keep them in the public domain." [6]

IRRI's now had a change of heart. On November 9, 2007, in the midst of the Asian Seed Congress, it announced the formation of its Hybrid Rice Research and Development Consortium.

IRRI's consortium is, for all intents and purposes, indistinguishable from ICRISAT's. It lays the foundation for a direct relationship between IRRI and private seed companies: IRRI supplies the parent lines and corporations, who gain exclusive rights to the varieties, handle the marketing. Even though IRRI says that the "primary beneficiaries" of the funds raised by the consortium will be the national public programmes working on hybrid rice, the money flows entirely to IRRI, and it keeps control of the background information on the parental lines. [7] This way, IRRI cuts the NARS out of the royalty stream and ensures that it remains the central hub for the development of new parental lines (See details of the Consortium in the box below).

IRRI justifies this major move into business by saying that it is the only way to salvage their work on hybrid rice. It believes that hybrid rice will be key to raising yields in the intensive, irrigated land areas and it argues that it is the only institution capable of carrying out the necessary research for the sub-tropical countries. The coordinator of the consortium, IRRI's Achim Dobermann, says they are "very concerned" by the promotion of Chinese hybrids in Asia's sub-tropics. He says that this germplasm was not developed for the region and, as a result, many of the hybrids will fail - "threatening the overall development of hybrid rice". [8]

To date, however, the evidence that IRRI's hybrid rice varieties increase yields is sketchy at best. Most evidence points in the other direction-- with embarrassing farmer drop-out rates from national hybrid rice programmes despite heavy subsidies. [9]

What hybrid rice has achieved, however, is the development of a private rice seed industry. From practically nothing a decade ago, corporations and their local partners are now investing millions of dollars to get into the rice seed market, with nearly all of this money flowing into hybrid rice. In 2007, all of the top 5 global seed companies announced major moves in Asia's hybrid rice seed industry. The largest being Vilmorin's purchase of a 46.5% stake in Yuan Longping High-tech Agriculture—one of China's largest hybrid rice seed companies and a major player outside of China. [10]

It is not the performance of hybrid rice that attracts seed companies; it's that farmers can't save seeds from these varieties, thus guaranteeing the companies a captive market. With the Consortium, they can leave the difficult basic breeding to IRRI while still getting the exclusive rights to the major markets in the end. The next step will of course be to modify these lines with their patented GM traits-- something not precluded by the terms of reference of the Consortium.

What about the obligation to the "public" that Virmani emphasised three years ago? The varieties that IRRI develops are based on the seeds that it holds, "in trust" for humanity, in its extensive seed collection. It bears repeating that these seeds were collected from farmers' fields. While it may be that the parental lines involved in the consortium have undergone considerable breeding by IRRI breeders, through the Consortium IRRI is still exercising monopoly privileges over the germplasm it holds and making money off of it-- by selling off the exclusive rights to it. IRRI can talk all it wants about the public benefits, but this cannot gloss over the betrayal at the heart of this operation.

Farmers and scientists unite to decry increased entry of GMOs!

Launches book against IRRI

News Release, November 7 2007

At a press conference at Quezon City, the militant Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP) and the Asian Peasant Coalition (APC) decried the increased entry of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) like the LL601, LL Rice 62 and the Uncle Sam Texas Long Grain Rice, in the country and the depletion of our traditional rice varieties. The groups also presented thousands of signatures of people aiming to protect rice culture.

According to Danilo 'Ka Daning' Ramos, concurrent secretary general of KMP and APC, 'this is the sorry state of our rice industry now and it is all because of the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), an institution which is mainly to blame for the deterioration of our country’s rice culture,'

'Farmers have long been protecting and preserving rice culture from genetically engineered (GE) rice but IRRI has almost destroyed all of this. Now we are launching this book IRRI Resource Kit titled 'Angry at IRRI' to help us save of what is left and be a useful tool in our education and advocacy work in defending our rice culture,' said Ramos.

Meanwhile Jun Layosa, coordinator of the Brotherhood of IRRI Workers Support Services Group (BISSIG) said 'IRRI did not only facilitate the influx of genetically modified organisms in the country, they also made some themselves and in the process we were evicted from our land and many of our friends and loved ones became sick and some of whom have already died. IRRI did not only take our land, they also took our health and our lives.'

'We hope that by this book the awareness of more people will be heightened against the dangers that IRRI poses against us and how we can combat it. We hope that people will use this book as a guide in guarding against threats to our rice culture and the health of the nation,' ended Layosa.

Ventria sowing a storm with altered rice

http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8475

COMMENT from Dr Doug Gurian-Sherman of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS): The food industry's concerns that production of this pharmaceutical protein in rice could have negative impacts on sales or exports are well founded. The industry's now long track record of contamination should not give anyone confidence that they can keep their pharma rice out of our food.

This article mentions that the Ventria company intends to market this product as a 'medical food'. This is an ill-defined regulatory category at the Food and Drug Administration that, similar to other GE crops, requires little regulatory oversight or safety testing.

The human-derived protein, called lactoferrin, that Ventria is producing in rice, is modified compared to the human version. This is the same class of modification that occurred in peas containing an engineered bean protein, reported several years ago to have acquired the ability to cause adverse immune responses in mice, and causing the CSIRO in Australia to cancel the project after a decade of work.

One type of adverse immune response that may be possible (although no one really knows for sure) is autoimmunity to the altered protein. This means that the body's built-in ability to distinguish its own proteins from foreign ones (e.g. from bacterial or viral pathogens), and thereby avoiding a dangerous immune response against one's own body, is lost. Well known autoimmune diseases are diabetes, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis. The disease that might be caused by an autoimmune response against one's own lactoferrin is not well understood, but any immune attack against important proteins in the body is cause for concern.

Especially troubling is that Ventria apparently is able to declare that this protein should be classified as a medical food rather than a drug, which would require rigorous safety testing. For example, another company, Agenix, is producing human lactoferrin in yeast in a contained facility for treating cancer, and is going through the typical drug safety-testing route. The actions of Ventria are yet another demonstration of the recklessness of the industry.

---

North Sacramento-based Ventria sowing a storm with altered rice
SacramentoBee, November 6 2007
http://www.sacbee.com/103/story/469124.html

ATTACK OF THE MUTANT RICE
Pg. 74 Vol. 156 No. 1 MARC GUNTHER
Fortune, July 9 2007 [U.S. Edition] http://www.bakingbusiness.com/news/newsfinder.asp?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=535&docId=l:631603763&topicId=14401&start=1&topics=single

AMERICA'S RICE FARMERS DID NOT WANT TO GROW GENETICALLY ENGINEERED RICE. THEIR CUSTOMERS IN EUROPE DID NOT WANT TO BUY IT. THEY NEVER EXPECTED THE...

ATTACK OF THE MUTANT RICE

Biopharm rice

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 17, 2007

Contacts: Dan Nagengast, Kansas Rural Center, 785-748-0959

Bill Freese, Center for Food Safety, 202-547-9359 x14

Bill Wenzel, Farmer to Farmer Campaign on Genetic Engineering, 608-444-0292

USDA Approval of Drug-Producing Rice in Kansas Poses Threat to Food Safety, Say Food Safety & Farming Groups

Tornadoes, Floods Could Contaminate Foods With Drugs Not Approved By FDA

20,000 Citizens, Scientists, Farming and Rice Organizations In Opposition

WASHINGTON — The Center for Food Safety, Kansas Rural Center and Farmer to Farmer Campaign on Genetic Engineering object to USDA’s May 16th approval of drug-producing rice cultivation in Kansas, charging that it poses needless risks to the safety of the American food supply. USDA’s approval permits cultivation in the Junction City area of up to 3,200 acres of rice genetically engineered to produce pharmaceutical compounds that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has refused to approve. FDA approval is not required for planting to proceed.

The groups note that the decision comes just a week after tornadoes in the Kansas River Valley and heavy rains caused severe flooding in east-central Kansas , including floodwaters on the Smoky Hill River , which passes just a mile from one of the proposed planting sites. USDA had earlier dismissed concerns raised by the groups that floodwaters could carry the pharmaceutical rice into surrounding cropland and contaminate farmers’ crops with drugs unapproved by the FDA. USDA concluded in its environmental assessment that: “Extreme weather events are rare and unlikely to occur in the area of the field trial.”

“About two weeks ago, I was huddled with other travelers in a rest stop on Interstate 70 as tornadoes were reported on the ground in the very area where Ventria proposes to expand their production between Junction City and Topeka ,” said Dan Nagengast, Executive Director of the Kansas Rural Center .

“I also question whether the company has adequately engineered their water control systems to deal with the amounts of torrential rainfall that are quite common here. This just represents an unconscionable food safety complication in a food-producing region. Why grow these crops in wide open nature, when other companies have found it possible to use genetic engineering techniques to produce biotech drugs in confined settings where food contamination is not an issue?”

USDA approved the “pharma rice” plantings despite receiving 20,000 comments in opposition from citizens, scientists, farming and rice groups. Groups opposing the scheme include the USA Rice Federation, U.S. Rice Producers Association, Riceland Foods, Mississippi Rice Council, Arkansas Rice Growers Association, Missouri Rice Research and Merchandising Council, and Rice Producers of California. In addition, fourteen independent scientists signed a joint scientific assessment warning of potential adverse health impacts from even trace-level exposure to one of the rice-produced drugs.

“These rice-grown drugs are unapproved by FDA, may be hazardous, and whether hazardous or not could cause huge economic losses to Kansas farmers whose wheat, soy or other crops become contaminated with drug rice,” said Bill Freese , Science Policy Analyst with Center for Food Safety.

“In 2002, corn containing an experimental swine vaccine got mixed into soybeans and regular corn, which then had to be destroyed at a cost of several millions dollars,” said Nagengast. “Over the past year, rice farmers have lost millions of dollars from contamination of their crop with unapproved genetically engineered rice grown under USDA’s watch,” he added.

“The USDA needs to stop rubber-stamping schemes like drug-producing crops that put farmers and the rural economies they support at great risk,” said Bill Wenzel, National Director of the Farmer to Farmer Campaign on Genetic Engineering. “The USDA should be focused on representing farmers rather than carrying water for the biotech industry,” he added.

Developed by California-based Ventria Bioscience, the rice is engineered with modified human genes to serve as a “biofactory” for production of synthetic human milk proteins that have antimicrobial and other drug-like properties. Ventria has proposed using the rice-extracted protein drugs to treat infants with diarrhea, and as additives in infant formulas, yogurt, granola bars and sports drinks, among other uses.

Last month, the Center for Food Safety released a report detailing the potential human health impacts of Ventria’s pharmaceutical rice and the FDA’s refusal to approve Ventria’s rice-grown drugs. The report, “A Grain of Caution,” also disputes the need for Ventria’s pharmaceutical rice, discussing cheap and effective solutions for prevention and treatment of diarrhea recommended by the World Health Organization and other public health experts. The report notes that these existing solutions have cut deaths due to diarrhea from 4.6 million a year in 1980 to 2 million today, and could save many more lives if adequate funding were provided.

Center for Food Safety’s “A Grain of Caution” is available at:

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/Pharmaceutical%20Rice-FINAL.pdf

For Center for Food Safety’s comments to USDA warning of contamination and other risks, see:

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/Biopharm%20Rice%20Kansas%20comments_final.pdf

__________

Center for Food Safety is a national non-profit membership organization working to protect human health and the environment by curbing the use of harmful food production technologies and promoting sustainable agriculture. In 2000/2001, CFS was part of a coalition that discovered widespread contamination of the food supply with genetically engineered StarLink corn, which had not been approved for human consumption due to concerns it could cause food allergies. In the past year, CFS has won three cases against USDA for the Agriculture Department’s reckless and illegal approval of genetically engineered crops. See www.centerforfoodsafety.org.

The Kansas Rural Center is a non-profit research, education and advocacy organization that promotes environmentally sound farming practices and a safe and healthy food system, benefiting both farmers and consumers. See www.kansasruralcenter.org.

The Farmer to Farmer Campaign on Genetic Engineering was formed in 1999 to provide a national voice for farmers on agriculture biotechnology. The Campaign provides education, training and support to farmers and farm groups on agricultural biotechnology issues.

Center for Food Safety

Kansas Rural Center

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 24, 2007

Contacts: Bill Freese or Joseph Mendelson, Center for Food Safety, 202-547-9359

Dan Nagengast, Kansas Rural Center, 785-748-0959

Genetically Engineered Pharmaceutical Rice Is Not the Solution to Diarrhea

Drugs in Rice Not Approved by FDA, Will Likely Contaminate Foods

Groups Urge Ban on All Drug-Producing Genetically Engineered Food Crops

WASHINGTON — Genetically engineered, pharmaceutical rice is not a safe or cost-effective solution for infants suffering from diarrhea, concludes an exhaustive report released today by the Center for Food Safety, as the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (USDA) considers whether to allow planting of the rice in Kansas this spring. The report discusses potential adverse health impacts of the rice-grown drugs, which have not been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Developed by California-based Ventria Bioscience, the rice is engineered with modified human genes to serve as a “biofactory” for production of synthetic human milk proteins that have antimicrobial and other drug-like properties. Ventria has proposed using the rice-extracted protein drugs to treat infants with diarrhea, and as additives in infant formulas, yogurt, granola bars and sports drinks, among other uses.

The report details Ventria’s failed attempts to gain FDA approval of its rice-grown drugs dating back to November 2003. Ventria is seeking USDA approval to grow up to 3,200 acres of its rice in the Junction City , Kansas area.

“USDA must not allow Ventria to grow genetically-engineered rice containing drugs that our nation’s food and drug authority have refused to approve,” said Joseph Mendelson, Legal Director at Center for Food Safety (CFS). “We call on USDA to unconditionally deny Ventria’s permits.”

“Policy makers in Kansas do not seem to have a sense of either the marginal benefits to be gained or the high risks entailed in this enterprise,” said Dan Nagengast, Executive Director of the Kansas Rural Center . “Clearly the food industry, and rice farmers elsewhere in the country, understand the risk to their businesses when contamination occurs.” He noted that rice supplies roughly 20% of the world’s calories.

Nagengast also pointed out that the USA Rice Federation, representing the rice industry, had asked USDA ‘in the strongest possible terms’ to deny Ventria’s requested permits. The Grocery Manufacturers of America and other groups representing the $500 billion food industry have also opposed drug-producing food crops.

“These genetically engineered drugs could exacerbate certain infections, or cause dangerous allergic or immune system reactions,” added Bill Freese , CFS Science Policy Analyst and author of the report, which references peer-reviewed scientific articles, the National Academy of Sciences, and FDA regulatory documents.

Freese notes that mothers of two infants who participated in a Ventria-sponsored clinical trial of its rice-grown drugs in Peru reported that their children had developed allergic reactions to numerous foods, leading to a Peruvian government investigation of the trial.

“USDA simply cannot be trusted to keep this pharmaceutical rice out of our foods,” said Nagengast. “Just a few years ago, corn containing an experimental swine vaccine got mixed into soybeans and regular corn, which then had to be destroyed. Rice has twice been contaminated with unapproved genetically engineered rice in just the past year,” he added.

The report also disputes the need for Ventria’s pharmaceutical rice, and discusses cheap and effective solutions for prevention and treatment of diarrhea recommended by the World Health Organization and other public health experts. The report notes that these existing solutions have cut deaths due to diarrhea from 4.6 million a year in 1980 to 2 million today, but are not adequately funded.

“What developing countries need most is clean water and basic sanitation facilities to prevent diarrhea, and improved access to existing oral rehydration solutions to treat it,” said Freese. “Even if Ventria’s rice-grown drugs eventually prove to be safe, they would be expensive, and divert funding from existing, cost-effective solutions that aren’t adequately funded,” he added.

__________

For the full report, go to http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/Pharmaceutical%20Rice-FINAL.pdf

.

Center for Food Safety is a national non-profit membership organization working to protect human health and the environment by curbing the use of harmful food production technologies and promoting sustainable agriculture. In 2000/2001, CFS was part of a coalition that discovered widespread contamination of the food supply with genetically engineered StarLink corn, which had not been approved for human consumption due to concerns it could cause food allergies. In the past year, CFS has won three cases against USDA for the Agriculture Department’s reckless and illegal approval of genetically engineered crops. www.centerforfoodsafety.org.

The Kansas Rural Center is a non-profit research, education and advocacy organization that promotes environmentally sound farming practices and a safe and healthy food system, benefiting both farmers and consumers. www.kansasruralcenter.org.

No to IRRI and biotech rice

IRRI TOLD TO GET OUT OF ASIA!

Week of Rice Action culminated in street protests

By Ilang-Ilang D. Quijano

Laguna, Philippines--- “IRRI out of Asia!” This was the resounding call of more than 1,000 Filipino farmers that trooped in front of the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) headquarters on April 3 to protest its’ 47th anniversary and to culminate the highly successful Asia-wide Week of Rice Action (WORA) led by Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific (PAN AP).

children also took to the streets

Kanji

GMO ACTION ALERT
Children With Diarrhoea need Rice “Kanji”, Not Cannibal Rice

Dr. Mira Shiva Dr. Vandana Shiva

Initiative on health, Equity and Society Navdanya / RFSTE

International Peoples Health Council (South Asia)

California based Ventria Bioscience has been given preliminary approval to grow a rice containing human genes on 3000 acres in Kansas.

The claim is that food products using the human proteins from rice could help save millions of children who die of diarrhoea and the resulting dehyrdration. The company plans to harvest the proteins from the rice and use them in drinks, desserts and muesli bars. Children with diarrohoea are not given muesli bars. Rehydration needs liquids, not solids.

The best rehydration for breast fed babies is mother’s milk. Ventria is in fact using the ‘lacto ferrin’ found in breast milk to produce the transgenic rice. Breast fed babies can directly get lacto ferrin in breast milk instead of getting it through Ventria’s “genetically engineered” rice with human genes in it.

Older Children, do not need the “cannibal rice” either. Oral rehydration is an established, time tested, safe method for diarrhoea and prevention of dehydration.

Oral Rehydration Therapy (ORT) / Oral Rehydration Solution (ORS) was considered the greatest medical revolution of the 20th century. It saved lives of millions starting from 1971 Bangladesh war of Independence and has been successfully used in the developing countries’ war for child survival. Diarrhoea and acute respiratory infection have been identified as the two major causes of infant mortality, worsened by the malnutrition of children.

While UNICEF / WHO ORS packets have been promoted, it has been the home made ORS called “Jeevan Jal” Salt sugar solution that has saved lives of children, especially where the free, low cost UNICEF ORS packets did not reach, and costly commercial ORS packets are the only alternative and the later are not easily affordable. A packet costs Rs. 6 – 10/- i.e for one litre. Over two packs may be required for each episode of diarrhoea. Large numbers of the afflicted children come from poor families whose income may be less than the cost of the packet. For over two decades anganwadi workers and village health workers, trained mothers and the community in making and using homemade ORS for the children with diarrhoea.

In India, for centuries, diarrhoea has been treated with home fluids for rehyrdration eg. Rice Kanji, Coconut Water, Butter Milk, Aniseed Water.

Rice Kanji not only provides calories to the child with diarrhoea, but it has an added advantage that it does no cause OSMOTIC DIARRHOEA. Butter Milk, besides providing fluid to compensate for the fluid loss in diarrhoea, it has natural Lacto Baccillus which helps in controlling diarrhoea. Lacto Baccillus capsules are being prescribed for diarrhoea care commercially.

When simple, low cost, locally available culturally appropriate safe and effective options for addressing diarrhoea care exist, as stated and promoted by International Public Health bodies such as UNICEF and WHO, International Peoples Health Council, there is absolutely no scientific, basis for a genetically modified rice with human genes to be introduced in the name of diarrhoea care.

Respected public health advocates David Werner of Health Wrights and David Sanders in “Questioning the Solution” had dealt with the politics of the ORS. They show that promotion of cereal based oral rehydration solution was delayed till the pharmaceutical companies could get their cereal based ORS packets commercially produced. This happened even though community health oriented health personnel, whether in India or Mozambique, recognised the value of cereal-based fluids and supported and promoted rice kanji – the rice fluid obtained by boiling rice. On epidemiological grounds, availability of clean drinking water and effective sewage treatment would be more useful in addressing water borne diseases like diarrhoea especially in the Third World. Promoting genetically modified rice with human genes in the name of diarrhoea care is an insult to the very concept of comprehensive health care – it is an unadulterated marketing stunt in the name of a diarrhoea care. The effective solution for which already exists and needs to be implemented and promoted as part of health literacy. Children need clean water and rice Kanji. They do not need untested “cannibal rice”.

FoE Africa Alert!: No to Medicine Rice

Monday, 12 March 2007

On the 6th of March 2007, it was reported in the media that a new variety of Genetically Modified (GM) rice containing human genes obtained preliminary approval from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) for large-scale planting in Kansas. California-based Ventria Bioscience, the developer of the rice, claims that it can be used to treat diarrhea. A BBC TV report on the 6th of March showed images of African children in a hospital as an example of some supposed beneficiaries of the new rice. FoE Africa believes that our continent does not need genetically modified solutions to diarrhea and condemns the use of African children as a tool to promote the new GM rice produced by Ventria Bioscience. Diarrhea is an illness that has well-known causes, and proven, inexpensive solutions. Ventria’s GM rice is unproven, unnecessary, and a distraction from ongoing programs to save children suffering from diarrhea on our continent. Click here to read/download full details.

PEOPLE’S STATEMENT ON SAVING THE RICE OF ASIA

We, representing the peoples and grassroots of Asia, state our strong stand on the issue of RICE in Asia and call upon all those responsible for agricultural and food policies at national, regional and international levels to take immediate action to safeguard the rice heritage of Asia.

PREAMBLE

Rice – the Life of Asia

Rice is Asia’s most deeply revered treasure. It is central to the Asian way of life; its culture, spirituality, traditions and norms. The staple food of three billion Asians, half the world’s population, Rice is Life to the people of Asia.

Rice has been grown in Asia for the last 7,000 years. Recent findings in China indicate that this may in fact be 10,000 years. Local and traditional rice varieties and ecological rice farming have sustained Asian rice farmers and consumers safely for most of foregone decades.

The core elements of this rich heritage of rice are enshrined in the “Five Pillars of Rice Wisdom”. These are: Rice Culture, Community Wisdom, Biodiversity-based Ecological Agriculture, Safe Food and Food Sovereignty.

******

We resolutely protest against:

• The use of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers on our rice farms. Rice-ecosystems should be conserved.

• The use and depletion of ground water in rice crop cultivation.

• High-input varieties and hybrid rice. Our local, traditional and farmer-bred rice varieties are good enough and healthier for us.

We resolutely reject:

• GE Rice. We do not want to feed ourselves or our children GE food in any form. We will unequivocally oppose the introduction of GE rice in Asia.

• The genetic modification, patenting or external ownership of our rice seeds in any way. There should be No Patents on Life!

• The WTO and its conditionalities and control over food and agriculture.

We resolutely condemn the actions of organizations like the International Rice Research Institute in collaborating with industry against the good of rice farmers and rice cultivation.

Arroz biofarmacéutico

WARNING OVER GM PHARMACEUTICAL FOOD CROPS AS USA PLANS TO ALLOW HUMAN GENES IN GM RICE

Meanwhile another GM rice contamination incident hits US

Friends of the Earth Press Release Immediate release: Tuesday 6 March 2007

Friends of the Earth is calling for the production of drugs in food crops grown outside to be banned after the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) gave preliminary approval to the commercial production of GM pharmaceutical rice containing human genes [1]. The environmental campaign group warned of the potentially devastating consequences if pharmaceutical crops end up on consumers’ plates.

The warning comes as US authorities have confirmed that a third GM rice contamination incident in less than a year has hit the United States. In the latest incident a type of non-GM long grain rice (known as Clearfield CL131, produced by BASF) was found to contain unknown GM contamination. The USDA has stepped in to stop rice farmers planting the variety because of the likelihood that the GM trait is unapproved [2].

Last week, US authorities confirmed that Clearfield CL131 had also been contaminated by GM LL62 rice – produced by biotech company Bayer CropScience. Because this rice is legal in the US, farmers had decided to plant the variety this spring because of a shortage of seed. This follows the initial contamination incident with Bayer’s LL601 rice which affected long grain rice exported around the world, including the UK [3].

Friends of the Earth's GM campaigner, Clare Oxborrow, said: "This latest GM contamination incident should set alarm bells ringing about the dangers of allowing GM pharmaceutical crops to be grown. Using food crops and fields as glorified drug factories is deeply worrying. The biotech industry has repeatedly failed to prevent experimental GM rice contaminating food crops. If pharmaceutical crops end up on consumers' plates, the consequences for our health could be devastating."

"The UK Government must urge the US to ban the production of drugs in food crops grown outside. It must also introduce tough measures to prevent illegal GM crops contaminating our food and ensure that biotech companies are liable for any damage their products cause."

[1]. The USDA has given preliminary approval for the first GM pharmaceutical rice containing human genes to be grown commercially. The rice, produced by a company called Ventria, has been engineered to produce human proteins to be extracted to produce anti-diarrhea medicine.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/01/AR2007030101495_pf.html

[2] http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/call_for_ban_on_us_imports_21082006.html

[3] http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/content/2007/03/ge_riceseed_statement.shtml

El mentado arroz transgénico

GE Rice Industry Facing Meltdown as Global Tide of Rejection Grows Bayer, global pusher of GE rice must admit defeat, says Greenpeace

AMSTERDAM - February 6 - The global rejection of genetically engineered rice is revealed today as 41 of the world’s biggest exporters, processors and retailers issued written commitments to stay GE free. The worldwide tide of opposition is reflected in the new Greenpeace report, ‘Rice Industry in Crisis.’ The report carries extracts of company statements covering Asia, Europe, Australia, and North and South America (1) and includes a commitment from the world’s largest rice processor, Ebro Puleva, to stop buying US rice. This follows a major contamination incident in 2006, when the world’s rice supply was contaminated with an experimental and illegal variety of GE rice produced by biotech company Bayer. “Bayer is aggressively pursuing commercial approvals for its GE rice globally, including in Europe and Brazil, yet refuses to accept responsibility for the major financial damage its unauthorised GE rice has caused in the US and elsewhere. Indeed, Bayer is blaming hardworking farmers or ‘acts of God’ for these problems when all signs point to Bayer being at fault,” (4) said Adam Levitt, a partner in the Chicago office of the law firm of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz – one of the law firms leading the prosecution of these cases against Bayer. “This global contamination and global market rejection of GE rice clearly shows the need for Bayer to withdraw from any further GE rice development,” said Jeremy Tager, Greenpeace International rice campaigner. “Bayer proves that GE rice is too risky. Through field trials alone Bayer caused massive financial damage to the global rice industry. The commercial growing of GE rice must never become a reality; the impact on the world’s most important food crop world be disastrous.” The report also examines the significant economic implications of the Bayer contamination, including when rice futures prices plummeted $150 million -- the sharpest one-day decline in years. Experts have predicted that US rice exports may decline by as much as16% in 2006/2007. (2) Several multi-million dollar class action lawsuits have been filed by US farmers who refuse to bear the financial burden of Bayer’s irresponsible and negligent conduct. The farmers claim that Bayer is responsible for the contamination of rice supplies and the economic losses the U.S. rice farmers have suffered as a result and must compensate farmers for the monetary and other losses that they have sustained as a result of Bayer’s improper conduct. (3) In addition to the class action lawsuits, several individual lawsuits have also been filed and there are also anecdotal reports that European traders contemplating legal action. As a result of the contamination of the rice supply with Bayer´s GE rice farmers, millers, traders and retailers around the globe are facing massive financial costs, including testing and recall costs, cancelled orders, import bans, brand damage and consumer distrust – distrust that could last for years. “Governments from around the world must respond to the economic, market and environmental damage caused by the 2006 GE rice contamination and reject outright any GE rice food and cultivation applications currently on the table,” said Tager. “GE rice should not be developed as genetic engineering is an unnecessary, unwanted and outdated technology that threatens the world’s most important staple food.” Greenpeace campaigns for GE-free crop and food production grounded on the principles of sustainability, protection of biodiversity and providing all people access to safe and nutritious food. Genetic engineering is an unnecessary and unwanted technology that contaminates the environment, threatens biodiversity and poses unacceptable risks to health. Notes to Editor (1) Company statements received from the following countries: Japan, Switzerland, France, Hong Kong, Germany, Australia, Pakistan, Thailand, India, Brazil, Spain, Canada and the UK. For statements see pages 7 – 12 of the Rice markets report. (2) Elias P. 2006. California growers fear biotech rice threat. Washington Post. 15 October, 2006. (3) Weiss, R. 2006. Firm Blames Farmers, ‘Act of God’ for Rice Contamination. Washington Post. 22 November, 2006. www.washingtonpost.com/ActofGod Leonard, C. 2006. 13 Lawsuits Over Accidental Spread of Genetically Altered Rice Could Be Combined Into 1. Associated Press. 30, November, 2006. www.boston.com/LawsuitGErice (4) Countries in which Bayer CropScience has applied for authorization for cultivation or food/feed consumption. All approvals are for LL62 unless otherwise noted. 1. Australia – food and feed. Applied 2006 2. Brazil – cultivation, food and feed, seed import, additional field trials. Applied 2006 3. Canada – approval granted for food and feed 2006 4. European Union (25 states) – food and feed. Applied 2004 5. New Zealand – food and feed. Applied 2006 6. Philippines – food and feed. Applied 2006 7. South Africa – food and feed. Applied 2006 8. United States – approvals granted for cultivation, food and feed. Approvals – LL601, 62, 06 (2006, 2002)

Genetically Engineered Rice Contaminating Food Supply

USDA Gives Rubber-Stamp Market Approval to Genetically Engineered Rice Contaminating Food Supply

'Approval-by-Contamination' Policy Puts Consumers and Environment at Risk, Erodes Trust in U.S. Food

USDA Continues to Allow Bayer to Test Experimental Genetically Engineered Crops

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE -- November 24, 2006

Contacts: Joe Mendelson: 703-244-1724; Bill Freese: 301-985-3011

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) today granted marketing approval of a genetically-engineered (GE) rice variety following its illegal contamination of the food supply and rice exports, first announced three months ago. The controversial decision was taken despite the insistence of its developer, Bayer CropScience, that it dropped plans to commercialize the variety, known as LibertyLink601 (LL601), five years ago.

"With this decision, USDA is telling agricultural biotechnology companies that it doesn t matter if you re negligent, if you break the rules, if you contaminate the food supply with untested genetically engineered crops, we'll bail you out," said Joseph Mendelson, Legal Director of the Center for Food Safety. "In effect, USDA is sanctioning an 'approval-by-contamination' policy that can only increase the likelihood of untested genetically engineered crops entering the food supply in the future, and further erode trust in the wholesomeness of U.S. food overseas," he added.

Mendelson also noted that USDA has still not determined how LL601 entered the rice supply or the extent of the contamination, and that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not undertaken a formal assessment of the rice, which is designed to survive direct spraying with the powerful herbicide glufosinate.

"Experimental, genetically engineered crops like LL601 are prohibited for a reason," said Bill Freese, Science Policy Analyst at Center for Food Safety. "Exhaustive testing is required to determine whether or not mutagenic gene-splicing procedures create human health or environmental hazards, and no one has done that analysis on LL601 rice," he added.

In comments filed with USDA, the Center for Food Safety (CFS) opposed USDA's consideration of Bayer's petition for market approval of LL601 as an abuse of the regulatory process. CFS also blasted USDA for allowing Bayer to black out extensive portions of its petition as "confidential business information," and demanded that it be released for public scrutiny and comment before any decision was made. CFS further noted that Bayer might exploit the approval to evade liability for an estimated $150 million in market losses suffered by U.S. farmers because of the episode.

The comments also spelled out the potential for LL601 to spread its herbicide-resistance trait to weedy red rice, making it more difficult for farmers to control.

LL601 is one of several 'LibertyLink' (LL) rice varieties that have been genetically engineered by Bayer to survive application of Bayer s proprietary Liberty© herbicide. Liberty kills normal rice, but can be applied directly to LL varieties to kill surrounding weeds. This explains why Bayer had to obtain government approval to permit residues of the weedkiller on rice grains of its two approved versions of LibertyLink rice.

"Contrary to what you hear from the biotech industry, genetically engineered crops like LibertyLink rice mean more chemicals in our food, not less," said Freese.

"USDA's decision to approve genetically engineered rice that Bayer itself decided was unfit for commerce is the clearest sign yet that U.S. authorities are intent upon dismantling federal regulation of genetically engineered crops in the interests of the biotechnology industry," said Mendelson.

"Center for Food Safety will consider all legal options to put an end to USDA's 'approval-by-contamination' policy for new genetically engineered crops," he added.

Mendelson further noted that since the contamination debacle was first announced on August 18, 2006, USDA has given Bayer the green light to conduct nine more outdoor field trials of new genetically engineered crops.

Rice Industry: Keep Genetically Engineered Varieties in the Lab

By Jeffrey M. Smith

The US rice industry can take a lesson from Hawaiian coffee growers. In 2004, the University of Hawaii and others were getting dangerously close to conducting outdoor trials of genetically modified (GM) coffee—plants whose DNA had been artificially inserted with genes from other species. Growers throughout the state knew if their premium coffee became contaminated with GM varieties, it would threaten their markets.

The growers rejected claims that small buffer zones around GM fields would protect them. Bees carry pollen for miles. GM crops can get mixed up by human error. And everyone on the islands knows that seeds naturally travel. (Consider Hawaii’s conversion from lava rock to a lush paradise.)

They extracted a promise from the University to discontinue studies that could lead to outdoor GM coffee trials, saving their farms from contamination. Not so for the rice industry, which just saw world markets close and prices plummet after unapproved GM rice escaped from field trials, contaminating US stocks. Japan stopped buying long grain US rice, products were taken off shelves in Europe and the industry may lose $150 million or more.

Amid the lawsuits and rejected shipments, the rice industry must now decide whether to belatedly follow the coffee growers’ example. They can tell the government and five multinational GM crop companies, “No more GM rice trials!” Or they can continue to risk costly episodes of contamination. And for what? To share the fate of soybean and corn growers?

In 1996, biotech companies introduced GM soy and corn varieties that could either withstand herbicide or produce pesticides in every cell. Although the new technology was largely hidden from American shoppers, the European press did extensive coverage and consumers there were not pleased. In a single week in April 1999, food companies throughout the continent responded by vowing to remove GM ingredients from their European brands. Japanese companies followed suit and American agriculture has yet to recover.

The corn industry lost their $300 million European market; US soy sales also plunged. The government poured an extra $2-3 billion per year in price support subsidies. And many non-GM growers were forced to pay for costly segregation programs just to keep their customers. The promise of higher yields, lower chemical use and weed-free living through GM crops turned into slightly lower average yields, significantly higher herbicide use and the emergence of superweeds that resist weed killer. Many who were once enthusiastic about GM technology are saying “Come back in 50 to 100 years when you’ve done your homework.”

The Biotech PR firms want the rice industry and others to believe that gene inserted crops are catching on around the world. In reality, studies show that the more people learn about GM food, the less they want to put it in their mouth. The main reason why most US consumers are complacent is that they don’t know about the issue. Sixty percent say they have never eaten a GM food in their lives. In truth, most eat it everyday—usually in the form of soy and corn derivatives in processed foods.

When Americans find out that they have been eating GM ingredients, they usually assume that the FDA has tested it and proven it safe. Not true. Documents made public from a lawsuit revealed that FDA scientists had repeatedly warned their superiors that GM foods might create unpredictable, hard-to-detect allergies, toxins, new diseases and nutritional problems. They urged political appointees to require long-term safety studies. But the person in charge of FDA policy was the former attorney (and later vice president) of biotech giant Monsanto. And the agency was under orders from the White House to promote GM crops. The policy that was adopted in 1992, and still stands, is that no safety tests whatsoever are required by the FDA. Thus, varieties that had never been rigorously safety tested with animals, and probably never even fed to humans, were approved for sale.

Evidence of adverse reactions is mounting. >From the tiny number of safety studies that have been conducted, animals treated with GM crops show stunted growth, impaired immune systems, bleeding stomachs, potentially precancerous cell growth, damaged and misshapen cells, inflamed kidneys, smaller brains and testicles, enlarged intestines, reduced digestive enzymes, higher blood sugar, inflamed lung tissue, increased death rates and higher offspring mortality, to name a few. Reports from the field are less encouraging. Two dozen US farmers say that sterility in pigs or cows is related to GM corn varieties. Seventy-one Indian shepherds report that 25% of their sheep died from grazing on GM cotton plants. Filipinos in at least 5 villages fell sick when nearby GM corn was pollinating. And hundreds of laborers in India developed allergic reactions after handling GM cotton. Soy allergies skyrocketed by 50% in the UK soon after GM soy was introduced. And in the 1980s, a GM food supplement killed about 100 Americans and caused sickness and disability in another 5,000-10,000.

If this information makes you uneasy, consider what will happen when millions of US consumers learn that high-risk GM foods are in their baby’s formula and kids’ breakfast cereal. The reaction may force US food manufacturers to repeat the vows of their European counterparts. The corn and soy growers would surely be hit even harder than before.

How will the rice industry fare? That depends on what they choose now. But the choice is not just with rice growers. What about those who deal in lettuce, barley, sunflowers and plums? Most vegetables, fruits and grains have GM counterparts in some stage of development. And behind that variety stands a biotech company, more than willing to grow it field trials and risk the food industry’s markets. Even the US wheat growers remain in danger. They had forced Monsanto to abandon plans to introduce GM wheat in May 2004, but unlike Hawaii’s coffee growers, they can still be contaminated from outdoor field trials.

It is time that US producers take charge and say to the biotech industry, “You can grow your GM crops only when we are ready to take that risk. Until then, keep it in the lab.”

Jeffrey M. Smith is the author of Seeds of Deception, the world’s bestselling book on GM foods. His forthcoming book, Genetic Roulette, documents more than 60 health risks of GM foods in easy-to-read two-page spreads, and demonstrates how current safety assessments are not competent to protect consumers from the dangers. He is available for media at info@seedsofdeception.com.