Friday, June 21, 2013

Unaware of the gold in the golden rice.

GM food off the menu in Parliament's restaurants despite ministers telling the public to drop their opposition

  • Genetically modified food banned from Houses of Parliament
  • Environment Secretary Owen Paterson launched pro-GM campaign

GM foods are banned from restaurants in the Houses of Parliament despite government claims it is ‘probably safer’ than other meals.
Government ministers are demanding that ordinary families should abandon their reluctance to eat genetically modified food, however they are banned from MPs’ plates.
This week the food and farming secretary, Owen Paterson, launched an extraordinary propaganda campaign to encourage the nation to accept GM crops and farming.
Menu: Genetically modified food is banned in the Houses of Parliament, despite ministers insisting it is safe
Menu: Genetically modified food is banned in the Houses of Parliament, despite ministers insisting it is safe
He bolstered his campaign with claims that some seven million children in the Far East could have been saved from blindness or  death in the last 15 years if only people had opened the door to a new form of GM ‘Golden Rice’.
However, his efforts were unravelling today amid evidence that GM food is banned from the dinner tables of MPs, while his claims for the GM rice proved to be bogus.
The House of Commons Catering service today confirmed that the ban on GM ingredients which dates back to 1998 remains in place as a matter of ‘customer choice’.
It said: ‘In line with its procurement policy, the House of Commons Catering Service avoids, wherever identifiable, the procurement of foods that contain genetically modified organisms. 
Speech: Environment Secretary Owen Paterson this week urged Brits to eat GM
Speech: Environment Secretary Owen Paterson this week urged Brits to eat GM
‘To this end, as part of the tendering process, food suppliers are required to work to a strict GM organisms policy and give assurances that goods supplied be free from genetically modified materials.’
It added: ‘The decision to avoid GMs is seen as largely a matter of customer choice.’
Mr Paterson has set himself up as the chief cheerleader for so-called Frankenstein Foods, however it appears that he has been unable to convince fellow MPs to accept them in their restaurants.
As a result, the minister and fellow MPs leave themselves open to accusations of hypocrisy and complaints that they are telling people to ‘do as I say, not as I do’.
Speaking earlier this week, Mr Paterson said: ‘The use of more precise technology and greater regulatory scrutiny probably makes GM organisms even safer than conventional plants and food.
‘There is no substantiated case of any adverse impact on human health…An enormous amount of material has been eaten, not a single case has been brought to my attention.’
Mr Paterson’s most powerful argument for accepting GM was the development of Golden Rice, which has been genetically modified to boost levels of beta carotene and Vitamin A, which can protect eyesight.
In an extraordinary statement, he said: ‘Over the last 15 years, despite offering the seeds for free to those who would need them, every attempt to deploy this golden rice has been thwarted.
‘In that time seven million children have gone blind or died.’
Restaurant: MPs, staff, officials and journalists can dine in several restaurants including in Portcullis House, across the road from the main Parliament building
Restaurant: MPs, staff, officials and journalists can dine in several restaurants including in Portcullis House, across the road from the main Parliament building
It emerged today that these seeds have not been offered free to communities in the Far East who might need them because they have not yet been through a safety checking and approval system.
Neither have any tests been carried out to establish whether they contain sufficient nutrients to make any difference to the eyesight of children, let alone save millions of lives.
Golden Rice has not been available to farmers and consumers for the past 15 years and is only now going through crop growing trials in the Philippines.
If these prove successful, the rice will be sold for profit just like any other agricultural commodity and will not be given away free.
The International Rice Research Institute has issued a statement which makes clear that Mr Paterson’s claims that Golden Rice could have prevented millions of youngsters from going blind or dying over the past 15 years are also bogus.
This states that: ‘It has not yet been determined whether daily consumption of Golden Rice does improve the vitamin A status of people who are vitamin A deficient and could therefore reduce related conditions such as night blindness.’
Al fresco: Food is also served in the pavilion buffet, a tented restaurant for MPs on the terrace at the House of Commons
Al fresco: Food is also served in the pavilion buffet, a tented restaurant for MPs on the terrace at the House of Commons
It said tests will be needed to establish whether the rice would be useful, but this process could take another two years.
The Channel 4 News FactCheck blog concluded: ‘Mr Paterson has been misleading on a number of counts.
‘There haven’t been attempts to give golden rice out for free. The leading exponent of it says it will cost ‘about the same’ as ordinary rice.
‘To then claim that seven million children have gone blind or died as a result of such attempts being thwarted doesn’t follow either. The numbers are a large and inaccurate extrapolation.’
A spokesman for Mr Paterson’s department, DEFRA, said: ‘We have only just started the discussion on the potential benefits of using GM products here in the UK. 
'Other governments wouldn’t licence these technologies if they didn’t recognise the economic, environmental and public benefits.’


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2345937/GM-food-menu-Parliaments-restaurant-despite-ministers-telling-public-drop-opposition.html#ixzz2Wv3vu0xi
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Sunday, June 2, 2013

A Role for Science in Poverty Alleviation?

ScienceVol. 340 no. 6136 pp. 1034-1035 DOI: 10.1126/science.340.6136.1034
  • NEWS FOCUS

A Role for Science in Poverty Alleviation?

Science spoke with Minister of Rural Development Jairam Ramesh about the role of science in poverty alleviation.
Figure
NEW DELHI—With more than 400 million people in India earning less than $1.25 a day, poverty reduction in this sprawling nation is an urgent task. Perhaps that's why the ruling United Progressive Alliance turned to one of its deep thinkers to tackle the intransigent problem. In July 2011, Jairam Ramesh was tapped to lead the Ministry of Rural Development, an $18 billion agency focused on the plight of the 70% of India's 1.2 billion people who live in the countryside.

Last month, Science spoke with Ramesh in his office here about the role of science in poverty alleviation. His remarks were edited for brevity and clarity.
Ramesh, 59, is no stranger to India's scientific community. He garnered headlines in January 2010, when, as environment minister, he imposed an indefinite moratorium on the introduction of genetically modified eggplant (Science, 12 February 2010, p. 767). A mechanical engineer by training who's known for his wit and biting remarks, Ramesh is also a China expert; in 2005 he published a book on the relationship between the two Asian powers, Making Sense of Chindia: Reflections on China and India.
Q:Is science in India helping the poor?
J.R.:People are coming out of poverty because of agricultural growth, better wages, and better infrastructure. Science played an important role in creating new varieties of rice and wheat; that has lifted farmers out of poverty. Science has created mobile phones that are giving farmers and wage seekers links with markets. But if you are asking me if there is a direct relationship between investment in science in India and rural development, my answer is no.
Q:How would you get scientists more involved in poverty alleviation?
J.R.:Almost 60% of all open defecations in the world are in India. And open defecation and poor sanitation has a direct link with malnutrition and stunted growth. But we've had no innovation whatsoever in the field of toilets. So when Mr. Bill Gates came to meet me a couple of months ago, we said, why don't we collaborate together and have a global challenge? Challenge the world's inventors to come up with low-cost toilets for use in trains, for use in our homes. You take four or five crucial areas and certainly you can throw the market open for ideas.
Q:Why is poverty so entrenched in India?
J.R.:It has nothing to do with science. It is the failure of land reform. We have not ensured equal access to land. We've had a horrendously iniquitous caste system, which is still very much prevalent in our country. Public health successes in India have reduced mortality rates drastically, but we've had a tripling of our population since independence. So the causes of poverty are complex, and the causes of poverty are not linked to the availability or nonavailability of science and technology.
One shouldn't make the mistake of giving science and technology more power than it actually has to alleviate poverty. Sure, it has a place to reduce drudgery, for example, if you can develop improved cookstoves. But how do you disseminate 150 million cookstoves?
Q:What about a McDonald's of cookstoves?
J.R.:McDonaldization has taken place in a few areas. Mobile telephones are the most ubiquitous instrument of rural transformation today. But in other areas, we have not been very successful. Cookstoves is a classic example. We've been at this cookstove game for almost 40 years. But whether improved stoves have actually penetrated rural households, I find no convincing answer.
Q:Will the universal ID (see p. 1032) make a major difference?
J.R.:It is a very big technological intervention that will have a major transformative effect in rural areas. All pension payments will be delivered electronically to the doorstep of the beneficiaries.
Q:How long will it take for everyone in India to have a universal ID?
J.R.:It is a huge priority issue. We hope that by the end of 2014, all subsidy payments, whether it is a kerosene subsidy or cooking gas or whatever subsidy, will be through this route, through micro-ATMs.
Q:So you need 600,000 micro-ATM machines, one for every village?
J.R.:At least. From a rural point of view, this is a game changer. It gives you a channel for delivery: cash benefits in a relatively hassle-free environment.
Q:India helped find water on the moon. But it struggles to provide clean drinking water to its people. Why?
J.R.:Water is a good example of where science is coming to our rescue. In 1987, there were about 50,000 villages in India without drinking water sources. Satellites helped locate sources for these villages within 1.5 kilometers. This was one of the earliest examples of a quick win for science in rural development.
I am not a worshipper of science. I realize the potential of science and the power of science. But I also realize that there is more to life than science itself. And the constraints to the diffusion of knowledge, the societal barriers, those have to be addressed.