> So it's cheaper to travel the countryside 
> administering supplements to the
> population than to simply allow them 
> to eat a different version of something
> they're already eating - the technology 
> for which has been donated by its creators?

I know a bit about this, as I pay attention and take notes when dinner
speakers at fundraisers talk about the work to be funded.

"Aid" is a stunningly complex undertaking.  With so many half-baked wannabe
do-gooders asking for donations, there are now multiple efforts to vet and
certify efforts as simply doing good rather than harm.  "Golden Rice" is a
narrow focus solution looking for a problem, it is fodder for feel-good
advertising, and it would not exist, other than for the fact it is the one
and only GE trait that can be claimed to actually benefit humans.  But the
collateral damage is so severe, it is not a wise choice for any rice-growing
country.

1) Basic medical services are already being provided, and are funded as a
top priority, so the question becomes "what is the marginal cost of
addressing vitamin A deficiency"?  Vitamin A supplements are so cheap as to
be essentially free, so why put a "free" pill in a more expensive rice?
(The ads given the false impression that the rice is the ONLY way to address
the problem. If they can get the rice to those people, they can get a few
vitamin supplements to them at far, far lower cost, and zero risk of
unintended consequences.)

2) The bulk of the Vitamin A deficiency is nothing but one of a larger
number of symptoms of simple malnutrition.  If they aren't getting enough to
eat now, and the malnutrition is so chronic that they lack Vitamin A, how
will a new rice help, when they aren't getting enough food in the first
place?  

3) People eat rice so much because it is a starch, and thereby "filling".  A
diet heavy in rice is most often a diet that lacks nutrition.  Better
nutrition would involve a more varied diet, and a shift away from diets that
are dominated by rice.  Again, the problem is not solved with a different
rice, it is only solved as a part of the larger issue of addressing
malnutrition.  See (4) below for why I say this.

4) The rice contains beta carotene, and one metabolizes beta carotene into
vitamin A via a process that is not very well understood.  But one thing
that IS known is that this process does not work well when the person
suffers from malnutrition, so the rice will likely not help those with a
deficiency caused by malnutrition, which is essentially all the people
suffering the deficiency.  The rice has not been shown to help a
malnourished metabolism !   

5) The repeated attempts to force this "miracle rice" down the throats of
unwilling 3rd-world countries to force the ads to become "true stories"
rather than fiction is a distraction from growing of an increased range of
indigenous, NATURALLY vitamin-rich crops.  If you ate nothing but cheese
doodles, your doctor would not tell you to go find cheese doodles with beta
carotene added, he'd tell you to eat a proper diet and stop trying to exist
on freakin' cheese doodles.  The marketing of this rice is a distraction
from eleventh-seven far more important problems.

6) Here's the collateral damage - the issue of export income.  Yes, while
some of their citizens starve, poor African nations sell food to Europe.
(This statement is also true of the USA.)  If a small farmer planted GMO
seeds from an aid shipment, these would tend to cross-pollinate (and
contaminate) neighboring fields. This would endanger the ability of the
entire country to sell crops to European buyers, who MUST be convinced that
what they are buying is absolutely GMO-free, as European stores simply
refuse to carry GMO food, as  European consumers won't buy it at any price.
Store chains like Tesco check DNA for tell-tales that indicate GMO traits.
This problem is such a threat to the economies of these countries that, for
example, Zimbabwe took all the food-aid corn they got, and spent the money
to have it milled before distributing it, so that it could not be replanted,
as it was GMO corn.

The concerns about the collateral damage are real and tangible, as it has
already happened here.  In 2006, the uncertified GMO crop "Liberty Link" ( a
Bayer strain) was found in US rice supplies. 63 percent of US rice exports
were affected, the contamination spread to at least 30 other countries.
Major rice buyers like the EU and the Philippines closed their markets to US
rice. $253 million in food product recalls were suffered, total losses
estimated at $445 million.

The contamination was the result of a 2001 "field trial".  The problem
wasn't detected for five years.  The US rice industry as a whole took a
serious hit.

That's just ONE strain of rice, and it took me two cups of coffee to explain
the basic bullet points.  
But go ahead, go walk into any organizing group of ladies planning a charity
event, and just say the words "Golden Rice".  I bet they roll their eyes and
say "No, that's a scam that nobody wants to fund, and nobody wants to
implement.  That's just a PR thing."

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html