Compared to a non - genetically engineered (GE) variety, the deployment of Golden Rice suffers from a delay of more than 10 years. The cause for this delay is GE-regulation. Considering the potential impact of Golden Rice on the reduction in vitamin A-malnutrition, this delay is responsible for loss of numerous lives, mostly children and women. GE-regulation is also responsible for the fact that public institutions are prevented from delivering a public good GE-product with the consequence that we are faced with a de-facto monopoly in favour of a few potent industries. Considering the forgone benefits from putative public good GE-products, GE-regulation can be blamed of being responsible for millions of lives, all of them, of course, in developing countries. As there is no scientific justification for present GE-regulation and as it has, so far, not prevented any harm, our society has the responsibility to reconsider present regulation which is based on the concept of an extreme interpretation of the precautionary principle. It would be justified to change regulation to a science-base and to regulate traits instead of technology. This would make regulation cheaper and faster, without compromising safety. GE-technology has an unprecedented safety record and it is far more precise and predictable than any other “traditional” and unregulated breeding technology.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
International Rice Research Institute
Indian Agricultural Research Institute
Directorate of Rice Research
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University
Genetically Modified Organisms
Al-Babili S, Beyer P (2005) Golden Rice – 5 years on the road – 5 years to go? Trends Plant Sci 10:565–573
Anderson K, Jackson LA, Nielsen CP (2005) GM rice adoption: impact for welfare and poverty alleviation. J Econ Integr 20:125–134
Batista R, Saib N, Lourenco T, Oliveira MM (2008) Microarray analyses reveal that plant mutagenesis may induce more transcriptomic changes than transgene insertion. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105:3640–3645
Baudo MM, Lyons R, Powers S, Pastori GM, Edwards KJ, Holdsworth MJ, Shewry PR (2006) Transgenesis has less impact on the transcriptome of wheat grain than conventional breeding. Plant Biotechnol J 4:369–380
Beyer P, Al-Babili S, Ye X, Lucca P, Schaub P, Welsch R, Potrykus I (2002) Golden Rice: introducing the beta-carotene biosynthesis pathway into rice endosperm by genetic engineering to defeat vitamin A deficiency. J Nutr 132:506S–510S
Bouis HE (2007) The potential of genetically modified food crops to improve human nutrition in developing countries. J Develop Stud 43:79–96
Bradford KJ, Van Deynze A, Gutterson N, Parrott W, Strauss SH (2005) Regulating transgenic crops sensibly: lessons from plant breeding, biotechnology and genomics. Nat Biotechnol 23:439–444
Burkhardt PK, Beyer P, Wunn J, Kloti A, Armstrong GA, Schledz M, von Linti J, Potrykus I (1997) Transgenic rice (Oryza sativa)endosperm expressing daffodil (Narcissus pseudonarcissus) phytoene synthase accumulates phytoene, a key intermediate of provitamin A biosynthesis. Plant J 11:1071–1078
Cohen JI (2005) Poorer nations turn to publicly developed GM crops. Nat Biotechnol 23:27–33
Dubock AC (2009) Crop connundrum. Nutr Rev 67:17–20
Ensering M (2008) Tough lessons from Golden Rice. Science 320:468–471
Gruere GP, Rosegrant MW (2008) Assessing the implementation effects of the biosafety protocol’s proposed stringent information requirements for genetically modified commodities in countries of the Asia pacific economic cooperation. Rev Agric Econ 30:214–232
Herman RA, Chassy BM, Parrott W (2009) Compositional assessment of transgenic crops: an idea whose time has passed. Trends Biotechnol 27:555–557
Kovalski SP, Ebora RV, Kryder RD, Potter RH (2002) Transgenic crops, biotechnology and ownership rights: what scientists need to know. Plant J 31:407–421
McGloughlin MN (2010) Modifying agricultural crops for improved nutrition. New Biotechnol 27:494–504
Morandini P (2010) Inactivation of allergens and toxins. New Biotechnol 27:482–493
Morris S (2007) EU biotech crop regulations and environmental risk: a case of the emperor’s new clothes? Trends Biotechnol 25:2–6
Nash JM (2000) Grains of hope. TIME Mag 31:40–47
Paine JA, Shipton CA, Chaggar S, Howells RM, Kennedy MJ, Vernon G, Wright SY, Hinchliffe E, Adams JL, Silverstone AL, Drake R (2005) Improving the nutritional value of Golden Rice through increased pro-vitamin A content. Nat Biotechnol 23:482–487
Potrykus I (2001) Golden Rice and beyond. Plant Physiol 125:1157–1161
Potrykus I (2003) Nutritionally enhanced rice to combat malnutrition disorders of the poor. Nutr Rev 61:S101–S104
Potrykus I (2010) Regulation must be revolutionised. Nature 466:561
Potrykus I, Klaus A (2010) Transgenic plants for food security in the context of development. Proceedings of a study week of the pontifical academy of sciences. New Biotechnol 27:442–717
Ramessar K, Peremarti A, Gomez-Galera S, Naqvi S, Moralejo M, Munoz P, Capell T, Christou P (2007) Biosafety and risk assessment framework for selectable marker genes in transgenic crop plants: a case of the science not supporting the politics. Transgenic Res 16:261–280
Shewry PR, Baudo M, Lovegrove A, Powers S (2007) Are GM and conventionally bred cereals really different? Trends Food Sci Technol 18:201–209
Sinha G (2009) Up in arms. Nat Biotechnol 27:592–594
Sommer A (2009) Leaving the chrysalis behind. SIGHT LIFE Mag 2:34–36
Stein AJ, Sachdev HPS, Qaim M (2006) Potential impact and cost-effectiveness of Golden Rice. Nat Biotechnol 24:1200–1201
Tang G, Qin J, Dolnikowski GG, Russell RM, Grusak MA (2009) Golden Rice is an effective source of vitamin A. Am J Clin Nutr 89:1776–1783
Taverne D (2005) The new fundamentalism, commentary. Nat Biotechnol 23:415–416
Ye X, Al-Babili S, Kloti A, Zhang J, Lucca P, Beyer P, Potrykus I (2000) Engineering the provitamin A (beta-carotene) biosynthetic pathway into (carotenoid-free) rice endosperm. Science 287:303–305
This paper is an edited and updated version of a previous publication: Ingo Potrykus (2010) Lessons from the “Humanitarian Golden Rice” project: regulation prevents development of public good genetically engineered crop products. New Biotechnology 27, 466–472. I am grateful to Dr. Adrian Dubock for the English editing of the manuscript.
About this article
Cite this article
Potrykus, I. “Golden Rice”, a GMO-product for public good, and the consequences of GE-regulation. J. Plant Biochem. Biotechnol. 21, 68–75 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13562-012-0130-5
- Golden rice
- Pro-vitamin A
- Intellectual property rights