Greenpeace urged by Nobel laureates to end GMO opposition

July 1, 2016

The international environmental group Greenpeace was recently called on by more than 100 Nobel laureates to end its opposition to genetically modified crops, saying there is a scientific consensus they are safe and can benefit society.

In particular, the scientists cited in a news conference the value of a genetically modified rice used to prevent some illnesses related to vitamin A deficiency in much of the developing world.”Golden Rice” produces beta carotene in the grain, which rice does not do in the natural world.

Greenpeace was called by the laureates specifically to stop opposing the grain and related biotechnology that they say has a positive impact across the globe.

The time has come that we now know these things are safe,” Nobel laureate Sir Richard Roberts said. “The basic method does not lead necessarily to a bad thing.”He said the group could influence other organizations and parties opposing GMOs.

But Greenpeace officials called the event a publicity stunt.

The organization contends that Golden Rice could contaminate non-genetically engineered rice and make it hard for people in developing countries to avoid such products. It said other efforts to address nutrition needs in developing areas of the world should be funded and implemented.

“We’ve been attacked in countries around the world because we’re working with farmers and communities on the threat they face from GMOs,” said Charlie Cray, a senior researcher with Greenpeace. “The real issue here is: Why are they doing a press conference in Washington D.C. a week before there is a major vote in GMO labeling?”

The US Senate is scheduled to take a procedural vote next week on a bill that could pre-empt Vermont’s GMO labeling law.

The laureates say science backs them up and urged Greenpeace to re-examine which findings the group uses in its advocacy.”They are willing to dismiss the views of the vast majority of scientists,” said Randy Schekman, who won a Nobel in physiology or medicine in 2013. “What I fail to understand is their acceptance of science and the scientific process when it serves their purposes, but in their opposition, they oppose the view of scientists.”

Tags: featured