One concept that I’ve been interested in for a while now is the use of genetically modified foods in combatting food insecurity. GMOs are a highly controversial issue, made even more so when explored in the context of aid. There are many GMO products that have been developed specifically to target nutritional issues in the developing world. One such product has caught my attention: golden rice. Since many complex factors collectively determine the effectiveness of golden rice as a nutrition intervention, I though it would be interesting to analyze them in order to gain some clarity on the issue.

A comparison of white and golden rice

Golden rice is a variety of rice that has been biofortified with provitamin A (β-carotene) through genetic engineering. The main objective of golden rice is to combat vitamin A deficiency, which affects an estimated 250 million children world-wide. Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) is the leading cause of preventable childhood blindness around the globe, and has serious implications for child and maternal health: VAD increases the susceptibility to and severity of infections, maternal mortality, and risk of death from disease. According to the Golden Rice Project, the lack of β-carotene in traditional rice varieties increases the risk of VAD in rice-dependent populations. As such, it postulates that widespread dissemination of Golden rice could help alleviate vitamin A deficiency and improve child and maternal health on a global scale.

However, the use of golden rice to combat VAD is a highly controversial issue. Concerns about genetically modified foods have led many organizations to question the long-term impacts of golden rice on human and ecosystem health. Furthermore, the ability of golden rice to improve vitamin A status has been widely contested, as a large amount of rice must be consumed in order to meet daily vitamin A needs. Due to its bright orange colour, golden rice may not be accepted by cultural groups accustomed to traditional white rice varieties, and as such may be ineffective at reducing VAD on a population level. In contrast, existing vitamin A interventions have achieved broad uptake and coverage across a variety of socio-cultural groups. They have proven to be effective at preventing and treating VAD, and some cost only pennies per person. This has led some experts to suggest that golden rice is a high-cost solution to an issue that can be solved relatively inexpensively.

There is no question that VAD is a prevalent issue worldwide. VAD is a public health concern in more than half of all countries, and causes nearly 800 000 deaths of women and children each year. Those in developing countries are particularly at risk, as their diets generally revolve around a staple crop, and therefore are low in vitamin A rich foods (such as eggs, milk, dark leafy green vegetables, and deep orange fruit). Although traditional rice varieties do not contain vitamin A, golden rice has been engineered to contain 31 μg/g of β-carotene. After accounting for the conversion of β-carotene to vitamin A and losses through cooking, it has been determined that golden rice provides enough vitamin A to meet recommended daily allowances for women and children when consumed in sufficient quantities.

However, the body’s ability to absorb vitamin A depends on overall nutritional status and dietary composition. Adequate quantities of zinc, protein, and fats are necessary for vitamin A absorption; these nutrients are often lacking in the diets of rice-dependent populations. Golden rice does not contain significant amounts of these essential nutrients, and as such, the ability of golden rice to combat VAD in malnourished populations comes into question. Although golden rice provides enough vitamin A to meet daily needs, undernourished individuals may not be able to absorb it. As such, golden rice may not be effective at improving the vitamin A status of undernourished groups.

Moreover, golden rice is a relatively expensive solution to VAD. So far, hundreds of millions of dollars have gone towards the development of golden rice, and there is no question that additional funding would be needed to implement golden rice as a vitamin A intervention on a global scale. Funding for public health projects is often scarce, which brings into question the cost-effectiveness of golden rice as a VAD reduction strategy. The World Health Organization currently promotes several strategies to combat VAD, including dietary diversification, supplementation, and food fortification. Unlike golden rice, these strategies are inexpensive and help combat a broad range of nutritional deficiencies. As such, golden rice may not be the most appropriate strategy for VAD reduction in today’s economic climate.

Furthermore, the cultural acceptability of golden rice must be taken into consideration. White rice is traditionally consumed in many countries, and often carries cultural significance. For this reason, communities may resist the adoption of orange-colored rice, which would be a major obstacle to the implementation of golden rice on a global scale. However, the Golden Rice Humanitarian Board notes that many cultures traditionally use spices such as saffron or turmeric in rice dishes, rendering them similar in color to golden rice. Additionally, new and novel food products are continually being introduced to consumers worldwide, and food choices often reflect a balance between traditional beliefs and curiosity. As such, the Golden Rice Humanitarian Board believes that the health value and taste of golden rice will make it acceptable to those who need it.

It is worth noting that genetically modified foods – including golden rice – have been the subject of controversy since their inception. A product of recombinant genetic engineering, golden rice is composed of genetic material from viruses, bacteria, and non-food species. As with many GMO technologies, there is concern about the long-term impacts of golden rice on human and environmental health. Cross-pollination or gene transfer of virus-derived genetic material could have devastating ecological impacts in areas where golden rice is grown, and consequently could negatively affect crop yields and biodiversity. Furthermore, the effects of GM foods on human health are still largely unknown; consumption of golden rice could have negative effects on health long-term. However, the Golden Rice Humanitarian Board asserts that golden rice has been thoroughly researched, and that the cultivation and consumption of transgenic crops does not have an adverse effect on humans, animals, or the environment.

It can be seen that no clear consensus exists on the safety, acceptability, or effectiveness of golden rice. Although both proponents and opponents of golden rice cite scientific research to support their claims, it is important to recognize the subjectivity of scientific investigation. Furthermore, issues of ethics and culture are inherently subjective, and as such cannot be considered in absolute terms. At present, there is no definitive solution to the global issue of vitamin A deficiency. The future of public health will likely depend on a broad range of approaches and technologies; however, it is currently unclear what role golden rice will play among them.

photo: Golden rice. October 11, 2013 10:30. Reuters / Erik De Castro