Thousands of children could die after court backs campaign group over GM crop in Philippines, scientists warn

Thousands of children could die after court backs campaign group over GM crop in Philippines, scientists warn

Scientists have warned that a court decision to block the growing of the genetically modified (GM) crop Golden Rice in the Philippines could have catastrophic consequences. Tens of thousands of children could die in the wake of the ruling, they argue.

The Philippines had become the first country – in 2021 – to approve the commercial cultivation of Golden Rice, which was developed to combat vitamin A deficiency, a major cause of disability and death among children in many parts of the world.

But campaigns by Greenpeace and local farmers last month persuaded the country’s court of appeal to overturn that approval and to revoke this. The groups had argued that Golden Rice had not been shown to be safe and the claim was backed by the court, a decision that was hailed as “a monumental win” by Greenpeace.

Many scientists, however, say there is no evidence that Golden Rice is in any way dangerous. More to the point, they argue that it is a lifesaver.

  • starman2112@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    194·
    6 months ago

    It’s efficient, pays for itself within a couple decades, and is far less dangerous than what we’re doing right now. Did you know that burning fossil fuels releases more radiation into populated areas than nuclear power does?

    • Teppichbrand@feddit.deEnglish
      136·
      6 months ago

      Nuclear power is a wonderful example of how costs can be pushed into the future and onto future generations. People are obviously still falling for this. The “Asse”-repository in Germany was used for storage from 1967 to 1978 and now we descendants have to deal with the follow-up costs while our ancestors enjoyed the oh-so-cheap nuclear power. Groundwater is already leaking in, and preventing pollution is complex and expensive. And we are only the second generation, but the stuff will still be there in 2000 generations. Rooting for this is so incredibly short-sighted.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        42·
        6 months ago

        you’ve convinced me, I’m an oil industry stan now, since nuclear power hasn’t made any progress in waste management in the last 60 years, and it’s not like our descendents will be dealing with the environmental cost of fossil fuels here in 2000 years

        Granted that’s because there won’t be any descendents, but still

      • A_Chilean_Cyborg@feddit.clEnglish
        44·
        6 months ago

        Germany, the country that’s doing the environmental transition backwards…

        Nuclear energy is safe, unfuckably safer than what your government is doing right now, you talk so much on the future yet you’re replacing a clean yet not renewable form of energy with the most greenhouse gas emitting shit out there.

        Nuclear fuel can be contained in a safe way that doesn’t require active human monitoring (burying it deep) coal power plant waste is stored in your lungs and in our atmosphere, in what universe is that better.

        People are afraid of things they don’t understand, so instead of voting for a party that makes a dance party while they demolished a town for expanding a coal mine they should sit down for 5 minutes and read a bit about it.

        Like WTF.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        41·
        6 months ago

        Damn I guess if it’s cheaper to destroy the environment with fossil fuels then we should probably do that instead

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        3·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, back when renewables weren’t dummy cheap the argument was more convincing.

        It’s possible nuclear could be done cheaper, but nobody has a convincing plan to do it. The whole SMR thing appears to be snake oil.