Editing Greenpeace (section)

===Greenpeace on golden rice===
Greenpeace opposes the planned use of [[golden rice]], a variety of ''[[Oryza sativa]]'' [[rice]] produced through [[genetic engineering]] to [[biosynthesis|biosynthesize]] [[beta-carotene]], a precursor of pro-[[retinol|vitamin A]] in the edible parts of rice. The addition of beta-carotene to the rice is seen as preventive to loss of sight in poverty stricken countries where golden rice is intended for distribution. According to Greenpeace, golden rice has not managed to do anything about malnutrition for 10 years during which alternative methods are already tackling malnutrition. The alternative proposed by Greenpeace is to discourage [[monocropping]] and to increase production of crops which are naturally nutrient-rich (containing other nutrients not found in golden rice in addition to beta-[[carotene]]). Greenpeace argues that resources should be spent on programs that are already working and helping to relieve malnutrition.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/agriculture/problem/genetic-engineering/hands-off-our-rice/Greenpeace-and-Golden-Rice/ |title=and golden rice |publisher=Greenpeace |date=5 November 2010 |access-date=21 February 2011 |archive-date=12 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110112161230/http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/agriculture/problem/genetic-engineering/hands-off-our-rice/Greenpeace-and-Golden-Rice/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

The renewal of these concerns coincided with the publication of a paper in the journal ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' about a version of golden rice with much higher levels of beta carotene.<ref>Paine JA, Shipton CA, Chaggar S, Howells RM, Kennedy MJ, Vernon G, Wright SY, Hinchliffe E, Adams JL, Silverstone AL, Drake R (2005) A new version of Golden Rice with increased pro-vitamin A content. Nature Biotechnology 23:482–487.</ref> This "golden rice 2" was developed and patented by [[Syngenta]], which provoked Greenpeace to renew its allegation that the project is driven by [[profit motive]]s and to serve as propaganda aimed at increasing public opinion of GMO products.<ref name=NS>[https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24021-militant-filipino-farmers-destroy-golden-rice-gm-crop.html Militant Filipino farmers destroy Golden Rice GM crop] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150707062703/http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24021-militant-filipino-farmers-destroy-golden-rice-gm-crop.html |date=7 July 2015 }}, [[New Scientist]], 9 August 2013.</ref><ref>Greenpeace. [http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/releases/syngenta-agm Patents on Rice: the Genetic Engineering Hypocrisy] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081203235907/http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/releases/syngenta-agm |date=3 December 2008 }}. 26 April 2005.</ref>

Although Greenpeace stated that the golden rice program's true efficiency in treating malnourished populations was its primary concern as early as 2001,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.checkbiotech.org/blocks/dsp_document.cfm?doc_id=891 |title=Prof. Dr. Ingo Potrykus Addresses Claims of Anti-Biotechnology Activists |access-date=23 January 2005 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050123041053/http://www.checkbiotech.org/blocks/dsp_document.cfm?doc_id=891 |archive-date=23 January 2005}}. 15 February 2001.</ref> statements from March and April 2005 also continued to express concern over human health and environmental safety.<ref>Greenpeace. [http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/failures-of-golden-rice Golden Rice: All glitter, no gold] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091010214558/http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/failures-of-golden-rice |date=10 October 2009 }}. 16 March 2005.</ref><ref>Greenpeace. [http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/releases/golden-rice-is-a-technical-fai Golden Rice is a technical failure standing in way of real solutions for vitamin A deficiency] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050428151734/http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/releases/golden-rice-is-a-technical-fai |date=28 April 2005 }}</ref> In particular, Greenpeace has expressed concern over the lack of safety testing being done on GMO crops such as golden rice and of "playing with the lives of people...using Golden Rice to promote more GMOs".<ref name=NS/>

In June 2016, a conglomeration of 107 Nobel Laureates signed an open letter<ref name=openletter/> urging Greenpeace to end its campaign against genetically modified crops and Golden Rice in particular.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/06/29/more-than-100-nobel-laureates-take-on-greenpeace-over-gmo-stance/|title=107 Nobel laureates sign letter blasting Greenpeace over GMOs|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|access-date=30 June 2016|archive-date=29 June 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160629203642/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/06/29/more-than-100-nobel-laureates-take-on-greenpeace-over-gmo-stance/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.sciencealert.com/107-nobel-laureates-just-signed-a-letter-slamming-greenpeace-about-gmos|title=107 Nobel Laureates just signed a letter slamming Greenpeace over GMOs|first=Fiona|last=MacDonald|date=30 June 2016 |access-date=30 June 2016|archive-date=1 July 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160701143021/http://www.sciencealert.com/107-nobel-laureates-just-signed-a-letter-slamming-greenpeace-about-gmos|url-status=live}}</ref> In the letter, they also called upon governments of the world to "do everything in their power to oppose Greenpeace's actions and accelerate the access of farmers to all the tools of modern biology, especially seeds improved through biotechnology." The letter states that "Opposition based on emotion and dogma contradicted by data must be stopped."<ref name=openletter/> Greenpeace responded stating that "Accusations that anyone is blocking genetically engineered 'Golden' rice are false" and that they support "...investing in climate-resilient ecological agriculture and empowering farmers to access a balanced and nutritious diet, rather than pouring money down the drain for GE 'Golden' rice."<ref name=reactive_statement>{{cite web|url=http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/press/releases/2016/Nobel-laureates-sign-letter-on-Greenpeace-Golden-rice-position---reactive-statement/|title=Nobel laureates sign letter on Greenpeace 'Golden' rice position - statement|access-date=1 July 2016|archive-date=5 July 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160705150259/http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/press/releases/2016/Nobel-laureates-sign-letter-on-Greenpeace-Golden-rice-position---reactive-statement/|url-status=live}}</ref>