The Global Diabetes Tsunami... And Why America Actually Has It Good

Tyler Durden's picture

Lately there has been a flurry of media reports focusing on America's obesity epidemic, and how costs associated with America's gradual shift to a fat society will inundate the already strapped budget in the form of shadow taxation and other direct and indirect costs, which are, to put it simply, unsustainable. As the first chart below shows, the primary cost center associated with the obese conditions - diabetes - has certainly gripped a substantial portion of the US population, at last count affecting at least 10% of the population. Yet as chart #2 shows, America, with its $23.7 million diabetes cases, actually has it good. Because when compared to countries without a social safety net, such as China and India, the US diabetes problem is child's play. With 90 million diabetes cases in China, and 61.3 million in India, or nearly half of the total 346 million worldwide diabetes cases, perhaps it is time for the developing world to worry how they plan on funding the billions of associated costs, as they assimilate more and more of the worst American habits. Because as the International Diabetes Foundation says, "In developing countries, the looming costs in human lives, healthcare expenditure and lost productivity threatens to undo recent economic gains." However since all of this is in "the future" what's the point of worrying about it now...

American diabetes is bad...

...But not nearly as bad as what is happening in the "developing" world. Whoops:

Finally, from the International Diabetes Foundation, here are the facts:

The number of people living with, and dying of, diabetes across the world is shocking: 90 million Chinese live with diabetes and 1.3 million died in 2011;23% of Qatari adults have developed diabetes.

TSUNAMI OF DIABETES

  • Type 2 diabetes accounts for almost 90% of all cases of diabetes in adults worldwide. In general, as countries become richer, people eat a more sugar- and fat-rich diet and are less physical active — and the incidence of diabetes rises. On average, nearly 8% of adults living in high-income countries (see map for country classification) have diabetes. It is, however, upper-middle and middle-income countries that have the highest prevalence of diabetes; over 10% of adults in these countries have the condition.
  • In high-income countries, diabetes primarily afflicts people over 50 years of age. But in middle-income countries, the highest prevalence is in younger people — the most productive age groups. As these people age, and as life expectancies increase, prevalence in older age groups will rise further. This trend will put a huge burden on healthcare systems and governments.
  • The mortality rate of diabetes varies sharply with the prosperity of the country. In 2011, the disease caused more than 3.5 million deaths in middle-income countries, of which more than 1 million were in China and just less than a million were in India. Approximately 1.2 adults die of a diabetes-associated illness per 1,000 cases in 2011 in low- and middle-income countries: more than double the mortality rate of high-income countries. Mortality rates are much lower in high-income countries with the greater healthcare recourses, but those tolls are still high: approximately 180,000 people died in the United States in 2011, for example.
  • Unsurprisingly, high-income countries spent vastly more on diabetes-related costs in 2011 than lower-income countries. In developing countries, the looming costs in human lives, healthcare expenditure and lost productivity threatens to undo recent economic gains.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
the not so mighty maximiza's picture

Corn syrup is good for you.

john39's picture

so are the lab engineered stealth pathogens that the NWO has been spreading around the world for decades...  that modern medicine just can't neem to get a grip on  (cash cows)...  all hail the NWO.

Gully Foyle's picture

john39

And you are the reason for this

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230419270457740434380200243...

Red Tape Hobbles a Harvest of Life-Saving Rice

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/143374/

Vitamin A deficiency affects the immune system, leading to illness and frequently to blindness. It probably causes more deaths than malaria, HIV or tuberculosis, killing as many people every single day as the Fukushima tsunami. It can be solved by eating green vegetables and meat, but for many poor Asians, who can afford only rice, that remains an impossible dream. To deal with the problem, “biofortification” with genetically modified food plants is 1/10th as costly as dietary supplements.

“Golden rice”—with two extra genes to make beta-carotene, the raw material for vitamin A—was a technical triumph, identical to ordinary rice except in color. Painstaking negotiations led to companies waiving their patent rights so the plant could be grown and regrown free by anybody.

Yet today, 14 years later, it still has not been licensed to growers anywhere in the world. The reason is regulatory red tape deliberately imposed to appease the opponents of genetic modification, which Adrian Dubock, head of the golden rice project, describes as “a witch-hunt for suspected theoretical environmental problems…[because] many activist NGOs thought that genetically engineered crops should be opposed as part of their anti-globalization agenda.”

It is surprising to find that an effective solution to the problem consistently rated by experts as the poor world’s highest priority has been stubbornly opposed by so many pressure groups supposedly acting on behalf of the poor.

pods's picture

Beta carotene is but one of the over 600 different known carotenoids.  Studies have actually shown that beta carotene supplementation is detrimental to health.  For peoples who have no intake of the carotenoids this rice may show some benefit, but more than likely us simple humans will see this as the "savoir" again and go along with a poor diet.

And of course we can toss in some good old propaganda, like milk for strong bones and teeth.  Of course the calcium balance is negative with milk due to the acidity load of consuming it, and studies show INCREASED fractures with increased milk consumption, but you cannot let the data get into the way of a good story.

pods

MisterMousePotato's picture

Dr. Joel Fuhrman (Eat to Live) has a persuasive explanation for the phenomenon of vitamin A supplementation actually being detrimental to health. His book is actually a compelling read, and the first to ever make me reconsider rib eye steaks as a good source of protein without the "Oh, the poor cows or chickens or the dead zone at the mouth of the Mississippi River" thing.

As to diabetes, consider that it is one of the most expensive diseases to 'treat' (here in the U.S.), and that Mexicans have rates of diabetes several times higher than whites, and current demographic trends (here in the U.S.) and, well, hm.

pods's picture

Most of my desire for information relating to nutrition is due to Dr. Fuhrman.

We have most of his books (not latest, eat for health yet) as well as his DVD lectures.  
Oh, and the Vitamix too. 

pods

ThirdWorldDude's picture

You're so full of Monsanto s#@t!

 

If Golden Rice "with two extra genes" was supposed to exist, Nature would've created it... Genetically messing with Nature's ways is cutting the branch you're sitting on.

 

If you want to help those poor people, then send them carrot seeds!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrot#Nutrition

Xkwisetly Paneful's picture

Jesusfuckingchrist is he so full of shit.

Lets go back to 1/12th the yield per acre so I can hear about peak food from the brainless drones.

Remember? Circa 1990 the world was supposed to run out of food and now largely thanks to those who the imbeciles despise the world is getting obese.

Damn how is that these people are so full of shit?

ThirdWorldDude's picture

Enjoy your GMO meal fucker, and go back to duty flying over Chigaco!

Grinder74's picture

How about you try to expand your vocabulary and pick on a more "peaceful" religion with your vulgarity: something like

"Mohammedfuckingprophet is he so full of shit."

Xkwisetly Paneful's picture

A calorie is a calorie.

I love reading anything to the contrary that access to calories and sedentary lifestyle are the underlying causes.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html

Twinkies. Nutty bars. Powdered donuts.

For 10 weeks, Mark Haub, a professor of human nutrition at Kansas State University, ate one of these sugary cakelets every three hours, instead of meals. To add variety in his steady stream of Hostess and Little Debbie snacks, Haub munched on Doritos chips, sugary cereals and Oreos, too.

His premise: That in weight loss, pure calorie counting is what matters most -- not the nutritional value of the food.

The premise held up: On his "convenience store diet," he shed 27 pounds in two months.

 

 

 

Oh but processed food is evil lets go back to 1649, down with all mass producers of food products.

Down with genetically altered food, fuck the chickens.  If H1N1 reached a flock of chickens 15yrs ago hundreds of millions of chickens would be slaughtered as H1N1 spreads very quickly,

of course thanks to genetic alterations-it largely no longer spreads throughout the flock.

But who cares? these people are evil, lets go back to the era or famines and pandemics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

pods's picture

Yeah, but have him keep eating that diet for 5 years to see how beneficial it is to his health.

Gully Foyle's picture

pods

Because you chose not to read the link.


Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

"That's where the head scratching comes," Haub said. "What does that mean? Does that mean I'm healthier? Or does it mean how we define health from a biology standpoint, that we're missing something?"

pods's picture

Gully, because you chose not to read my post.

So health is now defined by 3 measurable attributes over a period of 10 weeks?  He lost 27 pounds, his body was burning off fat.  No shit his triglycerides would fall.

I use many metrics to view what we call "health" and I can assure you, a long term diet of twinkies, crackers, and cookies is a death sentence.

Any easy way to judge how healthy a diet is is to use this Dr. Fuhrman equation:
H=N/C

Health= Nutrients/Calories.

Sure, they gave the a caveat in the story.  But 95% of the dingos that read the story or headline will be comforted in the diet that they want to eat.

We as americans, and I would go further and say most westerners, will go to great lengths to prove that the diet they prefer is healthy.

And see, I can use bold too.

pods

 

Xkwisetly Paneful's picture

Obesity is not only the health epidemic in the first world it is also the topic of this article.

The main cause is access to calories and sedentary lifestyle. 

Has zero, zippo, nada to do with what those calories are composed of which is the point.

These threads invariably contain inaccurate information that if people just ate healthier foods with the same caloric intake that they largely would not be obese and that is false.

but given the diet and nutrition is massive huge money, I wouldn't expect this myth to be shattered in the public realm anytime soon.

 

Is living off twinkies unhealthy? of course but not because they in and of themselves cause obesity. Any unbalanced diet is unhealthy but a balanced diet of equal caloric intake will still result in obesity which is the current first world health epidemic.

Spastica Rex's picture

I don't think you've really supported your weirdly angry contentions. Watch your blood pressure, chief.

pods's picture

Heathly whole food does not have the same caloric density as heavily processed, calorie laden food.  Along with calories, it contains phytochemicals, soluble and insoluble fiber, minerals, etc.

So it is almost impossible to overeat when you are eating a healthy diet.  I am not saying vegetarian, vegan, organic or any other buzzword.

When you eat a diet that has the bulk of the calories is obtained from whole vegetables, fruits, and nuts and seeds, you almost cannot overeat.

Our overeating is due to the malnutrition that is rampant in society today.  Yes, I said malnutrition.  Your body craves nutrients.  When you do not supply them, you body will desire more food in an attempt to get the nutrients that it needs.  The vast majority of americans are deficient in many major nutrients, and no doubt deficient in many yet unrecognized nutrients.

The second reason is due to the catabolic processes that our body undertakes when we are not digesting food.  The processing of toxins makes you feel terrible.  Of course, we all call that hunger, but it is not really hunger.  Fasting is a way to allow your body to process all the toxins and clean your system. Your body does not process toxins when it is busy digesting food.

So as soon as your body starts to process toxins and heal, we feel like shit and grab something to make us feel better.  That is food, and it is an addictive behaviour.

You do make a good point with the supplement and diet industry being mainly destructive to health.  Today we believe that a pill and a twisting of data that allows us to eat how we want to eat is the way to achieve health, which today is seen as not being fat.

pods

 

ElvisDog's picture

When you eat a diet that has the bulk of the calories is obtained from whole vegetables, fruits, and nuts and seeds

Who wants to eat only only vegetables, fruits, nuts, seeds? Yuck. Reminds me of some people I know who love to post about their quinoa-based dinners. They don't mention that quinoa tastes like bird seed. And the jury is still out on whether vegan/vege-only diets are even good for you. Read James Howard Kunstler blog archives for a summary of what was happening to his body under a strict vegan diet.

pods's picture

Then keep eating how you want and search for evidence that it is healthy.  Seems that is what most people do.  Find evidence that reinforces your preferred eating palate.

It really does not matter to me what you do.

A diet high in nutrients obtained from a whole food diet where no more than 5-10% of calories are obtained from animal products virtually guarantees you to be cancer, heart disease, and other chronic disease free.

If there was a pill that stated that, the creator would be the richest man alive.

BTW, vegans can be just as unhealthy as meat only, carb only, or anyone else. There is nothing special about veganism.  It is about nutrients, not labels.

pods

 

john39's picture

why don't we just eat soylent green then?  /sarc off

CPL's picture

Agreed.

 

But I think most people would start to feel a bit sick of the Swedish berry and Beef jerky nightly.

dolly madison's picture

I've experomented enough to know that you are wrong.  A calorie is not just a calorie.  When I eat that crap I gain ridiculous amounts of weight.

Besides that appetite is important.  The crap stimulates appetite.  It means nothing that one man can endure the diet he did. 

grok's picture

Read Gary Taube's Good Calories, Bad Calories.

 

and btw, there is nothing wrong with fat inandofitself.  My diet consists of probably 30% fat and my bloodwork is magnificent.

fnordfnordfnord's picture

Send them some carrot seeds. It's no surprise to me that Asians are suspiscious of Monsanto et al.

zuuuueri's picture

a technical triumph indeed- a triumph of a technology of death and destruction.

Sorry mate, this is not quite the shining example you might have been looking for if you wanted to point out red tape killing off some new development. These GMOs from monsanto and pals are some of the purest concentrated evil you will find on this planet today. Not only because of the legal trojan horse they represent, not only because of the orwellian methods of enforcement of 'intellectual property', but also even more fundamentally, through shortsighted pollution of the gene pools of the species tampered with and the disruption of whole ecosystems where they are planted.

Of course, we have a long history of making shortsighted and destructive moves because they were profitable to a handful of people at the time. This does not in any way make it a good idea.

Moreover, genetic tampering is truly the gift that keeps on giving - long long after the original profits have been eaten and forgotten, long after the very civilization that brought them about is gone and forgotten, still the consequences remain. Your children will curse your name and your miserable desperation for a few extra bucks, struggling to live in the world you left them, and it will be just that much worse with these kind of crops.

 

 

cnhedge1's picture

Are concerns over a Greek Euro exit overdone ?
http://www.cnhedge.com/thread-4852-1-1.html

Is the Euro area Credibly on Target?
http://www.cnhedge.com/thread-4838-1-1.html

ZackAttack's picture

It's also great that every ear of corn grown in the US is genetically identical.

What could go wrong?

Abitdodgie's picture

I had type 2 , it takes about 30 days to get rid of it if you sort your diet out , I no longer have it , it really is a no brainer .

pods's picture

Yep, diet alone can remediate Type II diabetes. It is a chronic disease of malnutrition.

pods

BooMushroom's picture

And as any American can tell you, there are many people who would rather pay for insulin and inject themselves in the stomach, than give up twinkies and Doritos.

Miffed Microbiologist's picture

You're correct but exercise can enhance the effect. Some hard core card and weight lifting has been shown to make cells more receptive to insulin therefore you need less.

Miffed:-)

kekekekekekeke's picture

good for you!

 

in this movie they reversed type 1 and type 2 diabetes by altering diet

 

http://www.naturalnews.com/030408_raw_for_30_diabetes.html

CPL's picture

http://www.enewspf.com/latest-news/science-a-environmental/32914-researc...

 

Mess with mother nature and she takes her pound of flesh by making better bugs to eat the toxins.  Something as simple as a potato bug or a cricket has sixteen reproductive cycles as a speices in a single season.  Or to put it in perspective, in a single human lifetime of 65 years, both "simple" bugs will have 3100 reproductive cycles to work out the annoyances the hairy bipeds throw at them.

 

Since we've got everything from super flus that are completely resistant to anything medical science can throw at them, we now have super bugs that are starting to target our food and fuel (corn, potatoes, sugar beets).  Fantastic stuff.  Maybe if Evolution was accepted and counted as a wild card varible in the development of the business plans we wouldn't be in the situation we are now.  It's surprising how many of the dolts on the PhD level don't even acknowledge that mother nature will shit on their GM veggie projects.

 

Matt's picture

Yeah, maybe having 95% of a crop being genetically identical is a bad thing, ya think?

Is there any liability for Monsanto if a blight or something wipes out all crops using their seeds as a result of lack of variety?

Xkwisetly Paneful's picture

Yea she makes better bugs! That's why slaughter due to the spread of infection amongst livestock is near zero because mother nature makes better bugs.

It is so scary, solve one problem and another arises, so I guess that means that famine is preferable.

Terrible idea, who wants the perfect vegetable everytime?

Not me, I want the farmers to depend on mother nature's randomness.

Really and truly, I want to go back nothing yields per acre and uneven results at that.

Because genetically altered food is evil!

Saro's picture

It depends on whether the genetic manipulation is a smart missile, targeted to a specific gene that they want to express, or a carpet-bombing approach (using poison) that they continue until the wheat grown from the mutated seeds displays the characteristics that they want it to (as alleged by William Davis).

Sure, they eventually got their RoundUp resistance in wheat, but what other changes did the uncontrolled mutations cause?  Since they can't possibly know, the only reasonable thing to do is to shove as much of it down our gullet as possible, right?

 

CPL's picture

It will go back that direction whether the human race wants to or not.  We have billionaires attempting to get into space to mine rocks (whatever...lolololol) while back here on earth all countries are hitting that energy wall hard.

 

http://www.brecorder.com/top-news/1-front-top-news/58275-fuel-supply-red...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-21/oil-rises-first-time-in-seven-d...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-20/fighting-climate-change-with-lo...

- Going backwards in time to attempt some change...won't happen until the last drop is pulled and people are stuck without options.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-21/u-s-gasoline-falls-to-three-mon...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9278578/Ed-Davey-Green-energy-tax...

- My favorite...like there aren't enough consumption taxes...why not have a sixth one...like that changes a damn thing.  At least the tax is only in worthless paper.

 

 

hedgehog9999's picture

sO IS PINKSLIME, MC fATS BURGERS, cHEESY bURRITOS, pIZZAS,RICH CAKES ETC.BUT yOU CAN'T REALLY BLAME FAST FOOD ONLY AS iNDIA AND cHINA DO NOT HAVE THE PENETRATION OF THE BIG WESTERN FAST FOOD CHAINS BUT THEY HAVE OTHER JUNK FOOD THEMSELVES AND NOT TO MENTION THE FOOTPRINT OF pEPSI AND cOKE AND ALL THEiR COMPETITORS. LACK of ENOUGH EXERCISE AND SITTING ON YOUR ASS ALL DAY HAS A LOT TO CONTRIBUTE AS WELL..................

i WONDER IF SOMEBODY COULD CHART THE NUMBER OF mCdONALDS OUTLETS IN THE WORLD AGAINST THE NUMBER OF CASES OF dIABETES, NOT TO PICK ON mCdONALDS AS THE MAIN CAUSE BUT MORE AS A PROXY OR INDEX CORRELATING it TO THE  WORLD OBESITY EPIDEMIC BECAUSE IN FACT THERE ARE MANY MANY CULPRITS..................

 

LowProfile's picture

YOUR FUCKING CAPS LOCK IS BUSTED.

Just sayin'...

ProtectiveFather's picture

Did you not look up once as you typed that? Wowzers.

viahj's picture

I bet that they did but then said "fuck, I'm not retyping all of that!"

onelight's picture

Is this because we have exported our gmo-enriched food paradigm to them?

Subprime food and all the rest...another derivative fiasco foisted on the world...oh and don't forget the cancer sticks, they were all in great need of that too..

...more I listen, the more I hear the words of George Carlin echoing The Planet is Fine, it's the people...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0aFPXr4n4&feature=related

His comments against environmentalism are bombastic, but his point seems really to be about human arrogance.

Gully Foyle's picture

onelight

And you are the reason for this

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230419270457740434380200243...

Red Tape Hobbles a Harvest of Life-Saving Rice

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/143374/

Vitamin A deficiency affects the immune system, leading to illness and frequently to blindness. It probably causes more deaths than malaria, HIV or tuberculosis, killing as many people every single day as the Fukushima tsunami. It can be solved by eating green vegetables and meat, but for many poor Asians, who can afford only rice, that remains an impossible dream. To deal with the problem, “biofortification” with genetically modified food plants is 1/10th as costly as dietary supplements.

“Golden rice”—with two extra genes to make beta-carotene, the raw material for vitamin A—was a technical triumph, identical to ordinary rice except in color. Painstaking negotiations led to companies waiving their patent rights so the plant could be grown and regrown free by anybody.

Yet today, 14 years later, it still has not been licensed to growers anywhere in the world. The reason is regulatory red tape deliberately imposed to appease the opponents of genetic modification, which Adrian Dubock, head of the golden rice project, describes as “a witch-hunt for suspected theoretical environmental problems…[because] many activist NGOs thought that genetically engineered crops should be opposed as part of their anti-globalization agenda.”

It is surprising to find that an effective solution to the problem consistently rated by experts as the poor world’s highest priority has been stubbornly opposed by so many pressure groups supposedly acting on behalf of the poor.

Confused's picture

Sure. Its the fault of opponents of genetic modification.

 

Because....you know, giving it away for...... free........ so it could be regrown by anyone......for free........at no cost...........free........ is totally believable.

 

Whats the catch?

Gully Foyle's picture

Confused

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice

Golden rice was created by Ingo Potrykus of the Institute of Plant Sciences at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, working with Peter Beyer of the University of Freiburg.

...

Potrykus has spearheaded an effort to have golden rice distributed for free to subsistence farmers. This required several companies which had intellectual property rights to the results of Beyer's research to license it for free. Beyer had received funding from the European Commissions 'Carotene Plus' research program, and by accepting those funds, he was required by law to give the rights to his discovery to the corporate sponsors of that program, Zeneca (now Syngenta). Beyer and Potrykus made use of 70 intellectual property rights belonging to 32 different companies and universities in the making of golden rice. They needed to establish free licences for all of these, so Syngenta and humanitarian partners in the project could use golden rice in breeding programs and to develop new crops.[24]

Free licenses, so called Humanitarian Use Licenses, were granted quickly due to the positive publicity that golden rice received, particularly in Time magazine in July 2000. Golden rice was said to be the first genetically modified crop that was inarguably beneficial, and thus met with widespread approval. Monsanto Company was one of the first companies to grant the group free licences.[25]

The group also had to define the cutoff between humanitarian and commercial use. This figure was set at US$10,000. Therefore, as long as a farmer or subsequent user of golden rice genetics does not make more than $10,000 per year, no royalties need be paid to Syngenta for commercial use. There is no fee for the humanitarian use of golden rice, and farmers are permitted to keep and replant seed.

...

Critics of genetically engineered crops have raised various concerns. One of these is that golden rice originally did not have sufficient vitamin A. This problem was solved by the development of new strains of rice.[3] However, there are still doubts about the speed at which vitamin A degrades once the plant is harvested, and how much would remain after cooking.[28] A 2009 study of boiled golden rice fed to volunteers concluded that golden rice is effectively converted into vitamin A in humans.[9]

Greenpeace opposes the release of any genetically modified organisms into the environment, and is concerned that golden rice is a Pandora's Box that will open the door to more widespread use of GMOs.[29]

Vandana Shiva, an Indian anti-GMO activist, argued the problem was not that the crop had any particular deficiencies, but that there were potential problems with poverty and loss of biodiversity in food crops. These problems are aggravated by the corporate control of agriculture based on genetically modified foods. By focusing on a narrow problem (vitamin A deficiency), Shiva argued, the golden rice proponents were obscuring the larger issue of a lack of broad availability of diverse and nutritionally adequate sources of food.[30] Other groups have argued a varied diet containing foods rich in beta carotene such as sweet potato, leafy green vegetables and fruit would provide children with sufficient vitamin A.[31]

Because of lacking real-world studies and uncertainty about how many people will use golden rice, WHO malnutrition expert Francesco Branca concludes "giving out supplements, fortifying existing foods with vitamin A, and teaching people to grow carrots or certain leafy vegetables are, for now, more promising ways to fight the problem".[32]

fnordfnordfnord's picture

Free for humanitarian use, while we feel like it, is not the same as free.

prole's picture

I'm not reading GulluBoil entire post, but it appears to me that the statist troll is on here championing some genetically modified rice, based on some twisted logic that someone is withholding the poison? For whatever reason? If so-- GOOD!! any reason to ban the poisonous chemical/biological warfare fruit known as "GMO" is a good reason. Let the bastards zealously guard their deadly "patent" for a million years.

onelight's picture

Gully that's interesting -- also how the article begins by contending that were the question raised in 1920, it would have been answered in support of eugenics, that great inspiration of Britain and then America and then over to Germany with fateful consequences -- Eugenics was not the most shining inspiration of the British Empire, alas nor of the The Cousins who bought into it for a time --

Golden Rice may be an exception, and I would like to learn more about it, from the scientists who have so ably debunked the rest of the GMO paradigm -- in meantime, I have to be proud of the many countries in the world that have voted to slow down the spread of GMO foods, until we know that what is claimed to be humane science is not actually stealth eugenics

That said, if Golden Rice is a true contribution whose advance has been blocked, well that is wrong indeed