KUALA LUMPUR - The International Year of Rice is coming to an end, but the debate over GM (genetically modified) rice will continue for some time as it gains momentum worldwide with GM rice's introduction for
commercial planting in China expected to take place as early as next year.

Currently, China, India and the Philippines are holding field trials after investing a lot of resources in genetically engineered rice.

According to a Reuters report, Chinese agricultural scientists have said China - the world's top producer and consumer of rice - could release GM rice by next year, with pressure mounting on Beijing to boost domestic grain production and farmer income. But the same report also cited officials at the Philippines-based International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) as saying that the first commercial growing of GM rice crop could be at least three years away. The international Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Application, on the other hand, says most of the GM rice in the research pipeline will only be available for commercial
use in five to eight years.

The types of GM rice that are likely to be available for commercial use in the short term are herbicide tolerant varieties, Bt rice (those that contain the Bacillus thuringiensis endotoxin gene that allows the rice to be resistant to the yellow stem borer) and rice that is resistant to bacterial leaf blight. Other varieties of GM rice in various stages of development include biofortified rice (beta-carotene, iron and zinc), rice resistant to other major pests (such as brown planthopper), pathogens (bacterial blight, rice blast) and abiotic stresses (drought, salinity, submergence). researchers are also pyramiding (or stacking) multiple GM genes into rice, trying to make GM rice resistant to multiple insects or both disease- and insect-resistant. Currently, only one GM rice trait - tolerance to the herbicide glufosinate - has been approved in the US but is not commercially grown.

In Asia, where rice is the staple diet, vitamin A and iron deficiency is a serious problem. These essential dietary components are found in animal products, fruit and vegetables, which are not always available to the poor. A lack of these nutrients can cause anemia, vision loss or a
weakened immune system, and is one reason for the high rate of mortality and illness among women and children in developing countries.

Proponents of "Golden rice" - a GM variant that has been biofortified to produce pro-vitamin A - argue that it holds the key to widespread vitamin A deficiency problem in the developing world. Critics, however, say there are many alternatives and cheaper ways to solve this problem as
vitamin A can also be obtained from green vegetables and unpolished rice, which are rich in other essential vitamins and minerals as well.

"To offer the poor and malnourished a high-tech "Golden rice" that is tied up in multiple patents, requiring US$100 million to produce and perhaps costing as much to develop, is worse that telling them to eat cake," says scientist Mae-wan Ho, director of the Institute of Science in Society in the United Kingdom, in her book Golden Rice - An Exercise in
How Not To Do Science.

Greenpeace also rejected the idea and pointed out that "Golden rice" would not solve the problem of nutritional deficiencies among the poor. The environmental group calculated, based on the product developers' own figures, that an adult would have to eat at least 12 times the normal
intake of 300g of rice to get the daily recommended amount of pro-vitamin A. As Ho says: "An adult would have to eat at least 3.7 kg dry weight of rice, ie around 9 kilograms of cooked rice, to satisfy the daily need of vitamin A from Golden rice. In other words, a normal daily intake of 300 grams of rice would, at best, provide 8% of vitamin A needed daily. A breast-feeding woman would have to eat at least 6.3 kilograms in dry weight, converting to nearly 18 kilograms of cooked rice per day!"

Other traits of GM rice are also under close scrutiny. Using the experience in the US as a guide, critics believe that use of herbicides is likely to increase, rather than decrease, as the proponents of GM rice claim. In the nine years of commercial growing of GM crops in the US, herbicide use, while having dropped in the early years, increased later.

Though the reasons are varied, the increase in herbicide usage is primarily due to several weeds becoming tolerant to herbicide with herbicide-tolerant crops. Therefore, claims by proponents that herbicide use will fall and farmers will save costs and the environment will benefit sound hollow.

Many GM varieties of rice under development confer resistance to some type of plant pest or pathogen, whether insects, weeds, fungi, viruses or bacteria. According to Greenpeace, pests can evolve to overcome these insect-resistant crops. Citing studies, it says that past experience in
chemical control of organism would indicate that insects, weeds, or pathogens will also eventually develop resistance to GM varieties of rice.

Loss of control because of the evolution of resistance is likely to increase the use of insecticides, which is more harmful to the environment or human health.

But what worries some scientists and critics about the introduction of GM rice in Asia, which is the center of origin for rice, is the danger of GM rice contamination of indigenous varieties and the threat that this poses to food security. Crop genetic diversity is important for food
security. If a disease sweeps through the rice population worldwide, locally bred traditional varieties that are currently abundant, can be relied upon to provide varieties that are resistant to the disease.

However, if GM rice is introduced, it is likely to cross-breed with local varieties, causing the extinction of local crops. The incident of genetic engineering contamination in Mexico is a case in point and signals what would happen to rice in Asia. In 2001, it was found that local varieties of maize in Mexico were contaminated by GM maize even though the country has a moratorium on it. Just as Mexico is the center of origin and diversity for maize, so is Asia for rice.

Asia produces over 90% of the world's rice supply. An estimated 140,000 different varieties of rice have been created by small farmers in Asia. It is therefore of great importance that contamination is avoided in the region in order to protect food security and crop diversity.

Another worry that plagues critics is that the introduction of GM rice heralds the arrival of corporate dominance of rice by a small number of large seed and agriculture companies such as Monsanto, Bayer and Syngenta, the main developers of GM rice. According to an Actionaid (an aid organization) study, as of 2001, there are 250 patents on rice, 61% are
controlled by just six seed companies, three of them also the world's largest pesticide corporations. There is concern that through patents and contractual agreements, seed companies will seek to prohibit farmers from sharing or saving seed, control what pesticides are used and even assert ownership rights over the harvest.

But researchers in the field of biotechnology insist the aim of GM organisms is not to create monopolies or to introduce new farming techniques, but to try to improve nutrition and health in developing countries. However, critics point to the successful alternatives to genetic engineering that are less costly and controversial. Plant breeders at IRRI, for example, have identified rice varieties in its collection of
germplasm that are naturally high in iron. They found that aromatic grains were usually higher in iron concentration and often also higher in zinc, compared to non-aromatic varieties. At the same time, they also experimented in growing, by conventional breeding, new varieties that could thrive in poor soils and cold temperature, and found that one variety that
was designed to tolerate low temperatures was also rich in iron and zinc.

With mounting evidence on why the GM road is full of peril, coupled with uncertainties of the benefits of GM rice, there are justifications for farmers and governments in Asia and other rice growing regions in the world to tread cautiously and continue to search for less costly and more durable alternatives.