> No, the idea is to taint anti-GMO activists with the accusation that they're killing third world children so that other, more profitable GMOs can be fed to fa

> No, the idea is to taint anti-GMO activists with the accusation that they're killing third world children so that other, more profitable GMOs can be fed to fat Americans. Yes those evil corporations are trying to save children from blindness just to make anti science activists look bad. The bastards!!! Sarcasm aside, did you know most of our crop varieties have been modified using radiation? Those types of mutations are still used today and require little testing, much less than what golden rice has been through. > (Oh, and by the way it inherently has worse yields than the varieties it's based on, so that golden rice will be more expensive too.) This is straight up FUD. The first version didn't have the same yield but the more recent ones do. > it cannot be used for any kind of meaningful deployment of the tech Why not? It clearly states they will provide the technology to the National Agricultural Research Centres and other public sector research institutions, in developing countries. Once the farmers have the crop they can replant as much as they like and they don't have to rely on capsules anymore. > the GMO industry couldn't bear to actually give up the possibility that they could somehow make money from starving third world kids. Except the GMO industry (whatever that means) is not involved in the development of Golden Rice (apart from some patents).