GMO debate takes a new twist
However, Greenpeace, one of the largest organizations against GMO, has vehemently opposed this move.

By Linda Mack | 15 hours ago

Genetically modified foods first developed in the mid-1990s. Scientist hailed it as the answer to food shortage and hunger. It is made by altering the organism's genetic makeup. The resulting organism usually shows superior qualities of the original.

However, human rights groups have been strongly against GMOs. Many state that the product is both harmful to the human body and affect other plants they get in contact with. Scientists are tiring to release a new kind of rice labeled "Golden rice." However, Greenpeace, one of the largest organizations against GMO, has vehemently opposed this move.

Golden rice is goldish brown in color, and it has been added a gene that makes the rice acquire high levels of Vitamin A. The Rice is believed to be a good way to solve malnutrition in places where affording a variety of meals may be a problem. However, Greenpeace says that scientists should look for a more natural way to control malnutrition.

"We urge Greenpeace and its supporters to re-examine the experience of farmers and consumers worldwide with crops and foods improved through biotechnology," said the lead scientist fighting Greenpeace. "They should recognize the findings of authoritative scientific bodies and regulatory agencies, and abandon their campaign against 'GMOs' in general and Golden Rice in particular."

88 percent of scientists from all over the world have voted that GMOs are safe. But perhaps an even more substantial argument is that Greenpeace should choose life and not really focus on what people eat. Just that they are not dying when there is an option for food.

Comments
Read on for more of Travelerseek's advice, and tell us what indispensable lessons you've learned on the road in the comments below — or on Twitter with hashtag @travelerseek