April, 01 2015, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Birgit Jaeckel
Lead Consultant, International Communications
Stockholmsvägen 23
122 62 Enskede
Sweden
Phone Stockholm: +46-8-702 03 39
Mobile (direct): +49 170 24 49 348
World Health Day: Genetically Engineered Crops are "False Miracles", Warn Global Experts
With "Food Safety" being the theme for this year's World Health Day, 37 Laureates of the Right Livelihood Award from across the world have endorsed a declaration on the future of nutrition, denouncing Golden Rice and GM Bananas as "false miracles".
WASHINGTON
With "Food Safety" being the theme for this year's World Health Day, 37 Laureates of the Right Livelihood Award from across the world have endorsed a declaration on the future of nutrition, denouncing Golden Rice and GM Bananas as "false miracles".
On 8 March 2015, Vandana Shiva, 1993 Right Livelihood Award Laureate, and her organisation Navdanya, along with a coalition of women's groups in India, began to call for signatures to a declaration on the future of nutrition. As many as 37 Right Livelihood Award Laureates have since endorsed this declaration adding support for the global movement against Golden Rice and GM Bananas. The declaration states that Golden Rice has not in fact proven to be more nutritious than indigenous varieties and that natural food sources like turmeric provide much more iron than GM bananas.
"As a source of nutrition for the Global South, Golden Rice has no real benefits. But considering the precedents set by soya, corn, canola and cotton, introducing Golden Rice as a way for large companies to gain control over entire food cultures based on rice, makes perfect sense," states the declaration. It also reveals the environmental costs, potentially damaging health impacts and consequences for small-scale farmers of GM crop production, and calls for support for sustainable agro-ecology systems with crop diversity and seed sovereignty.
For the complete text of the declaration, please see
https://seedfreedom.info/campaign/declaration-for-international-womens-day-8-march-2015/
A summary is provided below this release.
For a list with Right Livelihood Award Recipients' signatures to the declaration, among them also many men who support the women's initiative, see here:
www.rightlivelihood.org/biodiversity_gmo.html
Food sovereignty organization GRAIN, recipient of the 2011 Right Livelihood Award and signatory to the declaration, said in an earlier statement, "Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) - like other problems on malnutrition and hunger - is not caused by the lack of Vitamin A in food, but by people's inability to access a balanced diet...it is a mistake to turn blindly to Golden Rice, a crop that the International Rice Research Institute itself admits it has not yet determined can actually improve Vitamin A...It is clear that the development of Golden Rice, with its avowedly humanitarian mission to solve Vitamin A deficiency serves the biotech industry in its efforts to win wider approval for GM foods. It is a tool to promote GMOs that would pave the way towards control of food and agriculture by agrobiotech corporations." For further reference, please see:
https://www.grain.org/article/entries/5177-media-release-golden-rice-is-unnecessary-and-dangerous
Nigerian environmentalist Nnimmo Bassey, recipient of the 2010 Right Livelihood Award, said the move toward GM crops in Africa is driven by profit and heralds a new form of colonization. "The modern biotech industry is really going bananas. The so-called golden rice has always been known to be a hoax. The same goes for the so-called golden bananas. The future of African nutrition and access to the right food lies in the preservation of our biodiversity and genetic resources," he said.
Recently, Africa has been seeing escalating controversy over the development of GM crops on the continent.Summary of Declaration
Corporations are proposing genetically engineered Golden Rice and GMO Bananas as a solution to hunger and malnutrition in the Global South. The declaration initiated by Right Livelihood Laureate Vandana Shiva criticises the claims of nutrition benefits:
"Golden Rice is 350% less efficient in providing Vit A than the biodiversity alternatives that women grow. GMO 'iron-rich' Bananas have 3000% less iron than turmeric and 2000% less iron than amchur (mango powder).... Apart from being nutritionally empty, GMOs are part of an industrial system of agriculture that is destroying the planet, depleting our water sources, increasing green houses gases, and driving farmers into debt and suicide through a greater dependence on chemical inputs. Moreover, these corporate-led industrial monocultures are destroying biodiversity, and we are losing access to the food systems that have sustained us throughout time. When we consider the number of patents involved in these initiatives, it becomes all too clear that the only beneficiaries of these supposedly 'people-led' ventures are large companies operating for profit - not for people."
The declaration explains six processes through which industrial farming robs food of its nutrition.
First, industrial breeding is based on uniformity, long distance transport, and industrial processing, and not on diversity, taste, nutrition, quality and resilience. Industrially bred wheat varieties are low in nutrition and have contributed to the epidemic of gluten intolerance.
Second, by replacing biodiversity with monocultures, industrial agriculture reduces the amount of nutrition per acre.
Third, by renewing fertility with chemical inputs of synthetic fertilisers, the health of the soil is destroyed, nutrition in soils is reduced, and plants become nutritionally empty.
Fourth, GMOs are leading to a decline in nutritional availability, because the biotechnology industry is growing commodities, not food. 90% of the GMO corn and soya goes to biofuel and animal food, not human food.
Fifth, herbicide tolerant crops account for most of the GMOs cultivated. The use of Roundup (glyphosate) with Roundup Ready crops removes vital minerals like manganese through "chelation"-binding.
Sixth, there is ecology of biodiversity in our nutrition. Nutrients need each other. Fats are needed for absorption and bioavailability of Vitamin A, and Vitamin C is needed for absorption of iron. Mechanistic reductionism in nutrition undermines the ecological processes through which farms grow nutrition and our bodies are nourished.
Golden Rice & GM bananas are False Miracles
Golden Rice is genetically engineered rice with two genes from a daffodil and one gene from a bacterium. It is being offered as a "miracle cure" for Vitamin A Deficiency (VAD). But Golden Rice "is 350% less efficient in providing Vit A than the biodiversity alternatives that women have to offer."
Furthermore, "Not only do these indigenous alternatives based on women's knowledge provide more Vit A than Golden Rice at a lower cost, they also provide other nutrients. One such example is iron, which helps fight iron deficiency and anaemia. But just like the biotechnology industry is offering Golden Rice for Vit A deficiency, it is promoting GMO bananas for increased Vit A and iron. In reality, GMO bananas provide 7000% less iron than indigenous biodiversity that Indian women are experts in growing and processing."
Further Negative Effects of Golden Rice & GM Bananas
The declaration also touches upon the unethical and illegal feeding trials for Golden Rice as well as the GM Bananas. It links the monoculture rice diet to the diabetes epidemic. With 62 million patients, India already has extremely high rates of diabetes. "Golden Rice is an irresponsible proposal that would intensify this by blocking much-needed alternatives - biodiversity and balance in our diets."
Golden Rice promotes monocultures, which further destroy biodiversity. Golden Rice will increase the use of synthetic nitrogen fertilisers. The declaration states: "India is already one of the largest importers of nitrogen fertilisers, and Golden Rice will only serve to increase this. Moreover, it will increase the use of water, intensifying the water crisis. It will contribute to climate change through increased green house gas emissions. And it will leave our farmers liable to higher input costs through dependence on chemicals and fees for proprietary technologies."
The declaration also mentions close links between the scientists involved and the biotechnology corporations pushing royalty collection through patents.
The Right Livelihood Award was established in 1980 to "honour and support courageous people solving global problems". It has become widely known as the 'Alternative Nobel Prize' and there are now 182 Laureates from 72 countries.
LATEST NEWS
'No Safety in Appeasement': Law Firms That Fought Trump Vindicated as DOJ Drops Cases
"Another significant victory for the rule of law over Trump's reign of lawlessness," said Rep. Jamie Raskin.
Mar 03, 2026
Congressman Jamie Raskin said the US Department of Justice's decision Monday to abandon its legal cases against law firms that refused to capitulate to President Donald Trump should serve as "a reminder that those who fight back against authoritarianism are winning."
The DOJ asked the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to dismiss its cases against law firms including Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Susman Godfrey, and Jenner & Block, which won legal challenges they filed last year after Trump issued executive orders saying they should lose government contracts and their employees should be blocked from government buildings.
Those executive orders were signed because the firms represented and employed high-profile Democrats and other opponents of Trump.
Other law firms, including Skadden Arps and Paul Weiss, angered lawyers within their ranks and the larger legal community when they signed deals with Trump; the latter firm agreed to end its internal diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives and provide $40 million in free legal work for the president and causes he supports.
The Trump administration's decision on Monday proved, said Raskin (D-Md.), that "there’s no safety in appeasement.”
“When the Trump administration tried to bully and silence law firms by banning them from federal buildings, courthouses and contracts, a handful—like Susman Godfrey, Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale—fought back," said Raskin. "Today, those firms forced Trump to back down and abandon his blatantly unconstitutional effort to punish lawyers, clients, and causes because Trump disagrees with their speech. Meanwhile, the firms that chose to roll over saddled their associates and partners with doing billions of dollars-worth of free legal work for Trump, his twisted administration and his MAGA allies."
While other firms caved to Trump's demands last year, the companies that didn't quickly won legal victories, with one federal judge saying the executive order targeting Jenner & Block was “doubly violative of the Constitution" because it targeted the clients it represents as well as a lawyer it once employed—Andrew Weissman, who was part of former special counsel Robert Mueller's team that investigated Trump.
“This order, like the others, seeks to chill legal representation the administration doesn’t like, thereby insulating the executive branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers," US District Judge John Bates wrote last May. "It thus violates the Constitution and the court will enjoin its operation in full.”
"This episode will be remembered as demonstrating the difference between institutions that had the ethical courage to uphold the Constitution and fight bullying and then won, and those that compromised their ethics and gained nothing."
Jenner & Block said Monday that "the government’s decision to withdraw its appeals makes permanent the rulings of four federal judges that the executive orders targeting law firms, including Jenner & Block, were unconstitutional."
"Our partnership is proud to have stood firm on behalf of its clients, and we look forward to continuing to serve them—guided by these bedrock values—for many decades to come," said the firm.
Brian Hauss, deputy director of the Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project at the ACLU, said the DOJ had finally admitted "what everyone knew on Day 1: There is no way to defend these unconstitutional executive orders."
“This shameful assault on the rule of law has failed, thanks to the brave lawyers who refused to compromise their integrity," said Hauss.
Vanita Gupta, former associate attorney general under the Biden administration, told NBC News that the law groups that struck deals with the White House had "undermined the rule of law and the legal profession in this country."
"This episode will be remembered as demonstrating the difference between institutions that had the ethical courage to uphold the Constitution and fight bullying and then won, and those that compromised their ethics and gained nothing," Gupta said. "Let’s hope that media companies, universities, and other organizations pay heed."
In addition to his attacks on law firms, the president has threatened universities with funding cuts and federal investigations into what the White House views as antisemitism and extremism on campus and the colleges' efforts to promote diversity and inclusion.
At least six universities have struck deals with Trump. The University of Pennsylvania agreed to ban transgender student athletes from participating on women's sports teams and Columbia University agreed to further crack down on campus protests like those that erupted in 2024 against US support for Israel's assault on Gaza—protests that both the Biden and Trump administrations claimed were antisemitic.
Harvard sued the administration over its decision to freeze $2.2 billion in research funding and was granted a restraining order last year to protect international students whom the White House had threatened with visa restrictions.
On Monday, Raskin said the DOJ's decision to back down from the attacks on law firms was "another significant victory for the rule of law over Trump's reign of lawlessness."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Netanyahu Insists Iran Assault Is 'Not an Endless War' as US Sends More Forces to Middle East
Benjamin Netanyahu infamously predicted that the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 would "have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
Mar 03, 2026
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted in a Fox News appearance late Monday that the intensifying assault on Iran "is not an endless war," even as Trump administration officials declined to provide a clear timeline for the ongoing military operations, deployed more forces to the region, and signaled a more intense bombing campaign is ahead.
As elements of Trump's MAGA base expressed outrage over the war, which is broadly unpopular with the American public, Netanyahu claimed in an appearance on "Hannity" that the US-Israeli onslaught "will create conditions of peace," remarks that came as the Middle East descended into regional war as Iran retaliated against the illegal attacks with strikes on sites in at least nine countries.
The Israeli prime minister's comments recalled his infamous prediction in 2002, ahead of the US invasion of Iraq, that "if you take out Saddam, Saddam's regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
Netanyahu's remarks to Trump loyalist Sean Hannity echoed those of US Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth, who told reporters and the public earlier Monday that "this is not Iraq," dismissing criticism of the administration for plunging the US into another disastrous Middle East war.
"This is not endless," Hegseth said. The Pentagon chief later bristled at a question about President Donald Trump's suggested timeline of "four weeks or less," calling it a "typical NBC sort of got-you type question."
"President Trump has all the latitude in the world to talk about how long it may or may not take four weeks, two weeks, six weeks," Hegseth said. "It could move up, it could move back. We're going to execute at his command."
During the same press conference, Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the US would be sending more forces to the region, declining to offer specifics so as not to "tip the enemy off." Caine also said the US expects to "take additional losses."
"This work is just beginning and will continue," Caine said.
Trump, for his part, said the timeline for the war is "whatever it takes" for the US and Israel to achieve their stated objectives, which have ranged from knocking out Iran's nuclear energy program to full-scale regime change.
"Right from the beginning we projected four to five weeks, but we have the capability to go far longer than that," Trump said.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, meanwhile, warned that "the hardest hits are yet to come from the US military" and said that "the next phase will be even more punishing on Iran than it is right now." Rubio also indicated that Trump decided to join Israel in attacking Iran because the planned Israeli attack was likely to spark retaliation against US forces in the region, a justification that critics described as "insane."
The Iranian Red Crescent said Tuesday that Iran's death toll from the assault is now close to 800 and counting. The US has confirmed six deaths from an Iranian strike on a military installation in Kuwait.
"That we would just follow an ally into a war of choice that puts hundreds of Americans' lives, if not thousands of Americans' lives, at risk should be bone-chilling to Americans," US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said late Monday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Group Leads Push for UN to Declare US-Israeli Assault on Iran 'War of Aggression'
"No legal framework, international or domestic, can justify this."
Mar 02, 2026
A leading human rights group on Monday urged the United Nations General Assembly to declare the unprovoked US-Israeli assault on Iran—which has already killed more than 500 people in just three days, including many children—a "war of aggression."
In a letter sent to the permanent missions of all UN member states in New York City, Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN) "called on governments to formally request an emergency special session of the UN General Assembly to declare the assault a war of aggression in violation of the UN Charter and to demand the immediate cessation of all hostilities."
"The [UN] Security Council is unable to make that determination because the United States, as a permanent member and a party to the conflict, will veto any resolution," DAWN explained. "The General Assembly should act in its place."
DAWN's call came as the death toll from three days of US-Israeli bombardment of cities, towns, and sites throughout Iran rose to at least 555, according to the Iranian Red Crescent Society. Multiple massacres—including a bombing of a girls' school in Minab that officials said killed at least 180 people, many of them students—have been reported.
"The United States has initiated a war of aggression, which UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 defines as 'a crime against international peace' and which the Nuremberg Tribunal—established by the United States itself—called 'the supreme international crime,'" the group noted.
DAWN continued:
The US and Israeli decision to go to war violates the foundations of jus ad bellum, the body of international law governing when a state may lawfully use force against another. Under UN Charter Article 2(4), all member states are prohibited from using force against the territorial integrity or political independence of another state. There are only two explicit exceptions: self-defense under Article 51, or authorization by the UN Security Council under Chapter VII. Neither applies here. Article 51 permits self-defense only "if an armed attack occurs," and Iran had not attacked the United States. Even under the doctrine of anticipatory self-defense, the war is unlawful.
"No legal framework, international or domestic, can justify this US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran," DAWN executive director Omar Shakir said in a statement. "This war is patently illegal, and it must be stopped."
DAWN's call came on the same day that US First Lady Melania Trump chaired a UN Security Council meeting about the role of education in "advancing tolerance and world peace."
Just to be clear, sending his wife Melania to preside over the United Nations Security Council is a display of contempt for the UN by Trump.During his first term, Trump similarly sent his daughter Ivanka to multiple United Nations General Assembly sessions.
[image or embed]
— Leah McElrath (@leahmcelrath.bsky.social) March 2, 2026 at 1:02 PM
"We've become the laughingstock of the entire world," lamented the social media group Occupy Democrats. "This is an unprecedented appearance by an American first dady and yet another sign that [President] Donald Trump prizes loyalty and proximity to himself over competence."
"In fact, this is the first time that the spouse of ANY world leader has been allowed to take the president's seat on the Security Council," Occupy Democrats added. "It sends a clear signal to the world that the United States is now little more than a nepotistic, tin-pot dictatorship."
DAWN also sent a letter to members of Congress urging them to pass a pair of war powers resolutions that would bar US forces from waging an unconstitutional war on Iran. H.Con.Res.38 and S.J.Res.59—introduced last year respectively by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)—would direct Trump to withdraw US forces from unconstitutional attacks on Iran.
"The question before Congress is not whether to authorize this war retroactively," the letter states. "Given that... this war has been illegal under US domestic law from the moment it began... the question before you is whether to end it now, and Congress has the power to do so."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


