DailyDirt: Healthier Rice... From Science

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Billions of people around the world eat rice. So if rice can be made to be more healthy, the benefits could be globally significant. Sure, there are plenty of folks trying to genetically engineer better rice (eg. Golden Rice), but if you don't like GMOs for whatever reason, you're not out of luck. There are a few things that might help improve rice without messing around with rice DNA. After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: arsenic, bacteria, cooking, food, gmo, golden rice, health, how-to, low calorie, microbiome, rice, starches


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2015 @ 5:45pm

    Huh, didn't know arsenic in rice was an issue.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2015 @ 5:54pm

    Or eat brown rice.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Uriel-238 (profile), 21 Aug 2015 @ 6:11pm

    Is there really a thing about GMOs being actually unhealthy?

    Or is it that some GMOs may be unhealthy because spookyspooky? Or is it just a big fuck-Monsanto campaign?

    So far I haven't found any case for all GMOs being labeled as unhealthy, given we're happy to eat crush beetle carapace and artificial sweeteners that are allegedly safe but give people headaches, without big warning labels on either of those.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PopeRatzo (profile), 21 Aug 2015 @ 7:53pm

      Re: Is there really a thing about GMOs being actually unhealthy?

      Or maybe you just oppose GMOs because you don't believe in the patenting of basic foodstuffs.

      If I was worried about food safety, I would have eaten that burrito today from a street vendor with prison tattoos.

      There are a lot of reasons, political, economic, and simple consumer preference to not want to purchase GMO foods. And one might be simple contrariness. When an industry is willing to spend billions to make sure you never find out how their products are made, consumers can tell those companies to go to hell.

      Because ultimately, the consumer is paying the bill for all the research, all the marketing and all the lobbying around GMOs. And the one who pays gets to decide.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2015 @ 6:48pm

    In regards to GMOs anyone that assumes they're automatically safe is a dumbass. Anyone that assumes they're automatically dangerous is also a dumbass.

    Let's all agree to hate on Monsanto for their massive IP abuses instead of for GMO silliness.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2015 @ 7:50pm

      Re:

      Whether safe or not is immaterial, the consumer has a right to know what they are purchasing.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PopeRatzo (profile), 21 Aug 2015 @ 7:58pm

        Re: Re:

        Goddamn right they do. Because it's the consumer that is paying the bill. Not the corporation, not the GMO lobbyists, not even the farmers.

        The one who pays the bill gets to find out what they're paying for. And the unwillingness to disclose the provenance of their products is what's giving the GMO industry a bad name.

        One wonders why they don't just take all the money that they use to lobby congress and fight labeling laws and just use it on marketing their products' supposed wonderful properties. When you hide something, it makes people suspicious, and make no mistake: consumers are suspicious about GMOs and have a right to be.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Uriel-238 (profile), 21 Aug 2015 @ 11:28pm

          Kinda what I gathered before.

          From what I've heard from the science / nutrition people being a GMO / not being a GMO isn't too big a deal.

          From what I've read here, Monsanto is a really big fact dick and should be boycotted if not burned down and turned into a community garden.

          From what I've heard about labeling, it is very lacking in details. The bug carapace is from natural red food coloring which renders many things non-kosher, which is why it's a big deal, which is why I know about ground bug carapaces as a food product in the first place.

          No one puts powdered beetle carapace on their ingredients list. They put natural food coloring.

          And I think putting a GMO warning on our labels is going to be much like putting natural food coloring. Uninformative and not useful.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            PopeRatzo (profile), 22 Aug 2015 @ 9:19am

            Re: Kinda what I gathered before.

            That's why, instead of ingredients labeling, I would prefer a simple listing of the patents covering the GMOs themselves.

            I don't want to eat patented basic foodstuffs. If every goddamn patent is listed when I buy a phone or a video game, why shouldn't every goddamn patent be listed when I buy food?

            As you say, the food industry tries very hard to hide what's really in their products (like bug carapaces). If I'm the one paying, I want to know little details like that.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Mark Gisleson (profile), 22 Aug 2015 @ 9:04am

    Why reduce calories?

    Does the author have any clue why scientists are trying to modify rice? Why the tip on how to reduce the calories in rice? Yes, as a fat American I know that trick, but the scientists are trying to trick MORE calories out of rice, not less.

    What a stunning disconnect to go from feeding people to tips on how to get less food value from your food.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
.

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.