I wanted to say something in favor of sweet potatoes, so did some research:

[0] says:

The best lettuce has 2.5mg of beta-carotene in 47g of lettuce. The best sweet potato has 31mg of beta-carotene in 328g of sweet potato (sweet potatoes are the beta-carotene leader BTW :strong:).

If this modified lettuce can really have 30 times as much beta-carotene, that's a significant amount. I was expecting the numbers to show that lettuce had almost no beta-carotene, and after you times it by 30 it's still almost nothing, but apparently it's more significant than that.

[0]: https://ods.od.nih.gov/pubs/usdandb/VitA-betaCarotene-Conten...

Amazing. Lettuce that has increased beta carotene content – something we can already get from carrots – and, as a bonus, now looks unappetisingly like past-its-best regular lettuce.

I’m not up for making a thorough post about it right now, but one thing to be aware of is that beta carotene converts to vitamin A at rates that range from abysmal (single digit percentages or less) to barely adequate depending on personal factors like genetics.

I’ve also come across indication that beta carotene byproducts can potentially inhibit vitamin A use (also likely connected with personal genetics), throwing another wrench into the works.

Basically I do not recommend naively conflating carotenoid intake with vitamin A intake, especially in regards to populations vulnerable to malnutrition. For me and most of you reading this however the difference is not much of consequence.

I see the title was fixed here. The original said 30x more vitamins, but it is only beta-carotene. They created a version of lettuce that has a little more beta carotene than Kale, basically, but not as nutrient dense in any other way.

I actually am getting more concerned about transgenic food. Nassim Taleb’s arguments about limited upside with unlikely, but massive downside of these organisms if they have unexpected outcomes.

I’m obviously fine with genetic modification to plants to create crossbreeds of various types of, say, lettuce, but it seems like we are trying to change out plants instead of trying to change our farming practices.

---

Edit: since people are likely looking for a citation here, and are likely to down by default (again, I don't think their is anything "wrong" or "unhealthy" about genetically modification), I'll add one of his papers on the subject. Again, the concern is only to do with the effects that significant modification could have on wild species, and not on consumption:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267214303_The_Preca...

>Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and their risk are currently the subject of debate. Here we argue that they fall squarely under the PP [Precautionary Principle] because their risk is systemic. There are two aspects of systemic risk, the widespread impact on the ecosystem and the widespread impact on health.

>Ecologically, in addition to intentional cultivation, GMOs have the propensity to spread uncontrollably, and thus their risks cannot be localized. The cross-breeding of wild-type plants with genetically modified ones prevents their disentangling, leading to irreversible system-wide effects with unknown downsides. The ecological implications of releasing modified organisms into the wild are not tested empirically before release.

Golden lettuce is an anti-evolutive move. As a new product can be successful, but I predict that It will need an obligatory supply of chemicals on its production. Probably more chemicals than the green lettuce. The benefits as healthy food will be a balance between the carotene plus the other parts in the equation. Should be treated as a cold season product at least.

As a fancy product provides a new color in the market and can bring the company a lot of money (I'm not against that as long as is grow accurately) but IMO must be cleaned thoroughly by the consumer.

This is a good idea imo. Cus we grow vegetables so big and fast nowadays they end with with less nutrients in them by volume.

I guess the idea is that you grow these in vertical farms on the moon.

You could just eat a carrot... Carrots are better than lettuce anyway, in my humble but objectively correct opinion.

But, how does it taste?

[dead]

[dead]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Golden Rice, developed in the 1980s, which offered similar nutritional benefits. Golden Rice failed to gain significant traction because of dogmatic opposition to bioengineered foods. Personally, I hope Golden Lettuce receives more pragmatic review and support.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice

Prepare for Greenpeace et al to shoot this down just like Golden Rice. Decades wasted, millions with damaged eyesight because of some weird Westerners with backwards ideas about what's "natural" telling people in the global south how they should live their lives (or rather, should suffer for their ideals).