9 ms·

Chipotle Says Adios to GMOs, as Food Industry Strips Away Ingredients

54 points by user_235711 12y ago

bane 12y ago
Good, let's rely on random genetic mutation instead. Because we know that only produces healthy organisms that are safe to eat. (/sarcasm)
- 13years 12y ago
  People don't think random mutations are good either. Ironically, though, we may get more of that due to push back against GMOs. http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-11-21/monsanto-vs-dot-mutant-crop-developers-in-global-seed-market http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-11-21/monsanto-vs-... Yet to be fair, GMOs still produce changes that aren't possible through mutagenesis. Also GMOs are not without their own random mutations since the process of transgene insertions often produce their own random set of side effect changes. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559911/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559911/
- revelation 12y ago
  Selective breeding, the ancient form of GMO, which these people interestingly don't seem to object to, uses inbreeding and other techniques that are in fact known to produce unhealthy organisms.
  - federico3 12y ago
    Because breeding is thousands of times slower at producing mutations and it gives researchers (and society in general) enough time to assess the health effects of a crop. In 2015 we are still learning about crops that has been around for centuries.
- protomyth 12y ago
  The right has Climate Change and the left has GMOs with the extremes of both having very different reasons to reject vaccines. Humans are not scientific animals.
vdnkh 12y ago
>"...They blame it (horrific profits) on consumers getting concerned about what they put in their bodies." Even though health food has become fashionable (for perhaps less than rational reasons), I believe that greater awareness of what you eat is extremely important and I'm glad it's becoming mainstream. Now if only they would stop putting so much sugar in bread...
- Vendan 12y ago
  as much as I hate the anti-GMO stuff, cause in reality, we've genetically modified everything we eat through thousands of years of forced selection, I am all for better bread. I bake my own with minimal sugar and gluten, and it is soooo much better then store bread, and really makes a sandwich amazing(note, when I say minimal gluten, I mean no extra gluten, not gluten free flour).
  - Kurtz79 12y ago
    I believe you, but I really think that has absolutely nothing to do with GMO, raher than the simple fact that fresh, homemade food is intrinsically better than store bought food, which is usually tuned for aesthetics and long shelf life as opposed to flavor.
    - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
      Not really true! All of our grocery stores hereabouts bake every day, in-house. And don't assume a restaurant does a worse job than you of managing their freshness. They buy from the same grocery most likely. In fact, the grocery you buy from is a store; their fresh food is managed quite well. In fact everything you make is worse than that, because you have to buy it from them, THEN make something out of it. So its not as fresh.
    - Vendan 12y ago
      Sorry if it seemed like I was linking them, but I wasn't in any way. All the grocery store bread where I live, unless you go to the bakery, is this insanely soft sweet stuff, like Wonderbread and such. It feels like I use less sugar then there is in 2 slices of that stuff.
acheron 12y ago
Remember that "GMO" opposition is anti-scientific nonsense, and has led to millions of children left blind or dead [1], making it probably worse than vaccine opposition, even if the vaccine opposition is more likely to affect you personally. [1] http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2014/03/15/golden-rice-opponents-should-be-held-accountable-for-health-problems-linked-to-vitamain-a-deficiency/ http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2014/03/15/go...
- Attained 12y ago
  Can't agree more. Don't forget that before we had GMO's we just blasted millions of seeds with radiation until we found mutants with cool characteristics, which we then branded as natural mutations, and mass distributed. I wonder if that's how Chipotle does it....
  - Vendan 12y ago
    and before that we genetically modified them through forced selection. Modern crops(pre-GMO even) bear little to no resemblance to what they were originally. Anti-GMO sentiment is bullcrap.
    - researcher88 12y ago
      Isn't there a difference though? If I want to have a Scandinavian child, I just reproduce with someone from Sweden. If I want my child to be immune to the sun and skin cancer, I just add a gene from the leaf of a tree, inject it into his DNA and see what happens? I support GMOs but nuance is important.
      - splawn 12y ago
        "nuance is important" Says someone comparing plants with human children to make a point. (And no, not much of a difference, other than with modern technique we have more control over the results)
        12y ago
paulornothing 12y ago
>"I don't think this is about GMOs being harmful or not being harmful to your health," Ells tells The Salt. "It's a bigger picture. That mentality is what kills me about all of this. Let's make decisions contrary to what the evidence shows. I know this is probably a smart move because I'm sure the anti-gmo movement people would love to have a company to crusade against like Chipotle. I still don't like it.
kissickas 12y ago
I'm glad this trend is so far limited only to a few companies that I can easily boycott. There's even a group on the "Buycott" app against anti-GMO companies. It would really be great if there were a three-letter code we could use to demonize Monsanto and Syngenta's harmful patent practices and shift the discussion to where it used to be and still should be. edit: just adding a link to a recent John Stewart segment, which will hopefully stop some of the fearmongering https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY-UPHLJ31A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY-UPHLJ31A
whatok 12y ago
no GMOs while eating a burrito bowl with 1.5k calories
- padobson 12y ago
  Lol. Seriously though, it's tough to get to 1500 without the tortilla.
- digitalzombie 12y ago
  I think it's decently price for the amount of calories you get. I get it's 1.5k but it's not the corporation's responsibility to regulate how a much a person eat. I'm glad that we have laws posting calories count and I think it's good enough. You can eat half and save the rest or if you work out for 2-3hours then 1.5k calories is pretty nice. I did body building for a bit and I use myfitnesspal to count my calories. I had a food scale and a measure cup too. I don't get why we have to shame a food place for giving us a good deal. If anything have social programs to raise awareness to obesity.
  - whatok 12y ago
    No doubt, I agree with you 100% and think individuals should be allowed to make their own choices based on the information provided. That said, there is some definite marketing wizardry with this along with "organic" ingredients and not-so-subtle suggestions that both are somehow automatically healthy for you.
spacemanmatt 12y ago
Am I the only one who avoids Chipotle because it's crappy, even if they used organic/free-range/grass-fed/constantly-hugged meat and vegetables, only?
- lbotos 12y ago
  But do you eat fast food? In the fast food world, Chipotle is pretty high up on the "brand perception" scale. Sure, it's not incredible, but it "feels" better than eating Wendys/McDonalds/Burger King. (I don't eat fast-food much, but my bias is towards Chipotle when I do.)
  - spacemanmatt 12y ago
    No, and I know that puts me in a bit of a minority, but I carved out time for good food a long time ago, in a bet with myself that I could stay out of the doctor's office for a long time. (Won that bet 6 years in a row, now)
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > But do you eat fast food? In the fast food world, Chipotle is pretty high up on the "brand perception" scale. Chipotle aims for a fast casual ambiance (which can be a reason to prefer it), but to me the food quality seems to be between lower-end fast-food places like Taco Bell and better fast-food places like El Pollo Loco.
- protomyth 12y ago
  I like Pancheros Mexican Grill better, but they are basically the same type of place. I don't mind Chipotle and would pick it over a burger joint.
blinken 12y ago
> "The strongest scientific evidence calls for Americans to increase their intake of fruits and vegetables. This. Hint: the problem isn't the GMOs in that Big Mac you're eating
oskarth 12y ago
It's frightening how many people don't understand the arguments against GMOs. Read this: http://fooledbyrandomness.com/pp2.pdf http://fooledbyrandomness.com/pp2.pdf and before making arguments, make sure your argument hasn't already been responded to in the "Fallacy" section. Of course, there are many non-scientific arguments about GMOs. I'm not talking about those. EDIT: Someone asked for a tldr. It's a useful skill to learn how to read a paper (start with the abstract and the conclusion), but I'm pasting the conclusion here anyway: This formalization of the two different types of un-certainty about risk (local and systemic) makes clear when the precautionary principle is, and when it isn’t, appropriate. The examples of GMOs and nuclear energy help to elucidate the application of these ideas. We hope this will help decision makers to avoid ruin in the future.
- Kiro 12y ago
  TL;DR please. I'm definitely not going to read this and I would be surprised if many did. Just being honest.
  - blumkvist 12y ago
    Exactly the reason what is wrong with the world in general. You can't be arse to read a few pages, but I bet you feel entitled to an opinion, right? I bet you have opinions on many things. How did you form them? By reading tl;dr versions in the newspaper and discussing with friend on the dinner table?
    - Kiro 12y ago
      What are you even talking about? Who said anything about opinions? I asked for a TL;DR, that's all. I also think it's interesting that you choose to rant when it's about a long and advanced scientific article full of terminology I don't even understand. Shouldn't this be a case where a TL;DR is justified if anything?
  - jmilloy 12y ago
    Papers come with their own tldr. It's not because people are lazy, but because that's all most people reading it actually need. This is in contrast to many op-eds, blog posts, and even news articles, which intentionally make it hard to find a summary, disperse shallow content between ads, just like to hear their own voice, or other such behaviours that are worth avoiding. I think asking for a tldr here is mistaking the former for the latter (an honest mistake).
josefresco 12y ago
Seems broader than just GMO's: Pepsi announced it was getting rid of aspartame Kraft announced it was dropping artificial dyes McDonald's said it would start sourcing chicken raised without antibiotics Nestle declared it would dump artificial colorings and flavorings It seems blanket statements are bad for healthy GMOs but also have a secondary positive effect elsewhere within the food industry.
gotothrowaway 12y ago
Like many here, I'm confused with how people could be upset with GMOs but not random mutation. Either could result in the same vegetables. It turns out - when talking to strongly GMO-opposed persons - it's usually not the genetic modification they're worried about. Instead, it's that a crop has been showered in roundup before we eat it. Saying "anti-GMO" has become a simpler way of saying that you're anti-roundup-sprayed-crops. Even though I disagree with this redefinition, I've found it to be common among anti-GMO parties. I also consider their real argument much more respectable than actually being opposed to arbitrary genetic mutations.
- gregd 12y ago
  When a seed is genetically modified to support wide spectrum herbicide use, does the nuance really matter? A lot of people in this thread are poo pooing the anti GMO movement, when a lot of anti GMO folks are against genetically modifying food to support corporate greed. Monsanto isn't an angel sent from the heavens to feed the starving.
- mtbcoder 12y ago
  I agree. Personally, my concerns with GMOs lie more with environmental factors (contamination of surrounding areas for example) and concerns about gene/seed patenting by "big agro".
- collyw 12y ago
  Most of them don't have much understanding of the tech. Interestingly this appeared on my facebook timeline this morning. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150424105348.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150424105348.ht... I have a friend who likes to parrot out every anti-GM article in the mainstream press. He eventually kind of changed his argument (he is a stubborn bastard who will never admit being wrong), when I asked him: What is it about targeted gene mutation (as in GM organisms) that you think is so much more dangerous than random gene mutation that occurs in nature?
ariendj 12y ago
Is it just me or does this article look like native advertising?
jleyank 12y ago
Just a reminder to the "all GMO is bad" crowd - you're condemning yourself to a life of needles or a mechanical implant if you have or get type-1 diabetes (lack of insulin production). With genetic modification, it's possible to transfect genes to start insulin production but that would make the recipient a GMO... As people as written, this subject is nuanced. As best you can, try to understand what is involved rather than just listening to the noise.

54 points by user_235711 12y ago

bane 12y ago

Good, let's rely on random genetic mutation instead. Because we know that only produces healthy organisms that are safe to eat. (/sarcasm)

13years 12y ago
People don't think random mutations are good either. Ironically, though, we may get more of that due to push back against GMOs. http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-11-21/monsanto-vs-dot-mutant-crop-developers-in-global-seed-market http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-11-21/monsanto-vs-... Yet to be fair, GMOs still produce changes that aren't possible through mutagenesis. Also GMOs are not without their own random mutations since the process of transgene insertions often produce their own random set of side effect changes. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559911/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559911/
revelation 12y ago
Selective breeding, the ancient form of GMO, which these people interestingly don't seem to object to, uses inbreeding and other techniques that are in fact known to produce unhealthy organisms.
- federico3 12y ago
  Because breeding is thousands of times slower at producing mutations and it gives researchers (and society in general) enough time to assess the health effects of a crop. In 2015 we are still learning about crops that has been around for centuries.
protomyth 12y ago
The right has Climate Change and the left has GMOs with the extremes of both having very different reasons to reject vaccines. Humans are not scientific animals.

vdnkh 12y ago

>"...They blame it (horrific profits) on consumers getting concerned about what they put in their bodies." Even though health food has become fashionable (for perhaps less than rational reasons), I believe that greater awareness of what you eat is extremely important and I'm glad it's becoming mainstream. Now if only they would stop putting so much sugar in bread...

Vendan 12y ago
as much as I hate the anti-GMO stuff, cause in reality, we've genetically modified everything we eat through thousands of years of forced selection, I am all for better bread. I bake my own with minimal sugar and gluten, and it is soooo much better then store bread, and really makes a sandwich amazing(note, when I say minimal gluten, I mean no extra gluten, not gluten free flour).
- Kurtz79 12y ago
  I believe you, but I really think that has absolutely nothing to do with GMO, raher than the simple fact that fresh, homemade food is intrinsically better than store bought food, which is usually tuned for aesthetics and long shelf life as opposed to flavor.
  - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
    Not really true! All of our grocery stores hereabouts bake every day, in-house. And don't assume a restaurant does a worse job than you of managing their freshness. They buy from the same grocery most likely. In fact, the grocery you buy from is a store; their fresh food is managed quite well. In fact everything you make is worse than that, because you have to buy it from them, THEN make something out of it. So its not as fresh.
  - Vendan 12y ago
    Sorry if it seemed like I was linking them, but I wasn't in any way. All the grocery store bread where I live, unless you go to the bakery, is this insanely soft sweet stuff, like Wonderbread and such. It feels like I use less sugar then there is in 2 slices of that stuff.

acheron 12y ago

Remember that "GMO" opposition is anti-scientific nonsense, and has led to millions of children left blind or dead [1], making it probably worse than vaccine opposition, even if the vaccine opposition is more likely to affect you personally. [1] http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2014/03/15/golden-rice-opponents-should-be-held-accountable-for-health-problems-linked-to-vitamain-a-deficiency/ http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2014/03/15/go...

Attained 12y ago
Can't agree more. Don't forget that before we had GMO's we just blasted millions of seeds with radiation until we found mutants with cool characteristics, which we then branded as natural mutations, and mass distributed. I wonder if that's how Chipotle does it....
- Vendan 12y ago
  and before that we genetically modified them through forced selection. Modern crops(pre-GMO even) bear little to no resemblance to what they were originally. Anti-GMO sentiment is bullcrap.
  - researcher88 12y ago
    Isn't there a difference though? If I want to have a Scandinavian child, I just reproduce with someone from Sweden. If I want my child to be immune to the sun and skin cancer, I just add a gene from the leaf of a tree, inject it into his DNA and see what happens? I support GMOs but nuance is important.
    - splawn 12y ago
      "nuance is important" Says someone comparing plants with human children to make a point. (And no, not much of a difference, other than with modern technique we have more control over the results)
      - 12y ago

paulornothing 12y ago

>"I don't think this is about GMOs being harmful or not being harmful to your health," Ells tells The Salt. "It's a bigger picture. That mentality is what kills me about all of this. Let's make decisions contrary to what the evidence shows. I know this is probably a smart move because I'm sure the anti-gmo movement people would love to have a company to crusade against like Chipotle. I still don't like it.

kissickas 12y ago

I'm glad this trend is so far limited only to a few companies that I can easily boycott. There's even a group on the "Buycott" app against anti-GMO companies. It would really be great if there were a three-letter code we could use to demonize Monsanto and Syngenta's harmful patent practices and shift the discussion to where it used to be and still should be. edit: just adding a link to a recent John Stewart segment, which will hopefully stop some of the fearmongering https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY-UPHLJ31A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY-UPHLJ31A

whatok 12y ago

no GMOs while eating a burrito bowl with 1.5k calories

padobson 12y ago
Lol. Seriously though, it's tough to get to 1500 without the tortilla.
digitalzombie 12y ago
I think it's decently price for the amount of calories you get. I get it's 1.5k but it's not the corporation's responsibility to regulate how a much a person eat. I'm glad that we have laws posting calories count and I think it's good enough. You can eat half and save the rest or if you work out for 2-3hours then 1.5k calories is pretty nice. I did body building for a bit and I use myfitnesspal to count my calories. I had a food scale and a measure cup too. I don't get why we have to shame a food place for giving us a good deal. If anything have social programs to raise awareness to obesity.
- whatok 12y ago
  No doubt, I agree with you 100% and think individuals should be allowed to make their own choices based on the information provided. That said, there is some definite marketing wizardry with this along with "organic" ingredients and not-so-subtle suggestions that both are somehow automatically healthy for you.

spacemanmatt 12y ago

Am I the only one who avoids Chipotle because it's crappy, even if they used organic/free-range/grass-fed/constantly-hugged meat and vegetables, only?

lbotos 12y ago
But do you eat fast food? In the fast food world, Chipotle is pretty high up on the "brand perception" scale. Sure, it's not incredible, but it "feels" better than eating Wendys/McDonalds/Burger King. (I don't eat fast-food much, but my bias is towards Chipotle when I do.)
- spacemanmatt 12y ago
  No, and I know that puts me in a bit of a minority, but I carved out time for good food a long time ago, in a bet with myself that I could stay out of the doctor's office for a long time. (Won that bet 6 years in a row, now)
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > But do you eat fast food? In the fast food world, Chipotle is pretty high up on the "brand perception" scale. Chipotle aims for a fast casual ambiance (which can be a reason to prefer it), but to me the food quality seems to be between lower-end fast-food places like Taco Bell and better fast-food places like El Pollo Loco.
protomyth 12y ago
I like Pancheros Mexican Grill better, but they are basically the same type of place. I don't mind Chipotle and would pick it over a burger joint.

blinken 12y ago

> "The strongest scientific evidence calls for Americans to increase their intake of fruits and vegetables. This. Hint: the problem isn't the GMOs in that Big Mac you're eating

oskarth 12y ago

It's frightening how many people don't understand the arguments against GMOs. Read this: http://fooledbyrandomness.com/pp2.pdf http://fooledbyrandomness.com/pp2.pdf and before making arguments, make sure your argument hasn't already been responded to in the "Fallacy" section. Of course, there are many non-scientific arguments about GMOs. I'm not talking about those. EDIT: Someone asked for a tldr. It's a useful skill to learn how to read a paper (start with the abstract and the conclusion), but I'm pasting the conclusion here anyway: This formalization of the two different types of un-certainty about risk (local and systemic) makes clear when the precautionary principle is, and when it isn’t, appropriate. The examples of GMOs and nuclear energy help to elucidate the application of these ideas. We hope this will help decision makers to avoid ruin in the future.

Kiro 12y ago
TL;DR please. I'm definitely not going to read this and I would be surprised if many did. Just being honest.
- blumkvist 12y ago
  Exactly the reason what is wrong with the world in general. You can't be arse to read a few pages, but I bet you feel entitled to an opinion, right? I bet you have opinions on many things. How did you form them? By reading tl;dr versions in the newspaper and discussing with friend on the dinner table?
  - Kiro 12y ago
    What are you even talking about? Who said anything about opinions? I asked for a TL;DR, that's all. I also think it's interesting that you choose to rant when it's about a long and advanced scientific article full of terminology I don't even understand. Shouldn't this be a case where a TL;DR is justified if anything?
- jmilloy 12y ago
  Papers come with their own tldr. It's not because people are lazy, but because that's all most people reading it actually need. This is in contrast to many op-eds, blog posts, and even news articles, which intentionally make it hard to find a summary, disperse shallow content between ads, just like to hear their own voice, or other such behaviours that are worth avoiding. I think asking for a tldr here is mistaking the former for the latter (an honest mistake).

josefresco 12y ago

Seems broader than just GMO's: Pepsi announced it was getting rid of aspartame Kraft announced it was dropping artificial dyes McDonald's said it would start sourcing chicken raised without antibiotics Nestle declared it would dump artificial colorings and flavorings It seems blanket statements are bad for healthy GMOs but also have a secondary positive effect elsewhere within the food industry.

gotothrowaway 12y ago

Like many here, I'm confused with how people could be upset with GMOs but not random mutation. Either could result in the same vegetables. It turns out - when talking to strongly GMO-opposed persons - it's usually not the genetic modification they're worried about. Instead, it's that a crop has been showered in roundup before we eat it. Saying "anti-GMO" has become a simpler way of saying that you're anti-roundup-sprayed-crops. Even though I disagree with this redefinition, I've found it to be common among anti-GMO parties. I also consider their real argument much more respectable than actually being opposed to arbitrary genetic mutations.

gregd 12y ago
When a seed is genetically modified to support wide spectrum herbicide use, does the nuance really matter? A lot of people in this thread are poo pooing the anti GMO movement, when a lot of anti GMO folks are against genetically modifying food to support corporate greed. Monsanto isn't an angel sent from the heavens to feed the starving.
mtbcoder 12y ago
I agree. Personally, my concerns with GMOs lie more with environmental factors (contamination of surrounding areas for example) and concerns about gene/seed patenting by "big agro".
collyw 12y ago
Most of them don't have much understanding of the tech. Interestingly this appeared on my facebook timeline this morning. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150424105348.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150424105348.ht... I have a friend who likes to parrot out every anti-GM article in the mainstream press. He eventually kind of changed his argument (he is a stubborn bastard who will never admit being wrong), when I asked him: What is it about targeted gene mutation (as in GM organisms) that you think is so much more dangerous than random gene mutation that occurs in nature?

ariendj 12y ago

Is it just me or does this article look like native advertising?

jleyank 12y ago

Just a reminder to the "all GMO is bad" crowd - you're condemning yourself to a life of needles or a mechanical implant if you have or get type-1 diabetes (lack of insulin production). With genetic modification, it's possible to transfect genes to start insulin production but that would make the recipient a GMO... As people as written, this subject is nuanced. As best you can, try to understand what is involved rather than just listening to the noise.