Chipotle to Stop Serving Genetically Altered Food

[Jesus Malverde]

Source: NYTimes

In a first for a major restaurant chain, Chipotle Mexican Grill on Monday will begin serving only food that is free of genetically engineered ingredients.

“This is another step toward the visions we have of changing the way people think about and eat fast food,” said Steve Ells, founder and co-chief executive of Chipotle. “Just because food is served fast doesn’t mean it has to be made with cheap raw ingredients, highly processed with preservatives and fillers and stabilizers and artificial colors and flavors.”

In 2013, Chipotle was the first restaurant chain to indicate which items contained genetically modified organisms, and a small but growing number of restaurants, largely in fine dining, also now label their menus.

Grocers, too, are moving to offer consumers more products free of genetically altered ingredients. The shelves and cases in Whole Foods stores are to be free of products containing such ingredients by 2018, and Walmart is vastly expanding its selection of organic foods, which are free of genetic alteration by law.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/27/business/chipotle-to-stop-serving-genetically-altered-food.html

[bananas]

1. Good news! nt

[Cha]

55. Really Good Amazing News! Trend!

https://www.facebook.com/Save.Hawai.from.Monsanto

[alp227]

2. Pandering to scientifically ignorant morons.

Just as bad as the companies that suck it up to Food Babe's ignorance. I have no problem eating at Chipotle, but I am annoyed a bit.

[Art_from_Ark]

4. "Scientifically ignorant morons"

You mean, like the Union of Concerned SCIENTISTS?

"While the risks of genetic engineering are often exaggerated or misrepresented, GE crops do have the potential to cause a variety of health problems and environmental impacts. For instance, they may spread undesirable traits to weeds and non-GE crops, produce new allergens and toxins, or harm animals that consume them.

"At least one major environmental impact of genetic engineering has already reached critical proportions: overuse of herbicide-tolerant GE crops has spurred an increase in herbicide use and an epidemic of herbicide-resistant "superweeds," which will lead to even more herbicide use.

"How likely are other harmful GE impacts to occur? This is a difficult question to answer. Each crop-gene combination poses its own set of risks. While risk assessments are conducted as part of GE product approval, the data are generally supplied by the company seeking approval, and GE companies use their patent rights to exercise tight control over research on their products."

http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/food-agriculture/our-failing-food-system/genetic-engineering-agriculture#.VT3nDd2Q2z4

Or Environmental Sciences Europe, perhaps?

"A broad community of independent scientific researchers and scholars challenges recent claims of a consensus over the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In the following joint statement, the claimed consensus is shown to be an artificial construct that has been falsely perpetuated through diverse fora. Irrespective of contradictory evidence in the refereed literature, as documented below, the claim that there is now a consensus on the safety of GMOs continues to be widely and often uncritically aired. For decades, the safety of GMOs has been a hotly controversial topic that has been much debated around the world. Published results are contradictory, in part due to the range of different research methods employed, an inadequacy of available procedures, and differences in the analysis and interpretation of data. Such a lack of consensus on safety is also evidenced by the agreement of policymakers from over 160 countries - in the UN’s Cartagena Biosafety Protocol and the Guidelines of the Codex Alimentarius - to authorize careful case-by-case assessment of each GMO by national authorities to determine whether the particular construct satisfies the national criteria for ‘safe’. Rigorous assessment of GMO safety has been hampered by the lack of funding independent of proprietary interests. Research for the public good has been further constrained by property rights issues, and by denial of access to research material for researchers unwilling to sign contractual agreements with the developers, which confer unacceptable control over publication to the proprietary interests.

The joint statement developed and signed by over 300 independent researchers, and reproduced and published below, does not assert that GMOs are unsafe or safe. Rather, the statement concludes that the scarcity and contradictory nature of the scientific evidence published to date prevents conclusive claims of safety, or of lack of safety, of GMOs. Claims of consensus on the safety of GMOs are not supported by an objective analysis of the refereed literature.

http://www.enveurope.com/content/27/1/4

So please, stop this "anti-GMO= scientifically ignorant moron" nonsense already. People have a right not to eat that crap if they don't want to. People also have the right not to serve as unwitting guinea pigs for agrotech, whose only concern is maximizing profits.

[silverweb]

7. Thank you!

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]There are good GMOs and bad GMOs, with a lot of unknowns and uncertainties in between. The assertion that people have no right or need to know when they're consuming a GMO is reckless and beyond arrogant.

Like you, I stand with the Union of Concerned Scientists and others who urge caution.

[Cha]

56. Yeah, silverweb!

https://www.facebook.com/Save.Hawai.from.Monsanto

[GreatGazoo]

84. GMO Soy is designed for RoundUp, GMO corn produces its own Bt so it cannot be eaten raw

GMO crops are designed to pair with (or produce their own) pesticides. Weeds quickly select for the same trait, rendering the whole GMO + RoundUp system useless: http://cornandsoybeandigest.com/crop-chemicals/resistant-palmer-amaranth-hits-midwest-changes-control-programs

Which GMOs do you consider "good"?

[Jesus Malverde]

9. Thanks Art.

Great points.

[Pooka Fey]

11. Thank you for this post, Art!

K&R

[BeanMusical]

12. Good post.

[TekGryphon]

16. A little over 1/10th of One Percent of the UCS membership signed that letter

And, as it clearly states, it does not assert that GMOs are unsafe, simply that they feel more research needs to be done.

I agree with Alp. As much as I love Chipotle, this is just pandering to the flat-earthers on the left. It approaches the GMO issue from a black-and-white stance, throwing a blanket judgement over the entire industry.

[truebrit71]

25. 'flat-earthers on the left'...

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice

[TekGryphon]

31. If you have a better name for them, let me know.

"Flat-earthers on the left" are the best way I can think of to describe progressives who think the pharmacy industry is poisoning our children with vaccines, who think that every genetic modification is harmful, etc.

[truebrit71]

35. Which progressives are anti-vaxers?

...The only one I am aware of is RFK Jr, and I think his is more about mercury and other nastiness in the vaccines that are routinely given out...

Who else have I missed?

[TekGryphon]

39. Tom, Jane, Eric, Jim, Bruce, Emily, to name a few.

No, no, don't worry - I won't disregard a stupid question with a flippant answer. Here:

http://www.voicesforvaccines.org/leaving-the-anti-vaccine-movement/

Read the testimonials of those who abandoned the anti-vaxxer movement. Many of them were proud progressives. Educated, mid-upper class, caring, and intelligent.

They simply got wrapped up in psuedo-science and anti-corporate fervor.

[Recursion]

64. How about most of the Pacific Northwest?

Sort of meshes with the raw milk / gluten-free granola / unschool your children crowd.

[immoderate]

30. Isn't claiming they are 'safe' a black and white type claim?

--imm

[TekGryphon]

33. Sure, but let's be honest here. Chipotle throws over a daily dosage of sodium into every meal...

.. it's not like they're really interested in a truly healthy and wholesome dining experience. Their wraps are 300 calories a piece and a burrito bowl can easily exceed 1000 calories.

We can't even decide if eggs, bread, dairy, or meat are definitively "safe" or "not safe", so I don't look for definitive decisions.

What I look for is data and consensus, and the consensus on the data is that MOST GMO modifications are benign. A FEW raise concerns, however, and THOSE are the ones Chipotle should be cutting out of their supply chain until the data is more sound.

Instead they threw the baby out of the bath water to satisfy the fringe anti-intellectual movement on the left.

[OrwellwasRight]

38. And you know how much sodium is in your food -- as it is labeled.

So you can make a choice. A choice you cannot make if information is withheld.

[TekGryphon]

40. There is a scientific consensus that mountains of sodium is bad for you...

There is no scientific consensus that GMOs are dangerous, only that a few modifications show cause for concern and should be studied further (a position I think any reasonable person should agree with).

Chipotle is deliberately flying in the face of scientific consensus on one issue, while pandering to psuedo-scientific fear-mongering on the other.

I eat Chipotle 2-3 times a week, but that doesn't mean I can't smell hypocrisy a mile away.

[staggerleem]

44. Let me get this straight, now ...

In your opinion, the regular consumption of items whose safety YOU BELIEVE should be studied further is a good thing? Because, after all, where is science going to get the volunteers for these studies, right? Best if we ALL just volunteer, with or without our knowledge, right?

[TekGryphon]

50. Now, let me set you straight ...

Scientific consensus says excess sodium intake is unequivocally bad.
Scientific consensus says GMOs are almost entirely benign, but some variants could use some additional study.

Banning GMOs entirely is not a decision grounded in scientific consensus. To do so under the auspices of "respecting consumer health" is deliciously hypocritical when put into the perspective of their complete and utter disregard for the scientific consensus of what is, actually, healthy.

They are not looking to be healthy. They are looking to be trendy. In so doing, they enable the pseudo-scientific rabble who think GMOs are inherently dangerous.

[staggerleem]

67. How about "respecting consumer CHOICE?"

What pisses me off the most about this situation is that they don't want us to KNOW. They fight labeling initiatives tooth and nail - they don't even want to allow companies that produce GMO-free products to label them as such.

Dietary sodium generally comes from SALT - salting one's food is a CHOICE, as is going to restaurants that serve salty food, or buying prepared foods that are over-salted. Monsanto and the GMO lobby are looking to take away our choices, or even the ability to know there's a choice to be made! Justify THAT, TG!

[TekGryphon]

70. I responded to your anti-intellectualism down-stream.

You can continue your straw-man tactics there, if you wish.

[OrwellwasRight]

86. Wait, now this is the new funniest response I've ever read on DU!

There was not a single thing either "anti-intellectual" or "straw-man" about the post you were responding to. Not a single thing.

[OrwellwasRight]

53. Again, as I have stated a million times before

every time someone tries to use the ol' "GMOs are safe" routine, there is more to be concerned about than whether your food is going to make you drop dead immediately.

One can be concerned about HOW one's food is made as well. Just like people are concerned about organic farming (organic food has not been established to be nutritionally different than non-organic, did you know that? and yet it's labeled), sweatshop labor, fair traded, free range and other things, people can also be concerned about the use of round-up, about the promotion of monocultures, about the killing of bees, about unintended cross-breeding, about super weeds, and a whole host of other reasons that they want to know what's in their food and how it is produced that don't fit into your little "it's safe" meme.

People don't need your judgment.

[TekGryphon]

58. In this case it's more like banning anything made by humans...

... because you're pretending to be conscious of the problems of child labor.

It's a black-and-white, baby with the bathwater decision that is in no way grounded in science or scientific consensus.

The fact that it's coming from a company that is routinely criticized for the dangerous amounts of sodium they put in their food doesn't make it more or less wrong-headed, it just makes it hypocritical.

[staggerleem]

68. So, tell us, TG ...

... how long have you been employed by Monsanto?

There doesn't seem to be a post in this thread that you haven't replied to with a "You're just a freakin' luddite!" knee-jerk. You seem awfully threatened by the idea that anybody, anywhere might not LOVE GMOs.

Granted, this is not the first time that industry has "volunteered" the American public as guinea pigs in an experiment of massive proportions. It just seems to be the most egregious, and the least transparent example of that tactic.

IF I'm given the choice, I'll happily pay double or more for an ear of non-GMO corn. It seems that you don't think I should even be allowed that choice. Would you care to explain WHY, aside from the act that nobody has yet been able to PROVE that thee are negative health effects? If public schools are willing to allow kids to NOT participate in "No Child Left Behind" testing, why do you seem so unwilling to allow me to NOT participate in THIS "test"?

[TekGryphon]

69. Let me know when you're done setting up those strawmen, kiddo.

Last edited Thu Apr 30, 2015, 02:30 AM - Edit history (1)

No, I don't work for Monsanto. I'm a State Director for a large mental health company.
No, I don't support Monsanto. I think their attempts to monopolize the seed markets are block research are disgusting.
No, I don't oppose GMO labeling. I stated upstream I support labeling, unequivocally.
No, I don't oppose your right to be scared of GMOs. I simply find it wrong-headed to claim scientific consensus on GMOs being "dangerous" when, quite clearly, the scientific consensus is in the other direction.
No, I don't oppose an open and transparent research environment. The scientific consensus DOES say that while the vast majority of modifications are benign, there may be some that are not, and we need to keep studying to weed out any potentially dangerous strains.

But yes, I do believe you're a Luddite, an anti-intellectual. I think you're engaging in dangerous demagoguery by claiming moral and scientific legitimacy on an issue in which you have neither. I think you do a disservice to scientists seeking to research GMO strains and the citizens working to enable that research while striving to keep consumers informed.

[staggerleem]

76. Can you show me where I made any claim ...

... that there was any scientific consensus on either side of this issue? YOU, TG, are the only one in this argument making that claim. As far as I'm, concerned, the jury is still out. The GMO debate is far from settled, unlike the climate change "debate". Medical science can't even reach consensus regarding eggs! Are they good for you or not? Is the yolk OK, or should we just eat the white? If I ask these same questions again next year, will I get the same answers?

All I've said is that I don't want GMOs in MY diet. I've never been to a Chipolte (I tend to avoid chain restaurants on principle - it's one of few industries where a mom & pop can compete!), and this decision isn't gonna get me into one. I live in a rural community, and as much as possible, I try to eat locally grown fruits & veggies, and locally raised meats. My wife bakes our bread, and any commercial baked goods we buy are imported from countries where either GMOs are prohibited, or products that use them are labeled. I don't approve of corporations assuming the role of God (full disclosure - I hover somewhere between atheist & agnostic), either in terms of messing with the genetics of my food, or in determining how my government works.

I also believe that when we are told that GMOs are the ONLY way that we are going to be able to feed our overpopulated globe, we are being lied to, for the sake of MASSIVE PROFIT. And if you can point to a single corporation that both uses GMOs, and "strives to keep consumers informed", I'll kiss your butt in Macy's display window at high noon on the Saturday of your choice!

Basically, all I've EVER said about this issue is that if this is the game, I'M NOT PLAYING! It seems that offends you, but that's not MY problem. I'm done here - you are entirely welcome to the last word that it appears you so badly need.

[wordpix]

79. please read: "astonishing spectrum of birth defects associated with glyphosate"

Crystal Gammon and Environmental Health News, Scientific American. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/weed-whacking-herbicide-p/ Jun 23, 2009

Truthout. http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/25426-one-little-piggy-had-birth-defects-is-monsantos-roundup-to-blame. Aug. 8, 2014

“Studies conducted on rats and rabbits since the 1980s have shown an astonishing spectrum of birth defects associated with glyphosate, including absent kidneys, missing lobes of the lungs, enlarged hearts, ventricular septal defects (holes in the heart), extra ribs, and deformed and absent bones of the skull, spine, ribs, sternum and limbs.”

Danish pig farmer who changed to GE soy feed found piglets with (photos): a) malformed spine b) ear not formed c) cranial deformation d) cranium hole in head e) piglets born alive having short legs and one eye not developed f) one large eye, an elephant trunk with bone in it g) elephant tongue h) female piglet with testes i) fore gut and hind gut of the piglet with swollen belly are not connected j) malformed piglet with swollen belly. (Photos courtesy of Professor Monika Krueger)

[OrwellwasRight]

77. Really? Labeling = banning?

Oh, OK. I didn't realize we were dealing in wild hyperbole. I'm not interested in having such a silly conversation.

[TekGryphon]

83. You never entered the conversation in the first place...

... so it's really no loss that you're leaving.

Did you even read the thread you were posting on? We're not discussing labeling GMOs. We're discussing banning them. All of them. With zero basis in scientific consensus. GMOs that science universally concludes are safe are being tossed out with ones that scientists would like to do additional studies on.

[OrwellwasRight]

85. One company "not buying" is not the same thing as "banning."

You can still buy all the GMO foods you want at other outlets besides Chipotle.

Nothing is being "tossed out" and no experiments are being stopped.

That's really the most absurd argument I've ever heard on DU. Thanks for the laugh.

[wordpix]

78. +10000

[OrwellwasRight]

87. Actually, there isn't any such consensus.

Are you now going to rampage against salt-free and low sodium foods? How dare anyone be concerned about knowing how much salt is in their food if there isn't 100% scientific consensus about it! How dare they!!!!

http://news.emory.edu/stories/2015/01/jjm_sodium_intake_among_older_adults/index.html

http://www.webmd.com/heart/news/20140814/studies-question-need-watch-salt-sodium

http://media.jamanetwork.com/news-item/salt-intake-not-associated-with-mortality-or-risk-of-cardiovascular-disease-heart-failure-in-older-adults/

[closeupready]

23. Thank you!

[alp227]

52. Those are a bunch of politically motivated special interest groups.

I see them as no more credible than the Heritage Foundation or Discovery Institute. Find me some peer-reviewed journals saying so.

[Cha]

57. Mahalo Art!

https://www.facebook.com/Save.Hawai.from.Monsanto

[Jesus Malverde]

10. lets see how this plays out

I suspect fast food retailer chipolte will continue to grow while its competitors continue to lose market share.

[roody]

14. Yum, yum, yum, Chipotle. Sure tastes good.

Hurting your bottom line?

[NuclearDem]

18. Wow, didn't take long for the shill gambit.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

27. Not every person who wants to avoid GMO's think they 'cause autism' or whatever you seem to think

is the reason people avoid GMO food.

Some folks simply don't like putting cash in the pockets of poison-peddlers like Monsanto. They already have made too much off agent orange and their other products. We don't need to keep enabling them buy buying products made with 'RoundUp Ready' crops.

[Jesus Malverde]

48. Ding ding ding

Nailed it.

[Cha]

62. Precisely!

https://www.facebook.com/Save.Hawai.from.Monsanto

[LanternWaste]

42. I like to pretend I understand major business decisions too.

I like to pretend I understand major business decisions too.

[upaloopa]

51. No marketing to customer demands.

Don't eat there and don't get your panties in a wad over what other people eat.

[Cha]

54. I call bullshit on your statement, alp. There's ignorance afoot but not from Chipotle

https://www.facebook.com/Save.Hawai.from.Monsanto

[Ken Burch]

3. So they won't have "Sentient Salsa Saturday" anymore?

Last edited Mon Apr 27, 2015, 09:34 AM - Edit history (1)

Good news.

[appalachiablue]

6. K & R. Excellent news.

[JI7]

8. does this mean prices will go up and they will put even less meat in each order ?

[hopemountain]

59. are you aware their beef

is sourced from outside the u.s. and canada to insure they are humanely slaughtered and not fed gmo grains fed nor shot up with antibiotics and hormones prior to slaughter? organic consumers dot com

[mmonk]

13. Nearly impossible these days.

Especially with corn products unless they are going to use flour instead.

[roody]

15. They will have to serve organically grown corn.

[mmonk]

17. Very hard if not next to impossible here in Monsanto Land.

Import it from Mexico.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

28. One of the major canned veggie lines has already started putting

organic canned corn on the shelves of grocery stores here in flyover territory. Libby, I think it was.

[wordpix]

80. I grew several acres of organic corn for years

The main problem was raccoons, not insects. As always with organic growing, the secret is in good soil with lots of humus.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

82. I've tried growing corn several times of late -

I wanted to grow the 'glass gem' corn. But something kept coming along and eating the young shoots, or, if I caged the corn in until the small ears were forming, came along and ate the ears and gnawed through the stalks. I'd have to keep them entirely caged the entire time it's growing, I guess.

[Jesus Malverde]

22. +1

[samsingh]

20. this is very good news.

[uppityperson]

21. no canola oil or corn products? Like most things, there are good and bad and many shades of grey

[Zorra]

24. It is uplifting to see grassroots common sense and transparency defeat

the deceitful forces of corporations and their corporate marketers who flood our media outlets with their half-truths and flat out lies.

Next time I see a Chipotle I will pull in and have a nice fat Veggie Fajita.

[Jesus Malverde]

26. ..

[former9thward]

29. Humans have been genetically altering food since the beginning of agriculture.

So Chipotle will have to stop serving food. Maybe they can become shoe store or something.

[Jesus Malverde]

32. Consider reading the article

To go with your snark.


Or are you an astronomer

[former9thward]

34. I read your headline.

That was enough... Are you saying your headline does not reflect the article?

[Jesus Malverde]

37. I'm saying your an article short of an argument

The Stars they shine bright tonight. Don't they dr.

[immoderate]

36. They knew about genetics?

Did they use viruses to insert genes?

--imm

[former9thward]

41. They modified wild vegetation for large scale human use.

It was a process of trial and error over hundreds or even thousands of years. That is the reason certain crops developed in some areas but not in others. The potato, the tomato, the pepper, squash, several varieties of bean, and several other plants were also developed in the New World but not in Europe with the same climate conditions.

In real life I have found the same people who rant against "GMOs" are the same people who believe in chemtrails.

[immoderate]

45. The vegetation had to be there to modify.

With 'the same climate conditions' why didn't primates develop in both worlds?

Selective breeding is not the same as genetic engineering. Can farmers do this?


--imm

[former9thward]

47. Do you even know what genes are?

I am not trying to insult but your posts make me wonder. Do you think you would find a dairy cow in the wild? A mule? A donkey for that matter? People, not modern scientists, made these animals by experimenting with their wild cousins. Modern dogs developed because aggressive genes were eliminated by people controlling breeding from Wolfs who used to hang around early man living sites. All this was done with vegetation with hybrids being created and some genes being eliminated to make food which could be eaten and reproduced in large quantities.

Have fun at Chipotle!

[immoderate]

49. I see a difference between selective breeding and gene insertion.

And I see you attempting to obfuscate that difference.

Dogs are bred for non-aggressiveness. Their genes are not 'eliminated,' as they will revert to aggressiveness if they reproduce ferrally. But with breeding dogs from wolves, there are secondary characteristics that manifest. Like, their ears get floppy. They are in no way selected for that. Happens anyway. It might be an example of pleiotropy. Happens with foxes bred the same way. Are you sure that alien genes can't produce unintended results? How do you know?

--imm

[Zorra]

46. But did you know that humans have not been inserting the genes of one species into the

genes of another species in plants they consume for sustenance until fairly recently?

Big difference between breeding corn plants that can naturally self-pollinate another variety of corn plant, and humans inserting the genes of a virus into the genes of a corn plant.

Not even realistically comparable in the slightest.

[hopemountain]

61. in this case

chipotle is not allowing foods developed with insecticide, herbicide, or other lifeform dna. i understand what you are implying and your comment is off the mark.

technically, what you state in your first statement is somewhat true because every living organism on this planet has been genetically altered and evolved by it's environment. humans may have altered the growth habits of plants by hardening them off or coaxing them to survive with less water or more water or according to soil and temperature fluctuations. or, even crossing them with other similar PLANTS.

but, what the term gmo defines today no longer includes a broad category of how plants can and are being altered by humans with dna from completely foreign non plant dna (insecticides, herbicides, animal dna).

[former9thward]

66. Got it.

But I don't have the problem with GMOs that many do. I have never seen any science that backs up people's fears.

[hopemountain]

71. unless you are a scientist who

specializes in the effects of chemicals on humans and other living things, you probably haven't. i highly recommend the organic consumers association website.

[wordpix]

81. Read up on Roundup and glyphosate and get back to us, OK?

Crystal Gammon and Environmental Health News, Scientific American. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/weed-whacking-herbicide-p/ Jun 23, 2009

Truthout. http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/25426-one-little-piggy-had-birth-defects-is-monsantos-roundup-to-blame. Aug. 8, 2014

“Studies conducted on rats and rabbits since the 1980s have shown an astonishing spectrum of birth defects associated with glyphosate, including absent kidneys, missing lobes of the lungs, enlarged hearts, ventricular septal defects (holes in the heart), extra ribs, and deformed and absent bones of the skull, spine, ribs, sternum and limbs.”

Danish pig farmer who changed to GE soy feed found piglets with (photos): a) malformed spine b) ear not formed c) cranial deformation d) cranium hole in head e) piglets born alive having short legs and one eye not developed f) one large eye, an elephant trunk with bone in it g) elephant tongue h) female piglet with testes i) fore gut and hind gut of the piglet with swollen belly are not connected j) malformed piglet with swollen belly. (Photos courtesy of Professor Monika Krueger)

[onecent]

43. Sorry If I don't believe this. We don't know this

for months, probably years to come????

AND I DEFINITELY DON'T TRUST WALMART. Been to one of their stores lately? I have,
it's disgusting. The bathrooms have no water coming out of the sinks, there is no soap, the toilet roll covering BIG HUNKIN' toilet paper rolls (big hunkin' plastic plates) fall off the toilet paper rolls, so everyone touches
EVERY SINGLE rolled up paper that touches our smooth little tushes....

So how do employees wash their hands....what does the health department do about it?
NOTHING. Water is suppose to be a certain temperature...there is no water....a stream maybe, if you are lucky.

And people still believe that Walmart is gonna have an expanded selection of organic food. Good luck all of us.

[Cha]

63. I, for one, don't give a shite whether you believe it or not. It's great news for many of us.

https://www.facebook.com/Save.Hawai.from.Monsanto

[Cha]

60. Love this kind of talk..

"Getting rid of genetically engineered corn was easiest. Chipotle’s primary tortilla supplier was already producing non-G.M.O. corn flour in small amounts, and it agreed to increase its production.

But one oil can’t simply replace another. Different oils have different smoking temperatures. They impart different flavors and have varying viscosity.

Chipotle’s chefs preferred sunflower oil but finding enough was tricky. Chipotle found a farmer willing to increase his production of sunflower, but the company needed more oil than he could produce.

So instead of using one oil for the majority of its needs, Chipotle now uses sunflower to fry its chips and tortillas, while a non-G.M.O. rice bran oil will be mixed into rice and used to fry fajita vegetables."




https://www.facebook.com/Save.Hawai.from.Monsanto

[Jesus Malverde]

73. Agreed.

Eating healthy shouldn't be hard and I like they source their food from suppliers they know.

[Cha]

74. It's like a miracle for a semi-"fast food" restaurant!

Hoping it's a trend..

Gracias Jesus

[dembotoz]

65. great PR whatever the science

[romanic]

72. Will they serve REAL Mexican food next?

[dembotoz]

75. lol