As you probably know by now, Chipotle just became one of the first major restaurant chains in America to abolish GMOs from its food. At first, the initiative sounds pro-health and in line with their image of organic food and transparent processes. After all, the company readily tells you where they source their ingredients and cares about the welfare of their animals. But critics of Chipotle’s new anti-GMO stance are shaking their heads and calling the move “self-serving” and “bad science.”
A New York Magazine editorial declared the anti-GMO move akin to Jenny McCarthy proclaiming that she’s anti-vaccine because it “leads to autism.” Simply put, many scientists don’t believe that there’s any evidence that GMOs are bad for you — and some argue that they could even save the planet.
“Consumers who view themselves as socially conscious and vigilant about their health have begun turning against GMOs, and that seems to be who Chipotle is targeting when it explains its decision,” writes New York Magazine’s Jesse Singal. Slate, The Daily Beast, and countless other publications agree.
GMOs are a constant debate these days nationwide: a mandatory GMO labeling bill may soon pass in New York, while other countries around the world have banned genetically modified organisms altogether.
But critics of Chipotle’s stance argue that even if Chipotle believed the claims that GMOs are dangerous for humans to consume (like the ones in this study, which links GMO consumption to organ damage), the company’s policies are hypocritical because they only target certain ingredients: sodas and meat remain untouched.