Is Chipotle promoting food woo?

[Puppycow]

What misinformation have I spouted off?

What he's asking is for you to back up your claims. You are trying to turn the tables but the burden of evidence properly remains on you. You made the claim.

Keep in mind that news feeds do not stay available forever on the internet

That's a pretty lame excuse. If such things which you claimed are true and you know how to use Google, you should be able to find something on the internet to substantiate them. I can find news articles going back decades if necessary. Yes, not everything stays on the internet forever, but much of it does and if your claims are true you should be able to find a reasonably credible reference source to back them up.

 

[MinnesotaBrant]

Personally I haven't seen it so I can't really comment one way or the other.

Apparently it was shown on PBS:

http://www.pbs.org/pov/foodinc/

And here's the Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food,_Inc.

And here's a website created by food companies to rebut the claims in the film:

http://www.safefoodinc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3&Itemid=11

And this site is from Monsanto itself:

http://www.monsanto.com/food-inc/pages/default.aspx

I spent about 5 minutes looking at the feedlot industries page and they were in partial agreement with FOODincs statements about about how bad chicken farmer is but but didn't mention mention anything about Monsanto taking everything and anything to court.

Monsanto response agreed that they sue a lot of people all over the world for patent violations but said those people deserved it.

I guess Monsanto said that GMO's were safe and the feedlot industry said that feedlots were safe so if you want to believe that your welcome to I guess.

Might as well pick a specific topic from the actual movie you think is propaganda and dispute it. Here again is the script for the movie.

 

[Puppycow]

Might as well pick a specific topic from the actual movie you think is propaganda and dispute it.

I'm not searching for new claims to dispute, we are only asking you to back up the claims you made in this thread. Here they are again:

Actually there has been some harmful GMO corn created as feed for cattle and some of that has crept into the food supply.

There have been a lot of dubious GMO crops sitting around on test fields. The problem is keeping them from blowing around because that's what seeds do.

(Regarding the latter one my question is more not whether it happens at all, but whether it actually causes a serious problem.)

 

[Red Baron Farms]

You can't patent something you didn't invent. So of course not.

But all they have to do is make one little change and they own the whole thing.

 

[casebro]

Until the patent runs out.

 

[Wayward son]

How about Monsanto raiding the national seed repository and patenting all the heritage seeds they could get their hands on.

Hi, I am a Nigerian Prince who needs to get 20 million of dollars out of Nigeria. You seem like just the person to help me out.

 

[Wayward son]

But all they have to do is make one little change and they own the whole thing.

Yeah, cause patenting a trait means patenting the whole thing. Funny how many varieties have multiple traits patented to multiple companies. I guess they all own the whole thing. My Toyota has a pile of patents owned by different companies.

 

[ectoplasm]

There are patents and plant breeders rights associated with all kinds of commercial seeds. Its not exclusive to Monsanto and GMOs. People who spend time developing and breeding new plant varieties expect to receive some kind of compensation for their efforts.

There are arguments one can make about intellectual property and agriculture but if Monsanto and GMOs disappeared tomorrow, those issues would still be around.

 

[portlandatheist]

But all they have to do is make one little change and they own the whole thing.

Seed patents are not new and not only given to GMOs. In fact, now that Chipotle has switched from GMO canola, whose patent expires this year, will be getting their oil from BASF's freshly patented sunflowers

I should also add that BASF's market capitalization is larger than Monsanto's. So glad that Chipotle is moving away from GMOs with their awful seed patents, big ag, and herbicide use

 

[ThunderChunky]

What misinformation have I spouted off? Keep in mind that news feeds do not stay available forever on the internet but I am one of the few people around here that read news feeds daily so I feel fairly competent enough to fend off attacks. Just pick a topic from the actual film you claim is propaganda and I will somehow try to defend it. Here is a link to the script again.

I've listed it like 3 times now. 1) That "harmful" GMO corn only fit for cattle was getting into the human food supply. I've never even heard of a GMO corn strain developed only for cattle. If it exists you should be able to find it. Patents, regulatory approval, newsfeeds.. these things will still be on the internet if what you say is true. 2) That Monsanto patented heritage seeds. You can't patent heritage seeds, but if this somehow happened you should be able to find the patents. 3) That "dubious" trial crops were spreading their seeds is a problem. The only incident I am aware of this happening is with the example I brought up before of glyphosate tolerant wheat which could hardly be described as "dubious," so surely there must be other examples (and this one happened after food inc).

I'm not going to bother reading the food inc script just to debunk it. But I will say that Michael Pollan is a full blown woo when it comes to GMOs.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonenti...-brags-he-manipulates-new-york-times-editors/

 

[ThunderChunky]

Monsanto response agreed that they sue a lot of people all over the world for patent violations but said those people deserved it.

And I've read the court transcripts of those cases when available. In every instance, those people knowingly and intentionally infringed on Monsanto's IP.

ETA: Moe Parr is one case featured in Food Inc. The judgement is below. I'll bet anything Food Inc portrayed the story very differently.

http://www.fr.com/files/Uploads/pub...nto_v_Parr_NDIN_4-07-cv-00008_Apr_22_2008.pdf

 

[Wayward son]

1) That "harmful" GMO corn only fit for cattle was getting into the human food supply. I've never even heard of a GMO corn strain developed only for cattle.

This was starlink corn. The EPA approved it only for animal feed because they feared that the Cry9C protein could maybe, possibly be a human allergen. The EPA should have never done a split approval, and the company should have never gone forward with the split approval, and should have either pushed for the full approval or ditched it. As was bound to happen, some of it showed up in the human food supply - when the news hit about 50 people remembered back some weeks and decided that they had an allergic reaction. Testing found that not to be the case. The company removed it from the market (although the large number of people who consumed the corn with not a single documented case of an allergic reaction seems to have shown that the EPA was wrong).

So even though there are lots of non-GMO foods that actually contain allergens and all are fit for human consumption, a GMO food is not fit for human consumption because of a very unlikely, but hypothetical, allergen that has never caused a single allergic reaction.

 

[MinnesotaBrant]

This was starlink corn. The EPA approved it only for animal feed because they feared that the Cry9C protein could maybe, possibly be a human allergen. The EPA should have never done a split approval, and the company should have never gone forward with the split approval, and should have either pushed for the full approval or ditched it. As was bound to happen, some of it showed up in the human food supply - when the news hit about 50 people remembered back some weeks and decided that they had an allergic reaction. Testing found that not to be the case. The company removed it from the market (although the large number of people who consumed the corn with not a single documented case of an allergic reaction seems to have shown that the EPA was wrong).

So even though there are lots of non-GMO foods that actually contain allergens and all are fit for human consumption, a GMO food is not fit for human consumption because of a very unlikely, but hypothetical, allergen that has never caused a single allergic reaction.

Yeah I think it was this one. The Jack Parr case was indeed portrayed differently by Monsanto than by the movie. However, I am not sure what this proves other than teams of lawyers and and gobs of money to run businesses into the ground and intimidate everyone into buying their product is a viable business stategy. I am not even sure that Monsanto would disagree with anything I have posted so far really. To be honest I half of what I buy is gmos and though its been said grass fed beef is probably better for you, who can afford i?, Plus it has been said, I think by the FDA, that red meats such as beef are bad for you because of the saturated fats and for other reasons. As far as fast food goes, the problem isn't workers wanting 15$ an hour, the problem that they are producing food that no one wants to eat anymore. I have been recently been craving a bean burrito from Taco Bell so have been getting a couple once a week and the thing I notice is how empty the store is.

 

[luchog]

Chain restaurant makes money by pandering to idiotic food paranoia. Film at 11.

 

[MinnesotaBrant]

I am feeling abit woo-zy from all the criticism. I do note taht McDonalds decided to drop 7 popular items from their menu at 1:45mp today solely because of my timely posts regarding the state of the fast food industry.

 

[Wayward son]

The Jack Parr case was indeed portrayed differently by Monsanto than by the movie.

Do you mean Moe Parr? Assuming you are talking about Food Inc, I take anything it says with the world's largest grain of salt because to put it politely the documentary has an agenda and honesty is not high on that agenda.

However, I am not sure what this proves other than teams of lawyers and and gobs of money to run businesses into the ground and intimidate everyone into buying their product is a viable business stategy.

The reality of GMOs is not large companies running roughshod over everyone. The reality is that a large set of activists combined with conspiracy nuts, environmental NGOs, the organic industry and the natural foods/herbal supplements and other woo industries have lied their asses off (the activists because they are completely ignorant, conspiracy nuts because they are insane, and the other three groups because they profit off the baseless fear they sow). This baseless hysteria that has been created has led to governments over-regulating GMOs (while in most cases under-regulating all other methods) and that has led to 1) all but the largest companies not being able to compete in creating the GE crops, as well as resulting in 2) only the handful of highest acreage crops having the sales to justify developing GMO crops and 3) potential crops that could save the lives of the poorest children, improve nutrition, and reduce environmental impact all sitting on the shelf because they were created using the best, safest method we have.

If I was Dr. Evil and I was trying to way to completely f-up the world's food supply, I couldn't think of a better way to do than the idiocy that the green and activists movements have achieved.

I am not even sure that Monsanto would disagree with anything I have posted so far really.

Based on much of what you have posted so far being wrong, I can say that I am pretty sure that the company would not be in agreement with you.

 

[Red Baron Farms]

Funny how a food company with integrity is so hated by many of the people here. Is it really so bad a thing to have standards and the integrity to stick by them?

 

[Wayward son]

Funny how a food company with integrity is so hated by many of the people here. Is it really so bad a thing to have standards and the integrity to stick by them?

Edit - sorry wrong company - based on the previous post.

 

[portlandatheist]

Funny how a food company with integrity is so hated by many of the people here. Is it really so bad a thing to have standards and the integrity to stick by them?

I honestly have no idea of how to respond to this. I'm an armature gardener and as such, I bet you have a lot of great quality advice for me...but also a lot of crap as well. Integrity you say? They are jumping ship from a veggie oil that's patent is expiring this very year to a freshly patented crop. To a company that is much bigger than Monsanto. Chipotle doesn't have standards, they have a marketing strategy. They pretend that cheese is not a GMO product. And so on...

 

[ThunderChunky]

Funny how a food company with integrity is so hated by many of the people here. Is it really so bad a thing to have standards and the integrity to stick by them?

They don't have integrity though. They are still using cheese made with GMO rennet (while claiming that it's not) and they switched from one herbicide resistant crop to another herbicide resistant crop. It's pure marketing and woo.