Chipotle’s has decided to shun genetically-modified ingredients — such as, for example, the corn and soy that most of us eat on a regular basis. It’s a purely populist move, feeding on public misconceptions about the safety of GM foods. And if there’s a market niche there, fine. But what would we think of a business that banked on the public’s misunderstanding of the scientific consensus on, say, climate change? Or evolution? All three issues are subject to about the same level of scientific certainty. >>>
Chipotle to Stop Using Genetically Altered Ingredients
In a first for a major restaurant chain, Chipotle Mexican Grill on Monday will begin preparing only food that is free of genetically engineered ingredients…..
Interestingly, the announcement drew a parallel — a faulty one — between GM foods an various “junk” ingredients such as fillers.
Brought to you by:
Business Ethics Highlights 
Agree. GM Food are not so harmful as antibiotics, pesticides and synthetic ingredients found in most junk food. While pretending to act responsibly banning GM products, it mislead public and takes all the attention away from more harmful ingredients.
Or vaccines? Oh–wait–the organic industry is actually going after those: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_31368.cfm
And the same folks are in bed with “detox” merchants too. It baffles me that people can’t see through this marketing ploy.
Yeah, vaccines are another great example. What amazes me is that the people who refuse to acknowledge the scientific consensus re GMOs would be aghast at the idea of doubting consensus in other areas.
Pingback: Backlash Against Chipotle’s Anti-GM Move | Business Ethics Highlights
Pingback: Chipotle and GMOs: Corporate Irresponsibility? | Business Ethics Highlights
Pingback: Top 10 Business Ethics Stories of 2015 | The Business Ethics Blog