Chipotle's Non-GMO Push Is Based on Bad Science

by Caroline Weinberg 

Last month, several fast-food chains announced that they would be eliminating the use of antibiotics in their chicken products. This week, genetically modified organisms (GMO) are the cause de rigeuer in the food industry as Chipotle announced that it successfully eliminated all GMO ingredients from foods served in its U.S. restaurants. The move, a first for a nationwide chain, is the latest step in a push against farmers and ranchers using science to alter our foods. But should we really be worried about GMOs? Are there legitimate health concerns? Or is this simply rooted in too many viewings of Attack of the Killer Tomatoes?... 

But what are the health risks from eating genetically modified food?

There aren't any. Twenty-five years worth of scientific studies have shown no evidence of harm from the use of GM crops. A recent report from the European Union found that "the main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky [to consume] than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies." These findings are backed by the American Medical Association, the US National Academy of Sciences, and the World Health Organization — along with other respected scientific research based organizations worldwide. Nevertheless, popular resistance to the product continues to grow. As a result of this, all of the countries in the EU and dozens of other countries worldwide restrict or ban the production and sale of genetically modified foods.

In the United States, genetically modified foods are overseen by the US Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the US Food and Drug Administration. Prior to entering the commercial market, GM plants undergo safety testing. This rigorous testing determines whether the foreign DNA poses a risk to human health, and whether new known allergens have been introduced to the food. Labeling is, at this point, only mandatory if the GM product has nutritional or safety properties different from what consumers expect from a specific food. If the two are "substantially equivalent," no labeling is federally required. Currently three states have passed mandatory labeling laws — all at different stages of implementation — with ballot initiatives in place in more than 25 others. But labeling proponents may have a fight on their hands: Just last week, the House of Representatives, led by U.S. Agricultural Secretary Tom Vilsack, will hear a bill that will make GMO labeling a federal consideration, potentially invalidating already-passed state laws.

GMOs have been a part of the American diet for decades, and science suggests it is safe to eat. But the public's documented fear of GMOs is based on claims propagated by convincing bloggers like the Food Babe, who reject scientific evidence in favor of fear mongering. Supermarkets and restaurants are increasingly pandering to these vocal activists by actions like identifying products as containing GMO ingredients or, as is the case with Chipotle, removing them entirely. (On its ingredients website, Chipotle proclaims that while "the meat and dairy products we buy come from animals that are not genetically modified... it is important to note that most animal feed in the U.S. is genetically modified, which means that the meat and dairy served at Chipotle are likely to come from animals given at least some GMO feed.")

READ ENTIRE COLUMN