Pass any Chipotle these days — and it is my gastronomic preference to pass rather than enter — and you will see signs claiming credit for removing ingredients that contain GMOs (genetically modified organisms) from the menu. It is the first big chain to do so, and probably not the last. The business press has pronounced it “a savvy move to impress millennials” and a “bet on the younger generations in America.”
This milestone in the history of fast-food scruples (and of advertising) is also a noteworthy cultural development: the systematic incorporation of anti-scientific attitudes into corporate branding strategies. There is no credible evidence that ingesting a plant that has been swiftly genetically modified in a lab has a different health outcome than ingesting a plant that has been slowly genetically modified through selective breeding. The National Academy of Sciences, the American Medical Association, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the World Health Organization have concluded that GMOs are safe to eat. This scientific consensus is at least as strong as the one on human-caused climate change.
As I’ve said before, I read the New York Times and the Washington Post to see what is not true. And it’s not because the journalists there are not talented. It is that they made the same career mistake that establishment comedians did: They sold their souls to the devil.
This person is either spectacularly uninformed of the hazards of consuming genetically modified food or he’s sold his mouth to the highest bidder.
I will not address this in too much depth. The purpose of this piece of mine is not to argue a point or convince you of anything. So if you want evidence, go find it.
The man is attempting to equate “swiftly” genetically modifying plants in a laboratory with “slowly” genetically modifying plants by selective breeding. It’s the same process, you see. There’s no difference except that one is faster. And since country bumpkins can move only so fast on their dirt roads, probably jess walkin’ along in their bare feet with a fishin’ pole over their shoulders, it comes as no surprise that they’re scared of things that move fast like the swiftly moving genetic modification of plants in a laboratory. See? You are witnessing a sophist in action. He’s smooth, like a pick-pocket.
Well, for one thing, selective breeding is the process of emphasizing desired traits that already are encoded in the organism’s genome. Genetic modification is the introduction into the organism’s genome of foreign DNA. Two completely different things. And that the columnist in question breezily equates the two tells me either that he thinks his audience is stupid or that his audience is already stupid. And since it’s the Washington Post, I’m guessing it’s the latter.
Does the slow, ponderous process of selective breeding of plants by hooded monks introduce pig DNA into the green beans? Jellyfish DNA into the apples? Does it cause foreign RNA to recode the genomes of those who eat the genetically modified plants, thereby transferring terminator genes that prevent reproduction in those who eat the plant in question? Does the painstakingly bred corn contain human sterilants in it?
Eating GMO is a death sentence.
Monsanto obviously calls the shots at the Washington Post. I love how the Washington Post is always the go-to rag for lost causes. Americans are now well aware of the hazards of GMO foods. That the Washington Post feigns ignorance of the reams of damning data of the hazards of GMO foods tells me that Monsanto is now grasping at straws, trying to undo the public’s understanding of the poison that is genetically modified food, and that someone over there snapped his fingers and had the bright idea to enlist the help of everyone’s favorite go-to rag as a means of polluting the public discourse and rolling back the disastrous calamity that is the accelerating elimination of GMO foods in the free market of restaurants and grocery stores.
The Washington Post’s protest regarding whatever lost cause they’ve been paid to push is this: “Only country bumpkins are scared of [product or service in question.]”
Not quite the glory days of Watergate, that’s for sure.
Does Gerson charge by the hour? Or by the service?
That rag is so transparent.
I am America’s Senior Comedian. Thank you for your kind attention in this matter.