To show my support of GMO crops...

Options
_John_
_John_ Posts: 8,642 Member
in Chit-Chat
Think I'll eat lunch at Chipotle today...

Steak bowl it is.
«1

Replies

  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    edited September 2015
    Options
    A lesson in the fallacy of labelling. Enjoy your Frankenbowl!
  • Escloflowne
    Escloflowne Posts: 2,038 Member
    Options
    People who are against GMO are just extremely ignorant and uneducated on the subject...
  • CallMeCupcakeDammit
    CallMeCupcakeDammit Posts: 9,375 Member
    Options
    Don't skip the guac.
  • yellowantphil
    yellowantphil Posts: 787 Member
    Options
    You should have coelacanth on a bed of moss. It's hard to get much less genetically modified than that.
  • Char231023
    Char231023 Posts: 702 Member
    Options
    Num num Franken Berry. Oh I sorry you said Frankenbowl. That brings up a point would Franken Berry be considered a GMO.

    Just kidding it a processed food.
  • _John_
    _John_ Posts: 8,642 Member
    Options
    Double steak, pinto beans, pico, corn salsa, and guac...my bowl was even clean...
  • Shalaurise
    Shalaurise Posts: 707 Member
    Options
    Bronan_The_Brobarian wrote: »
    GMOs give you cancer from the chemicals involved

    1w3s1547i2rt.jpg
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Options
    Shalaurise wrote: »
    Bronan_The_Brobarian wrote: »
    GMOs give you cancer from the chemicals involved

    1w3s1547i2rt.jpg

    When you think about, it's such a generic statement that it's not wrong, regardless of the motivations behind the post.
  • _John_
    _John_ Posts: 8,642 Member
    Options
    tincanonastring wrote: »
    Shalaurise wrote: »
    Bronan_The_Brobarian wrote: »
    GMOs give you cancer from the chemicals involved

    1w3s1547i2rt.jpg

    When you think about, it's such a generic statement that it's not wrong, regardless of the motivations behind the post.

    Because giving the calories to sustain life can be argued as a contribution to the development of cancer...
  • Of_Monsters_and_Meat
    Of_Monsters_and_Meat Posts: 1,022 Member
    edited September 2015
    Options
    Which part is the genetics?

    Cuts-of-Beef-Infographic-900x535.jpg



    Oh, I'm such a softy
    154.jpg
  • Illini_Jim
    Illini_Jim Posts: 419 Member
    Options
    l0s7q8vqplu1.jpg
  • k8blujay2
    k8blujay2 Posts: 4,941 Member
    Options
    Chipotle. Prime example of what happens when you let food terrorists win.
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Options
    Illini_Jim wrote: »
    l0s7q8vqplu1.jpg

    Harry Potter and the Bong of Ra-Sta
  • Illini_Jim
    Illini_Jim Posts: 419 Member
    Options
    Bronan_The_Brobarian wrote: »
    Look at this
    jYCd8EN.jpg


    That is not natural that came from a GMO cow

    Well marbled I'd say.
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Options
    _John_ wrote: »
    tincanonastring wrote: »
    Shalaurise wrote: »
    Bronan_The_Brobarian wrote: »
    GMOs give you cancer from the chemicals involved

    1w3s1547i2rt.jpg

    When you think about, it's such a generic statement that it's not wrong, regardless of the motivations behind the post.

    Because giving the calories to sustain life can be argued as a contribution to the development of cancer...

    Because there only needs to have ever, in all of history, been a single case of cancer caused by a GMO product of any kind to validate the statement "GMOs give you cancer from the chemicals involved." It's a bit of a loose interpretation of the word "cause," but it still works.
  • _John_
    _John_ Posts: 8,642 Member
    Options
    tincanonastring wrote: »
    _John_ wrote: »
    tincanonastring wrote: »
    Shalaurise wrote: »
    Bronan_The_Brobarian wrote: »
    GMOs give you cancer from the chemicals involved

    1w3s1547i2rt.jpg

    When you think about, it's such a generic statement that it's not wrong, regardless of the motivations behind the post.

    Because giving the calories to sustain life can be argued as a contribution to the development of cancer...

    Because there only needs to have ever, in all of history, been a single case of cancer caused by a GMO product of any kind to validate the statement "GMOs give you cancer from the chemicals involved." It's a bit of a loose interpretation of the word "cause," but it still works.

    It doesn't even need to be that legit...out of 2 billion people on the web it only takes one to take one for the team and come up with a convincing anecdotal blog and get a doctor high enough to make a video in support of the claim...
  • TheRoadDog
    TheRoadDog Posts: 11,793 Member
    Options
    It's too late to go back.
  • maab_connor
    maab_connor Posts: 3,927 Member
    Options
    Bronan_The_Brobarian wrote: »
    GMOs give you cancer from the chemicals involved

    being human can give you cancer... from the chemicals involved.

Categories