Impossible Burger

Impossible Foods: Capitalism Is the Most Powerful Lever To Fight Climate Change

Impossible Foods says that animal agriculture is a leading cause of climate change. Instead of trying to pass laws to ban meat, it's providing tasty, plant-based alternatives.

|

HD Download

"We don't have time to wait for an international consensus on something as disastrous as climate change. We need to employ every single lever at our disposal. And frankly, that includes one of the most powerful levels we have, which is capitalism and consumer choice," says Rachel Konrad, the chief communications officer of Impossible Foods. Reason's Justin Monticello sat down with Konrad at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas in January of 2020.

Impossible Foods creates plant-based alternatives to meat. Its first product, the Impossible Burger, closely approximates the look, texture, and taste of traditional ground beef by using some of the same molecules found in animal meat but extracting them from plants instead. It debuted in July of 2016 and is now sold in roughly 17,000 restaurants worldwide. Konrad says that the company was founded with the explicit mission to save the world from "the disaster of climate change."

You can buy Impossible products at Dunkin Donuts, White Castle, Burger King, Whole Foods, Qdoba, Red Robin, and other restaurants. For now, it's significantly more expensive than traditional meat, but Konrad says that will change.

"The impossible burger uses about 80 percent less water, about 90 percent less energy, and about 95 percent less land" than most traditional beef production, she says. "Over the long term that pushes the cost for us, and ultimately for the consumer, down."

Konrad says Impossible Foods creates new products based on their potential environmental and public health impacts. The company's first priority was beef, but in January it announced the launch of Impossible Pork and Impossible Sausage.

Impossible Pork, Sausage, and Burger cook and taste very similarly to real meat. The company's key innovation here is heme, the same protein that makes blood red, which allows its simulated meat to "bleed" and sear like a beef burger. Impossible Foods isolated the protein from soybeans and developed a genetic engineering process to manufacture it in bulk.

The meat industry has responded to this plant-based competition by pushing for labeling laws that clarify that Impossible Foods' and similar companies' products aren't the real thing, on the grounds that consumers might be confused about what they're actually buying.

Konrad isn't buying that criticism: "That's obviously complete bullshit. Consumers are absolutely certain of what they're buying when they buy our product, which is why we've seen such stratospheric growth."

Speaking fondly of economic growth in any capacity is exceedingly rare among climate activists, where markets are often seen a major contributor to climate change. Impossible Foods takes the opposite position there. While Konrad says she has some issues with capitalism, "the reality is that we don't have time to shift the economic system in the entire world in order to fix it, in order to then fix climate change…we need to leverage every single thing that we can. And I don't know if you're going to find a more powerful lever right now than capitalism, consumer demand, and consumers' rational behavior."

Produced by Justin Monticello and John Osterhoudt.

Featured Image by Lex Villena

NEXT: Supreme Court Postpones Oral Arguments Over COVID-19, Some Justices Will Work From Home

HD Download

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Wake me when they get to implausible.

    1. Inconceivable?

      1. Do you have a pay pal, in the event if you have you can add an extra 350 /week in your income just working at home five hours per day. go here to this page…. Read More

    2. Indigestible.

    3. And the accusations that beef and poultry farming is more detrimental to the environment overall than crops like soybean, rice and canola are all built on several thoroughly discredited studies.

    4. Do you utilize a pay~pal account ? because if you do you can create an additional 600 a week to your account just working from home for two hours every day. look at this site…. Read More

  2. I’m not going to pay more for less food, fat and calories. Give me some animal fat.

    1. And these “impossible foods” contain soy oil and a million other things that are very unhealthy. Somehow people have gotten it into their heads that nothing plant based can be unhealthy and is always healthier than meat. Nothing could be further from the truth.

      If they ever do convince people to start eating this garbage, you will see even more high cholesterol and heart disease and obesity as a result. And it will of course make no difference to the climate. But hey, a bunch of ignorant doofuses will get to be French fry vegetarians and virtue signal their moral superiority over the evil meat eaters. And that is what it is all about isn’t it?

      1. Sort of like how some prefer ‘natural’ remedies that are just the raw plant material that gets concentrated into pharmaceuticals?

        1. The other thing about plants that most people don’t understand is that they don’t like to be eaten. Plants have all kinds of natural defenses to deter other creatures from eating them. So, plants contain all kinds of toxins. Obviously, there is not enough of those toxins to kill us in the plants we eat or else they wouldn’t be edible. But, science isn’t even close to fully understanding all of the substances contained in plants or how they interact with the human body. Chances are pretty good that a significant portion of cancers and other diseases for which there is no known cause are caused by the toxins in the plants we eat.

          That is not to say we should stop eating plants. We should continue to eat plants. It is just to say that there is no reason to believe eating them is any healthier than eating meat.

          1. Sometimes a plants defense mechanism is why we eat them in the first place. Go figure. I know I like jalapenos, anyway.

            1. I’ll stick to alkaloids thank you: caffeine and chocolate (theobroma).

          2. “Chances are pretty good that a significant portion of cancers and other diseases for which there is no known cause are caused by the toxins in the plants we eat.”

            Oy.

            People who eat a very high to 100% plant diet live the longest so even if the plants are killing you, they kill you slower than other diets.

            And of course, plants have defense chemicals but they aren’t all toxic to us and also, the dose makes the poison. Would you consider pure water toxic? Well, too much water will kill you. It’s called water toxicity. Vitamin A is good for you but if you eat the wrong kind of wild game liver, it will kill you. Too much of some healthy B vitamins can be harmful. Does this mean that B vitamins are toxic now too?

            Many of the defensive compounds that plants use are beneficial to us.

            Dare I guess, not only do you think a plant based diet is toxic, but you also think exogenous cholesterol, hormones and the ingestion of saturated fat regardless of the source is not harmful, right?

            1. Dare I guess, not only do you think a plant based diet is toxic, but you also think exogenous cholesterol, hormones and the ingestion of saturated fat regardless of the source is not harmful, right?

              Are you hear to tell us that a steady diet of vegetable shortening prolongs your life?

              Otherwise, you can fuck off with your false enlightenment, ideological determinism, and sloppy correlation = causation bullshit.

            2. A plant based diet is fit for prey.
              If you want so badly to not be human, you can simply off yourself and spare real people your toxicity

            3. “ People who eat a very high to 100% plant diet live the longest so even if the plants are killing you, they kill you slower than other diets.”

              According to thoroughly debunked garbage like the China Study.

      2. They ignore the number one killer is plant based, sugar.

      3. BINGO!!!! This crap is highly processed with a lot of unhealthy ingredients!

        Even a guy like America’s greatest health expert, Dr. Joseph Mercola, are realizing that the right meat can be very healthy! Certainly healthier than this garbage!

        https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/10/21/is-red-meat-good-for-you.aspx

    2. Grazing herds used to cover and fertilize larges swaths of grasslands now turning to desert in their absence.

      How to green the world’s deserts and reverse climate change | Allan Savory
      https://youtu.be/vpTHi7O66pI

  3. …which allows its simulated meat to “bleed” and sear like a beef burger. Impossible Foods isolated the protein from soybeans and developed a genetic engineering process to manufacture it in bulk.

    Remains to be seen if the people who are worried about the environment to such an extent they change their eating habits aren’t the same people who are ‘concerned’ about GMO’s I’d suppose.

    1. Or, maybe more completely, how big the Venn diagram overlap between ‘people unconcerned about GMOs’, ‘people concerned about the environment’, ‘people who enjoy depriving themselves virtuously’, and ‘people who still want to eat meat’ is.

      They’ve got the affluent fast food consumer market nailed.


      1. They’ve got the affluent fast food consumer market nailed.

        LOL, I see what you did there.

  4. “The impossible burger uses about 80 percent less water, about 90 percent less energy, and about 95 percent less land” than most traditional beef production, she says. “Over the long term that pushes the cost for us, and ultimately for the consumer, down.”

    Wait, wut? Say we weren’t talking meat vs. veggies, say two differently baked buns. The only rationalization I can come up with that explains how they make it with 80% less water, 90% less energy, and 95% less land and it doesn’t pay off in the short term is if they’re making out of something really rare or precious… like humans.

    1. My guess is that they are assuming every cow, pig and chicken is raised in some kind of absurdly free range way. The truth is that most animals who are consumed for meat are raised in concentrated feeding operations that take up much less land than growing vegetables. That claim is 100% bullshit.

      1. That claim is 100% bullshit.

        Yeah. “Eventually, $1 + $1 + $1 < $0.40 + $0.20 + $0.10.”

      2. I believe that they mean mostly the land used to grow feed for the animals.

        1. I think that’s the rub. I’d guess the ‘plant material’ in these faux burgers is less than that, but like you I’d be curious about the calorie difference.

        2. But the food used to feed animals is things like milo and corn that produce enormous yields. Food that you eat takes a lot more land than that.

          I would also point out that the same people who make these sorts of claims also hate GMOs, pesticides, and fertilizers. I am sorry but I can’t take someone who claims to be concerned about land use but then turns around and objects to the very things that make farm land more efficient seriously about much of anything.

          1. I would also point out that the same people who make these sorts of claims also hate GMOs, pesticides, and fertilizers.

            They’re also the people who will advertise cricket grubs as a source of protein and laud their nitrogen capture or retention capabilities by citing sources showing N retention ratios greater than 1; claiming you get ~1.1 g of N back for every 1 g you feed them (never mind that they get to 1.1 by feeding off other waste streams and, even if you got them cleaned/sterilized, you wouldn’t digest/assimilate 100% of that nitrogen effectively).

            1. Are they lying or are they really so stupid they don’t understand the conservation of energy and the laws of thermodynamics? I bug that produces more nitrogen than you feed it is otherwise known as a perpetual motion machine. What the hell is wrong with these people?

              1. I bug that produces more nitrogen than you feed it is otherwise known as a perpetual motion machine.

                Pretty much anything that starts from a place of thwarting AGW effectively boils down to a belief that perpetual motion exists or is achievable, from wind power to electric cars to vegan meat. It’s (frequently) a religious statement that allows them to sidestep the normal scientific and economic sins of energy accounting, costs, and inefficiency (or at least kick them down the road).

                1. A few years ago people were claiming without irony that hybrid electric cars would contribute to the electric grid while also using less gas than non hybrid ICE cars. The theory went that the cars would charge themselves on the road and then plug in when parked to contribute to the electric grid.

                  I haven’t heard that one in a while. But none of them seem to understand that wind contains a finite amount of energy and it uses that energy to turn a wind turbine. They all think you can build an infinite amount of wind turbines and harvest the power of the wind.

                  And they all would happily strip mine the entire fucking world to build batteries for cars in the name of “saving the climate”. Calling this shit a religion is an insult to religion. It is more of a cult.

        3. I believe that they mean mostly the land used to grow feed for the animals.

          I disagree but it’s hard to know how much is accurate/intentional and how much is spherical cow misapproximation, intentional or otherwise.

          Like they’re comparing lbs. of soybeans to lbs. of cow while ignoring the fact that the cow’s blood (most of which is discarded) is way more heme-dense than the soybean ever could be.

    2. It’s people!

    3. How much energy and time does it take to process the raw materials?

      1. That’s a bit what I was getting at. The only way you say that it’s phenomenally cheaper to produce despite the higher cost is if you make it out of something like diamonds or unicorn horns and just assume diamond or unicorn horn production would get more efficient and doesn’t count.

        Producing hemes, which are water soluble, in a plant like soybeans, which has been bred for it’s fat/oil content, is astoundingly counterproductive. Seaweed/algae would be more efficient but, considering that we don’t produce beef for the hemes (we throw most of it away and could get much more by simply bleeding cattle rather than slaughtering them), and hemes aren’t what allow meat to sear (vegetables, doughs, and cheeses can all arguably be pan-fried or seared) it’s a lot of tilting at windmills.

    4. like humans.

      Soylent Green is people! It’s people!!!

      1. More and more, whenever I see an up-and-coming technology defend its costs with the “economies of scale” argument, I hear Zap Brannigan bragging about how he sent wave after wave of men at the killbots.

        Certainly there are some “economies of scale” arguments to be had, but there are plenty of times when people use the argument without even the faintest clue as to whether the killbots actually have a programmed kill limit or not.

  5. BAAAAAAAARRRRRFFFFFFF.

    That is all.

  6. Impossible Pork, Sausage, and Burger cook and taste very similarly to real meat,

    since none of these inanimate substances can cook or taste at all.

    1. Funny thing. Some verbs have both transitive and intransitive uses.

      1. Only clingers restrict verbs to a binary option

      2. Only if they identify as trans.

  7. Was this a sponsored post?

  8. Impossible Foods says that animal agriculture is a leading cause of climate change. Instead of trying to pass laws to ban meat, it’s providing tasty, plant-based alternatives.

    Tasty? I suppose that is a subjective term, but “tasty” certainly isn’t an adjective I would use.

    1. Impossible Foods says that animal agriculture is a leading cause of climate change.

      Really that is just a dishonest way of saying people are the leading cause of the dreaded climate change.

  9. …the Impossible Burger, closely approximates the look, texture, and taste of traditional ground beef by using some of the same molecules found in animal meat but extracting them from plants instead.

    I’d be curious to know how much of that plant material ends up being wasted? Maybe it’s not as much as one might think, but without knowing that, are we really sure it’s such an environmental bargain if a large chunk of the plant matter ends up in a landfill?

    1. And how much energy does it take to make these things. The plants have to be cooked and transformed in some way. And that takes energy. But, they are marketing to people who think electricity comes from the light socket. So, these sorts of questions will never be asked much less answered.

  10. >>the company was founded with the explicit mission to save the world from “the disaster of climate change.”

    better spent money building a weather machine.

  11. My grocery store has run out of actual meat a few times over the last week or two, but there’s always plenty of this shit available. Figuring out how to turn all that soy into toilet paper would’ve been more worthwhile.

    1. Same thing at my local grocery store

  12. Has anyone tasted one of these things? I’m thinking to try to be open minded and get some first-hand info. But Impossible Foods better beware: I’m a meatloving snob – if it tastes like a knockoff, I’m going to be vocal in that assessment.

    1. It is apparently not terrible, but to say it actually tastes like real meat is a stretch.

    2. Has anyone tasted one of these things? I’m thinking to try to be open minded and get some first-hand info. But Impossible Foods better beware: I’m a meatloving snob – if it tastes like a knockoff, I’m going to be vocal in that assessment.

      Don’t have to. Not to discourage someone from trying something they might want to try but dietary displacement is not a new phenomenon. Neither is marketing.

      I like turkey bacon. It’s not better than actual bacon and I would never confuse the two but I like it for what it is. Chili con carne was, originally, peppers, water, and meat. Beans kept longer and, when stewed, were an effective protein substitute for some meat. I like Chili con carne, Chili, and (some) vegetarian chili but I’d never confuse the 3. The fact that they aren’t selling “Impossible Turkey Bacon” or “Impossible Chili” at a fraction of the cost of regular bacon *or* turkey bacon *or* chilli tells me all I need to know. They aren’t going for the low-hanging fruit and/or establishing themselves in the market, because AGW, they have to own the whole tree.

      The pledge to AGW clearly implies that even if they dominated the food market with ‘Impossible Meat’ and people still ate meat at a level that was driving AGW, they’ve failed and need to dominate the market harder.

    3. I had an Impossible Whopper and it smelled and tasted every bit as bad as any other type of veggie burger I’ve tried. I took one bite and couldn’t bring myself to take a second. It wasn’t just bad; it was bad in a distinctly veggieburger kind of way.

    4. I had one. It tastes like a crappy burger from McDonalds. Better than a veggie burger but not much. I’m looking forward to lab-grown meat.

    5. I had the impossible Whopper I thought it was great pretty sure I would fail a blind taste test between it and a meat based Whopper.

  13. Climate change? Who the fuck cares about that at a time like this!

    HOW DARE YOU!

  14. You can’t beat meat.

    1. I try to be as gentle as possible with mine.

    2. If that were true, porn wouldn’t be 60% of the traffic on the Internet.

  15. Unfortunately this shit and Beyond Meat are deceiving the public as they have the same or more fat than real meat. So just buy meat for now until something real and more transparent comes along.

  16. Vegetable based burgers are fine. When is someone going to produce vat grown beef? I read about it in sci-fi all the time.

  17. “Instead of trying to pass laws to ban meat…”

    Oh, yeah? So when that bill comes up in the legislature for money to fight meat consumption through expensive education programs, they’ll vote it down? When that tax on meat comes along to reduce bovine fart emissions, they’ll vote it down? When the bill comes along to subsidize meat alternatives to fight the urgent crisis of climate change, they’ll say no thanks?

    Grow up.

  18. “by using some of the same molecules found in animal meat but extracting them from plants instead”
    “Impossible Foods isolated the protein from soybeans and developed a genetic engineering process to manufacture it in bulk.”

    GMO!!!
    GMO!!!
    GMO!!!

    RUN AWAY! HIDE! THE WORLD WILL END!

  19. I prefer the traditional method of turning vegetable-based matter into something which “closely approximates the look, texture, and taste of traditional ground beef.”

    It’s called a “cow.”

    That said, I hope they’re wildly successful. Just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be there for others who do.

  20. Humans eat meat.
    Full stop.
    Fuck all these people who hate themselves so much that they hate their entire species

  21. the term “impossible burger” implies very strongly that I’mma gonna get a MEAT burger, because that’s what a BURGER is.

    I’ve see “soy”burgres, “veggie” burgers, etc,so the first word is an accurate descriptor.

    but “impossible” is not an accurate descriptor.

    If I want a non-meat patty, I’ll start with my own mix of beans, thanks all the same. These guys are taking vegetables apart , selecting the fractions of them THEY want to use, and who knows what the full effect of this might be? On the other hand, the BEEF burger I just ate and enjoyed is a known and proven quantity. Some of the harmful substances we eat ARE extradcts, derivatives, or byproducts of plants. In fact some of the most effective poisons are plant-derived.

    Further, these eedjits begin with the false premise that “global warming” exists, is man caused, and is harmful. NONE of which is settled science.
    SHE certainly seems to believe in her product. But she is delusional if se thinks I will.

    1. Hamburgers are not typically made of ham, or people from Hamburg. They come from beef, or beef substitute. The first word is only rarely an accurate descriptor. This is a good thing. Who would eat strawberries if they came from straw, as their name implies.

      “NONE of which is settled science.”

      Any ideas on how to settle the science? Didn’t think so.

  22. “…it’s providing tasty, plant-based alternatives…”

    I’ll dispute the “tasty” claim.

  23. “That’s obviously complete bullshit. Consumers are absolutely certain of what they’re buying when they buy our product”

    Full confession. I did by an impossible slider from White Castle not knowing it was plant based until a few weeks later.

    Didn’t taste any worse that the crap sliders I also got.

  24. Reason should fire the writers..they didn’t do any research in the claims it seems. The ingredients in his shi$ have some “interesting” chemicals…which in the end you have to ask why this is better than millions of years of evolution (meat). And the supposed “less impact” claims demand a little more scrutiny.

    Who is this woke they are interviewing? Same old same old..

  25. I am boss of my own will. Come to join under link to earn $75 per hour by watching tv with family in spare time. Earn as much as you spent time. If so please copy the link and full fill your dream……… Read more

  26. Capitalism comes down to a means of wealth distribution. It’s not a way to fight climate change. To mitigate climate change will require laws, regulations, technological innovation and social stigmatizing.

    Fake fur has been on the market for decades yet still the catwalks of Paris and Milano featured models wearing coats of ermines, foxes and minx etc. This has largely ended thanks to anti-fur militants dousing the strutting models with vials of fake blood, a PR disaster for haute couture designers and fur users.

    1. “Capitalism comes down to a means of wealth distribution. It’s not a way to fight climate change. To mitigate climate change will require laws, regulations, technological innovation and social stigmatizing.”

      Bullshit followed by lefty propaganda.
      Fuck off.

      1. Fake fur has been on the market for decades yet still the catwalks of Paris and Milano featured models wearing coats of ermines, foxes and minx etc. This has largely ended thanks to anti-fur militants dousing the strutting models with vials of fake blood, a PR disaster for haute couture designers and fur users.

      2. Hamburgers are not typically made of ham, or people from Hamburg. They come from beef, or beef substitute. The first word is only rarely an accurate descriptor. This is a good thing. Who would eat strawberries if they came from straw, as their name implies.

        “NONE of which is settled science.”

        Any ideas on how to settle the science? Didn’t think so.

  27. First of all, let me state that I keep vegan. And, yes, when on the road I sometimes eat Impossible Whoppers. They are passable (there are more tasty beef substitutes available). Now that I have said that, let me say that “vegetarianism” is NOT going to save the planet. While raising livestock does have an effect on carbon production, here in the US, and in most wealthy nations, it is a very minor player — and very few folks in developing countries are going to pay high prices for second-rate “meat.” I could go on, but let me just suffice it to say that Impossible Brands, or whatever they call themselves, are just pandering to their customers and would-be customers by bringing up the entire global warming thing. This is no worse than what any number of businesses with “cards in the game” are doing. And no better. ‘Nuff said.

    1. “While raising livestock does have an effect on carbon production, here in the US, and in most wealthy nations, it is a very minor player”

      My sources inform me that meat production accounts for more than 10% of the planet’s entire annual atmospheric carbon emissions. It’s not a minor player. I agree that meat substitutes are not really something to mitigate global warming. They rely on easily avoidable energy intensive processing, packaging, distribution etc.

      1. “My sources inform me that meat production accounts for more than 10% of the planet’s entire annual atmospheric carbon emissions.”

        World-wide, I have heard the same. But ag practices in the US are very different than in other nations. Not only does is make much more efficient use of agricultural by-products, but is also doesn’t involve the burning of rain forests to create new grazing lands. Not that the system in the US is perfect, and couldn’t stand for some improvement. But, the world’s second-largest beef producer is Brazil, which is a whole ‘nother kettle of fish.

        1. “but is also doesn’t involve the burning of rain forests to create new grazing lands.”

          The forests that covered vast areas of the USA, including where beef is now farmed, were burned or cut down long ago, destroying carbon sinks.

          “But ag practices in the US are very different than in other nations.”

          Probably the biggest difference is the power and number of the lobbyists American agriculture has at its disposal.

          1. “The forests that covered vast areas of the USA, including where beef is now farmed, were burned or cut down long ago, destroying carbon sinks.”

            Yes and no. There are more trees today in the US today than there were a hundred years ago. And many of those gains include the East coast, where the hardwood forests were decimated in centuries past, have twice as many trees as they did just seventy years ago.

            Note: I am not defending the beef industry here, but the statements from Konrad in the article seems to be more about “virtue-signalling” than anything else. I get tired of such antics, from wherever they originate.

            1. “There are more trees today in the US today than there were a hundred years ago. And many of those gains include the East coast, where the hardwood forests were decimated in centuries past, have twice as many trees as they did just seventy years ago.”

              The US forestry service report that in 1600 half the US was covered by forest. Today it’s closer to one third. There are trees and trees. Trees from old growth forests are more valuable environmentally speaking than the faster growing species like poplar that typically replace them.

  28. Let’s talk about the actual quality of the Impossible Foods product to the consumer, unrelated to its environmental impact. I occasionally get an expensive ($18) hamburger at Porta Via, a popular restaurant in Beverly Hills. (My girlfriend likes this restaurant.) It offers an Impossible Burger that except for the actual burger is identical to its regular beef hamburger, for the same $18 price. I thought here’s a way to easily compare an Impossible Burger to a beef hamburger.

    I found the Impossible Burger to be drier and slightly less tasty than the beef hamburger. I talked to the waiter afterward, and he expressed the same opinion.

    The Impossible Burger is not terrible. I wouldn’t decline to eat it, I wouldn’t complain if someone served me one, but it’s not worth a premium and it’s not what I would choose over an actual beef burger today assuming cost is the same. I’m not ready to voluntarily pay more for a burger that won’t be quite as good as an actual beef burger. But if Impossible Foods can improve its product to be as good as what one gets from a cow, great.

  29. I am creating an honest wage from home 3000 Dollars/week , that is wonderful, below a year agone i used to be unemployed during a atrocious economy. I convey God on a daily basis i used to be endowed these directions and currently it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with everybody, Here is I started… Read more  

  30. Join them… and start working from comfort of your home! All you need is a computer and a internet connection and you are ready to start. Learn how to make a steady income for yourself on following web adress…
    American People

  31. I made $64,000 so far this year working online and I’m aade such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve mabout it. Here’s what I’ve been doingr==► Click it here   

  32. Situs Agen Sbobet Terpercaya
    I do not know who you are but definitely you’re going to a famous blogger if you are not

  33. I am making a good salary from home $1200-$2500/week , which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone, Here is what I do. Follow details……. Read more

  34. The impossible burger uses about 80 percent less water
    i agree with this statement we should be car full while eating burger

  35. Sᴛᴀʀᴛ ᴡᴏʀᴋɪɴɢ ғʀᴏᴍ ʜᴏᴍᴇ! Gʀᴇᴀᴛ ᴊᴏʙ ғᴏʀ sᴛᴜᴅᴇɴᴛs, sᴛᴀʏ-at-home moms or anyone needing an extra income… You only need a computer and a reliable internet connection… Mᴀᴋᴇ $90/h and up to $12000 a month by following link at the bottom and sɪɢɴɪɴɢ ᴜᴘ… You can have your first check ʙʏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴇɴᴅ ᴏғ ᴛʜɪs ᴡᴇᴇᴋ… visit This Site…
    More Read Here

Please to post comments