2 Biotechnology companies claimed that their products are substantially

2 biotechnology companies claimed that their products

This preview shows page 3 - 5 out of 9 pages.

( 2 ) Biotechnology companies claimed that their products are substantially equivalent to those that are not genetically modified simply because “GMO crop contains comparable amounts of a few basic components, such as proteins, fats, and carbohydrates” and because they are similar in a few ways “no compulsory safety testing is required by the regulatory agencies” (McCann, 2014). Several ethical issues could arise from the FDA not testing genetically modified plants such as opposing utilitarianism and Kantianism. Claiming that GMO crops are substantially equivalent and should not be regulated puts all consumers at risk for eating these crops. This would only benefit the company that is producing and selling these crops. Also, it is morally stressed that we have a duty to treat all humans with respect. Under the Kantian theory, it would be immoral to produce and sell crops that may harm humans. Also, under the deontology, FDA or investors should have a duty to research the effects of GMO and its safety for human consumption. Instead, they are influenced by egoism and turn a blind eye and accept Monsanto’s bribery or money offer.
Image of page 3
MONSANTO VS CONSUMERS 4 ( 3 ) In the documentary there was an interview with Rodney Nelson, a farmer from North Dakota. Nelson discovered that Monsanto’s employees and employees of the government regulatory agencies are the same people. This in turn would affect the fairness of government policies, because these employees would side with the private companies. For example, when Dan Quayle ran the Competitiveness Council, he recommended that there be no regulation on genetically modified foods. When the FDA strongly disagreed with Quayle’s beliefs, Quayle reached out to the current deputy commissioner of food policy at that time, Michael Taylor, a former council member of Monsanto, and as a result Taylor had written an official policy for the industry that basically stated no regulation was necessary. Despite being a government employee, Taylor did not look out for the best interest of the people, rather he sided with the private company. We could argue that under deontology, Taylor is to act in favor of the people or country, instead, he acted unethically under the influence of egoism to benefit his private company and himself. ( 4 ) Genetic pollution in the agricultural industry is when unwanted or undesired genes from new plants are cross-pollinating with existing plants. This is especially crucial when GMO seeds are cross-pollinating with non-GMO seeds. Once these GMO crop cross-pollinate, all plants become GMO and continue to produce more GMO plants. ( 4a ) Mexican maize have always been naturally grown corn without any genetic modifiers. But, one day, a farmer from Mexico purchased unlabeled corn seeds from the United States, only to find out that they were genetically modified seeds after being planted. But, it was already too late, the genetic modifiers began to cross-pollinate with non-GMO seeds in his field, creating chain reactions throughout Mexico. The variety of maize began to lessen in number as GMO corn began its uprising.
Image of page 4
Image of page 5

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 9 pages?

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

Stuck? We have tutors online 24/7 who can help you get unstuck.
A+ icon
Ask Expert Tutors You can ask You can ask You can ask (will expire )
Answers in as fast as 15 minutes