Dumping of Products in Third World Countries Essay

Made in the USA- Moral JudgmentFor old ages. the United States has been dumping export stuffs and goods that have been banned or found to be risky to the wellness of the people the United States. In the instance Made in the U.

S. A. – Dumped in Brazil. Africa.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Iraq… . the instance informs about how the United States dumped fire-resistant children’s pyjama. babe conciliators. chemicals. etc. in 3rd universe states without their knowing of the danger they were exposing themselves to by accepting the export goods. The U. S.

had this great thought to come up with a children’s pyjama that would defy catching on fire. After careful scrutiny by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission merchandises and by merchandises of the chemical in the stuff called Tris was found to do kidney malignant neoplastic disease in kids. Then the US came out with babe conciliators that were found to do choking.

The conciliators were exported overseas and 400 Iraqis died and 5. 000 were hospitalized after eating the antifungal on the conciliators. Then we have Winstrol. which was a male endocrine merchandise was banned after it was found to stunt the growing of American kids. Last when the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) approved the sale of Galant. which was to be used as a weed slayer. found that this weed slayer caused malignant neoplastic disease the EPA banned the slayer in the US. but the maker of the merchandise still continues to sell the same merchandise in Mexico City.

Although the U. S. has been leting the concern pattern of dumping by merchandises and merchandises that have been banned by the US for human usage on 3rd universe states dumping is incorrect and demands to halt instantly for the improvement of all human wellbeing.The safety of kids is really of import. but does it hold to be the monetary value of 3rd universe kids to salvage the lives of the kids in the United States? I think non. The United States had no right to dispose of the children’s pyjama without even speaking to the other states before exporting bad goods to them.

The non-consequentialist theory best describes this judgement. Non-consequentialist theory is “right and incorrect are determined by more than the likely effects of an action” ( Shaw 2008. 44 ) . The wrong of the action is that kids.

cherished kids are being harmed by these pyjamas. Then to go through them on to other kids on other states does non do the action right. It is still incorrect. Merely as the kids of the United States are of import so should the kids of other states as good. Third universe states have their ain jobs and the US giving them harmful contaminated pyjama does non do the province of the state any better.Next.

the U. S. manufactured 450. 000 babe conciliators and they were known to do babes to choke to decease. So what does the U. S.

make up one’s mind to make with these conciliators? They decide to export the conciliators overseas where these kids were exposed to the antifungal and either died or had to be hospitalized due to the organic quicksilver that was on the conciliators. “Four hundred Iraqis died in 1972 and five 1000s were hospitalized after devouring the byproducts ( conciliators ) of eight thousand dozenss of wheat and barley coated with an organic quicksilver antifungal. whose usage had been banned in the U. S. ” ( Dowie. 1979 ) . This action is incorrect.This is demoing that the U.

S. childs are better than the kids of other states and this is non true. What makes the United States childs better than any other kid in the universe? The U. S. has no right to set certain kids over others. If the shoe was on the other pes the U.

S. would non let other states to dump merchandises and byproducts on them. It should be the United States’ moral duty to see that all kids are safe from injury or harmful things by censoring the concern pattern of dumping risky merchandises and by merchandises to 3rd universe states.Winstrol. when it foremost came in being in the United States was to be used as a “synthetic male hormone” but was found to stunt the growing of the kids in the United States. After the merchandise was banned in the U.

S. it was so dumped to 3rd universe states where that promoted the merchandise as an appetency stimulation for kids. In India 30 per centum of the kids are malnutrition and tierce of the kids in the Philippines are considered malnutrition besides.

This merchandise was advertised in these states as a remedy for kids who are non able to acquire the nutrition from the nutrients they eat. The advertisement for this merchandise included phrases like “‘a delightful sirup spirit kids love … a singular appetency stimulation and physiques organic structure tissue. ‘” ( Tiranti. 1983 ) . which if promoted in these states where nutrient is difficult to acquire and kids are deceasing each twenty-four hours.The parents of the kids in the 3rd universe states would make anything they could to maintain their kids alive and healthy as possible. In the United States Winstrol was found to stunt growing and in the 3rd universe states it was thought to be the remedy for malnutrition kids.

What pick is better for kids? The picks to stunt their growing or construct up their appetency are both misdirecting. America misleads the 3rd universe states to believe and believe that a drug can bring around hungriness and that is incorrect. What the 3rd universe states kids need are nutrient and non a pill. This drug should non be used for that intent and dumping the drug on states who do non cognize is merely incorrect.

Through a consequentialist point of position. the effect of this drug being promoted as a good merchandise is incorrect so the action of the U. S. dumping this merchandise on others is incorrect excessively.Galant is a chemical used in a batch of merchandises and byproducts. Galant is used in mundane merchandises such as babe blocks. nail Polish.

weed slayer. kitchen cabinets. plyboard. etc.

Europe banned this chemical from merchandises. but the United States did non. The US is ever out for a net income. so if it can export these merchandises to other states and still do a net income so that is what the US will make. As more and more wellness bureaus started to see that Galant was unsafe they stopped utilizing the chemical.

What makes Galant so unsafe is the dipyrone that is given off by the by merchandises and merchandises mentioned. This is the agent that is said to do malignant neoplastic disease. It is besides linked to asthma and headaches excessively ( Gardner. 2006 ) .

“Michael Wilson at UC-Berkeley claim the United States hazards going a “dumping ground” for toxic merchandises as other states clean up their Acts of the Apostless. U. S. chemical Torahs are weak. he complains. Alternatively of coercing industry to turn out a chemical is safe. the load is by and large on the EPA to turn out it endangers people and topographic points.

And that legal criterion of cogent evidence. he says. is excessively high” ( Gardener. 2006 ) .The pattern of the United States seting the load of their errors on other states is incorrect and demands to be stopped.

It is non the duty of other states to dispose of the muss the U. S. makes. Galant.

this malignant neoplastic disease doing blood upset merchandise is a error and is non the duty of other states to take the burden for merchandises that theUnited States find to be unsafe to human wellness.
“Manufacturers that dump merchandises abroad clearly are motivated by profit” ( Shaw. 2008 ) . The United States is all about net income and companies in the U. S.

can non stand to lose money. So if they can happen another manner to acquire a net income on a merchandise that they have produced be it safe or insecure they will make it. Now. should this net income be at the disbursal of human wellness and good being. This should non be the instance at any clip by any one state. The concern pattern of dumping merchandises and by merchandises in other states is incorrect and demands to alter. The U. S.

needs to happen a better manner to dispose of merchandises that are found to be harmful the human wellness or ingestion. The U. S. has no right to force banned merchandises on 3rd universe states.

The U. S. is no better than any other state when it comes to the public assistance of its people and they need to believe about that. If the merchandises can harm the U. S. citizens what makes 3rd universe states any different for them. The consequence of dumping has started to come back and stalk the United States.

The same chemicals that we banned in the United States to utilize on our harvests are being used in 3rd universe states and when we import merchandises from these states the chemicals are on the merchandises and by merchandises that they produced for us. This goes to turn out that the U. S.

is no better than any other state when it comes to happening merchandises and by merchandises non good for human usage or ingestion. The concern pattern of dumping is unsafe. unsafe to the U.

S. and unsafe to other states and it has to halt and halt now.MentionsDowie. M. ( 1979. Nov/ Dec ) .

The Corporate Crime of the Century. Mother Jones. Retrieved May 16.

2008. from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. motherjones. com/news/feature/1979/11/dowie. hypertext markup language.Gardner.

S. ( 2006. November ) . US going a toxic dumping land.

Marketplace. Retrieved May 17. 2008.

from hypertext transfer protocol: //marketplace. publicradio. org/display/web/2006/11/13/us_becoming_a_toxic_dumping_ground/Shaw. W. H. ( 2008 ) . Business moralss ( 6th ed.

) . Belmont. Calcium: Thomson/Wadsworth.

Chapters 1 & A ; 2.


I'm Sarah!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out