Social Responsibility and Ethics in Management, BSBA 325
April 1, 2012
The High Cost of High-Tech Foods
1. What are the ethical issues in this case?
The first ethical issue I perceive in the case is that both parties, when discussing the subject, base their arguments more on feelings and assumptions than on scientific facts, which I find unethical when discussing something as important as health and alimentation. Also, there is the pro-GM vision, that claims that the “risks should be judged once scientific consensus has been reached.” I think that this argument in not ethical, since the fact that scientific groups haven’t completely agreed on the side effects of GM foods doesn’t mean that these risks are not present. On the other side, I also see that the argument of anti-GM foods to be vague, since deliberately slowing down research and progress “in order that society may digest innovations of past years” means to stop human development without a reason, which I find unethical. Another ethical issue present is the claim of anti-GM foods groups of the studies of GM-crops being biased and reaching conclusions without sufficient evidence. Also, it is very likely that companies producing pesticides and herbicide-resistant seeds exaggerate the benefits of their products while diminishing or hiding the side effects, in order to make more sales. Finally, according to GM proponents, “detractors often exaggerate environmental hazards, do not substantiate their claims with scientific evidence, and are simply reacting out of fear”, which is an unethical reaction to a field that might end world hunger. 2. Do you think that either group, pro-GM or anti-GM foods, is correct while the other group is wrong? If so, what reasoning do you give for supporting the position of one group over the other? Is it possible for both to be right? What ethical concepts help you decide? I think that both parties have a valid point,...