Business Ethics A Case Study in Scientific Fraud

Question: Discuss about the Business Ethics for A Case Study in Scientific Fraud? Answer: What should it have done differently? Answers will vary, but the author would argue that once the harmful side effects of DDT were made apparent and the EPA banned its sale and use in the USA, Montrose should have pursued an alternative product and ended its production and sale of DDT anywhere in the world (Wrobel, Mlynarczuk Kotwica, 2012). MCC should not have produced/distributedthe chemical until long term side effects are known. Although, the chemical was very useful in the war to aid soldiers from insects carrying diseases the mass production does not conform to Corporate SocialResponsibility. Byinitiating in CSR a company targets social benefits over profit. Was it ethical to manufacture and sell DDT to other countries after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) banned its use in the United States due to its harmful effects? Countries facing thousands of deaths as a result of malarial infection were obviously willing to take a utilitarian approach and argue that the ends justified the means in continuing to use DDT. It was highly unethical to sell andmanufacture DDT to other countries after beingbanned by the Environmental Protection Agency (Ogoma et al., 2014). Milton Friedman argues that a company should earn its revenue without deception and fraud. Did the EPA make the right decision when it banned DDT? The chemical compound that has saved more human lives than any other in history, DDT, was banned by order of one man, the head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).The EPA reacted to current data and an extremely vocal population in the USA that was unhappy with the damage being done to the environment as a result of DDT usage. However, subsequent studies have shown that the use of DDT in much smaller quantities can still be effective in combating malarial infection. This suggests that the EPA didnt really do its homework in requiring an outright ban in the production and sale of DDT. The EPA made the correctdecision when it banned the chemical DDT as it causes more harm than benefits.Sustainabilityis a word used more often in the business world as asuccessful company is now considered not only on profit but howsustainable they are (Nicholson et al., 2013). MCC did not consider the earth's natural systems as it produced a product that is not environmentally friendly. Is the ability to save lives worth the risk to the environment? DDT was claimed to have dire effects on marine life. This question is very subjective as it depends on how a person views the environment in comparison to a human life. Forecasting environmental disasters often requires taking a value-laden leap of faith beyond the present state of knowledge, writes Jocelyn Kaiser. Answers will vary. Third world countries facing thousands of deaths with DDT as their only preventative solution would say yes. More developed nations with better health care systems would say no (McGartland, 2013). When the writer examine the 'triple bottom line it places people ahead of the plant (people, planet, profits). However, both human lives and the environment intertwine, meaning that the environment depends on human life and vice-versa. References McGartland, A. (2013). Thirty Years of Economics at the Environmental Protection Agency. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 42(3), 436. Nicholson, R. A., Wilson, R. G., Potter, C., Black, M. H. (2013). Pyrethroid-and DDT-evoked release of GABA from the nervous system in vitro. Pesticide Chemistry, Mode of Action, Metabolism and Toxicology, 3, 75. Ogoma, S. B., Lorenz, L. M., Ngonyani, H., Sangusangu, R., Kitumbukile, M., Kilalangongono, M., ... Moore, J. (2014). An experimental hut study to quantify the effect of DDT and airborne pyrethroids on entomological parameters of malaria transmission. Malaria journal, 13(1), 1. Wrobel, M. H., Mlynarczuk, J., Kotwica, J. (2012). The effect of DDT and its metabolite (DDE) on prostaglandin secretion from epithelial cells and on contractions of the smooth muscle of the bovine oviduct in vitro. Toxicology and applied pharmacology, 259(2), 152-159.