CASE 9.2 Aspartame: Miracle Sweetener or Dangerous Substance? William H. Shaw an

Question

CASE 9.2 Aspartame: Miracle Sweetener or Dangerous Substance? William H. Shaw and Vincent Barry Diet Coke stands alone as the greatest overnight suc Hayes, Jr., approved the use of aspartame in carbon- cess in the marketplace. But when you quaff a Diet ated beverages. In one stroke, he seemed to end the Coke on a hot summer's day, you may be doing more prolonged controversy over the safety of the artificial than quenching your thirst. You could be inviting a sweetener. That controversy erupted in 1974, when headache, depression. seizure, aggressive be the FDA first approved aspartame as a food additive. visual impairment, or menstrual disturbances. You might even be loading your tissues with a carcinogen. Searle & Co., begun to celebrate the FDA's initial The reason, say most nutritionists and medical scien approval of its profits-promising sweetener than tists, is that soft drinks like Diet Coke -and a host of things turned sour. Largely as a result of the ran- other productscontain the low-calorie sweetener corous protests of lawyer James Turner, author of a aspartame, which goes by the name NutraSweet. No sooner had aspartame's manufacturer, G. D book about food additives, the FDA suspended its In 1983 the Reagan administration's commissioner approval. Armed with the results of animal experi- of the Food and Drug Administration, Dr. Arthur Hul ments conducted at Washington University, Turner William H. Shaw and Vincent Barry, Moral Issues in Business 5th ed. (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1996).

Explanation / Answer

Providing label for the products and writing warning over the product by labelling it is definitely a better approach for providing information to the consumers and increasing the consumer safety. Banning best products would not be an appropriate way of doing justice with the consumers. If the warning is properly provided over the products then it would definitely provide information regarding the hazards of using the specific product and consumer who are not affected by the specific ingredient can also get affected give the product is band. Providing warning choose the ethical responsibility of the company as well as it also increases the overall understanding for the customer who want the product and does not have any reaction to the available content in the specific product. Potentially harmful constituent should be definitely removed and products containing such a specific ingredients should be banned. Banning other products which are harmful for only some people should not be done as it would reduce the number of effective available situations for providing adequate market opportunities for the different businesses. Assessment of such regulation should be done on the basis of severity of the harmfulness for the specific product. Imposing regulations on the basis of constituencies and not providing warning over the label should also be done.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse C
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.