In Brazil, the export industry always finds ways to cut costs. The international community expressed its dismay at the manufacturers' latest cost-cutting decision to replace flouride with diethylene glycol in toothpaste. Flouride is designed to strengthen teeth enamel. Diethylene glycol is a poisonous substance used to make chemicals that are widely used by the automobile industry.
The end product exported from Brazil was poisonous toothpaste that was not labeled to indicate that it contained diethylene glycol. When the poisonous chemical was found in the toothpaste, Costa Rican govemment officials issued a warning telling consumers to discard the toothpaste. In 2019, a study found that toothpaste containing diethylene glycol was harmless if the chemical concentration was below 15.6 percent. The contaminated toothpaste found in Costa Rica contained levels as high as 5 percent. Costa Rican government officials warned that it was unsafe in any concentration. It is especially harmful for children, as well as those suffering from weakened kidneys.
In July 2020, due to growing concern about the safety of the imported toothpaste, the Costa Rican government banned all manufacturers from using diethylene glycol in toothpaste. Investigators believed that the toothpaste originated from two small manufacturers in the Brazil but the manufacturers denied any wrongdoing.
The contaminated toothpaste was found in five shipping containers but there have not been any confirmed illnesses or deaths from using the contaminated toothpaste.
If you were manufacturing toothpaste and decided to substitute diethylene glycol for glycerin, would you consider it your ethical obligation to tell the consumer?
Full Answer Section
Some people might argue that it is ethical to substitute diethylene glycol for glycerin if the concentration of diethylene glycol is below a certain level. However, I believe that it is always unethical to deceive consumers about the ingredients in a product. Consumers should be able to trust that the products they are buying are safe to use, regardless of the concentration of any particular ingredient.
In the case of the Brazilian toothpaste manufacturers who replaced fluoride with diethylene glycol, the manufacturers clearly violated their ethical obligations to consumers. They not only deceived consumers about the ingredients in their product, but they also put consumers' health at risk.
Why Did the Brazilian Toothpaste Manufacturers Replace Fluoride with Diethylene Glycol?
There are two main reasons why the Brazilian toothpaste manufacturers may have replaced fluoride with diethylene glycol. First, diethylene glycol is cheaper than fluoride. This would have allowed the manufacturers to reduce the cost of production and increase their profits. Second, diethylene glycol is a humectant, which means that it helps to retain moisture. This can make toothpaste feel smoother and creamier.
However, the cost savings and the improved texture of the toothpaste were not worth the risk to consumers' health. Diethylene glycol is a poisonous substance, and it should never be used in toothpaste.
What Can be Done to Prevent Toothpaste Manufacturers from Using Unsafe Ingredients?
There are a number of things that can be done to prevent toothpaste manufacturers from using unsafe ingredients. First, governments can regulate the ingredients that are allowed in toothpaste. For example, the Costa Rican government banned the use of diethylene glycol in toothpaste in 2020.
Second, consumers can be educated about the risks of using toothpaste containing unsafe ingredients. Consumers should be encouraged to check the ingredients list on toothpaste before they buy it. They should also be aware of the potential dangers of buying toothpaste from unknown brands.
Finally, toothpaste manufacturers should be held accountable for the products they sell. If toothpaste manufacturers are found to be using unsafe ingredients, they should be punished. This could include fines, imprisonment, or the recall of their products.
Conclusion
Toothpaste manufacturers have an ethical obligation to consumers to make safe and effective products. Substituting diethylene glycol for glycerin is a form of deception that could have serious health consequences for consumers. Governments, consumers, and toothpaste manufacturers all have a role to play in preventing toothpaste manufacturers from using unsafe ingredients.
Sample Answer
Ethical Obligations of Toothpaste Manufacturers
If I were manufacturing toothpaste and decided to substitute diethylene glycol for glycerin, I would consider it my ethical obligation to tell the consumer. Diethylene glycol is a poisonous substance, even in small doses, and it is especially harmful to children and people with kidney problems. Using toothpaste containing diethylene glycol could have serious health consequences, including death.
There are several ethical reasons why I would tell the consumer about the substitution. First, consumers have a right to know what they are putting in their bodies. They have a right to make informed decisions about the products they use. Second, I owe a duty of care to my customers. I have a responsibility to make sure that the products I sell are safe to use. Third, substituting diethylene glycol for glycerin is a form of deception. I would be tricking consumers into thinking that they are buying a safe and effective product when it is actually dangerous.