The new trend of eating healthily, organic and wholesome meals has raised big concerns about what we put into our bodies and how our food is labeled. Recently congress has been voting on food manufactures to disclose genetically modified organisms know as G.M.O on food packaging. Big Food Company’s try to hide the fact that they use many G.M.O ingredients in their foods but consumers want to know what they are consuming. Recently the FDA approved the sale of the first genetically engineered animal for human consumption. The fish is called AquAdvantage Salmon and it can be marketed as Atlantic salmon. There even might be no way for consumers to tell weather the salmon they are eating is genetically engineered. I picked this article because I
…show more content…
I believe that it’s up to every individual to decide what he or she wants to do in life. For this particular situation I am surprised that individuals are being denied their right to know what their food contains or how it was made. How can consumers decided what they want to consume if they are not even allowed to know. I am also surprised that it’s taking the government a long time to pass a law that requires food companies to label all their food if it contains G.M.Os. With a matter like this, which involves food that every human needs to survive it should be required that food, labels are made properly. With all the unknown dangers that G.M.Os impose, it should be a concern to every person and it’s their right to know and decide if they want or don’t want to eat it. My personal ethical framework proposes that food companies think making a profit is a higher priority than the lives of humans and the government is denying consumers the right to know what they are consuming by not passing a law to make G.M.O food labels required.
With this specific news article about G.M.O labels, I believe that the universal law of Kant’s categorical imperative would not uphold positive in this condition. I truly think that there should be a worldwide rule that requires food companies to label their food properly, so that the people can decide what they want or don’t want to consume and buy. I think this rule can be hard …show more content…
Also the goal of utilitarian ethics is to promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number. In this situation the people who are affected are the ones that consume food, which is every human. Ethically based off of utilitarianism the greater number off people who are affected should technically be helped and in this case G.M.O labeling would benefit almost everyone. The choice of action to require G.M.O labeling is ethical by utilitarianism, because it will defiantly benefit the greater amount of people and make the most amounts of people happier by knowing what their food is made of. I think that if the majority of the people will benefit and be happier because of the G.M.O labeling then we should do
I believe that it’s up to every individual to decide what he or she wants to do in life. For this particular situation I am surprised that individuals are being denied their right to know what their food contains or how it was made. How can consumers decided what they want to consume if they are not even allowed to know. I am also surprised that it’s taking the government a long time to pass a law that requires food companies to label all their food if it contains G.M.Os. With a matter like this, which involves food that every human needs to survive it should be required that food, labels are made properly. With all the unknown dangers that G.M.Os impose, it should be a concern to every person and it’s their right to know and decide if they want or don’t want to eat it. My personal ethical framework proposes that food companies think making a profit is a higher priority than the lives of humans and the government is denying consumers the right to know what they are consuming by not passing a law to make G.M.O food labels required.
With this specific news article about G.M.O labels, I believe that the universal law of Kant’s categorical imperative would not uphold positive in this condition. I truly think that there should be a worldwide rule that requires food companies to label their food properly, so that the people can decide what they want or don’t want to consume and buy. I think this rule can be hard …show more content…
Also the goal of utilitarian ethics is to promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number. In this situation the people who are affected are the ones that consume food, which is every human. Ethically based off of utilitarianism the greater number off people who are affected should technically be helped and in this case G.M.O labeling would benefit almost everyone. The choice of action to require G.M.O labeling is ethical by utilitarianism, because it will defiantly benefit the greater amount of people and make the most amounts of people happier by knowing what their food is made of. I think that if the majority of the people will benefit and be happier because of the G.M.O labeling then we should do