In 1939, a Swiss chemist named Paul Muller who worked for J.R. Geigy needed a way to protect crops against moths. He created a white crystalline powder called dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane commonly known as DDT. DDT was the first modern synthetic pesticide and even won Muller the 1948 Nobel Prize for chemistry. In 1942, Geigy sent some DDT to their office in New York to get it translated into English and then the U.S Army wanted the Department of Agriculture to help protect their soldiers from insect born diseases and they found out that it was the most effective. DDT because the insecticide of choice around the world once people started to find out that it protected them from Malaria. Farmers and homeowners used DDT to protect their crops from insects and also countries started using it to protect their people. In 1962 author Rachel Carson published the book Silent Spring that showed a link between the use of DDT with related deaths in birds and fish. It caused the death of birds of prey because they could not produce offspring, and as well at it began showing up in human breast milk. The Environmental Protection Agency banned its use of DDT in the United States in1972 but it still could be produced and exported out of the country. Montrose Chemical Corporation started producing DDT in 1942, and continued until 1982, 10 years after the ban exporting it to Africa, India and other countries. The chemical is now banned in the European Union and many other countries but the evidence of DDT can still be found in the Great Lakes to this day.
We feel like Montrose Chemical Corporation did not violate any ethical standards in manufacturing and selling DDT to the public. The company first started creating DDT in 1942 before they knew the side effects and everyone did not find out until 1962. For those 20 years, it was ethical selling to the public for their crops but once they knew the side effects then they should have stopped.
Instead of selling the chemical, Montrose should try to invest in something that has the same effects as DDT on Malaria for the poorer countries but needs to have no side effect on birds and fish.
Montrose Chemical Corporation did violate ethical standards in manufacturing and selling DDT after it was banned in 1972. If that product was banned in the country that it is being made in, then it should not be sold outside the country.
The Environmental Protection Agency did make the right decision in banning DDT, but if anything they should have looked at it early and banned it early. The ban went into effect 10 years after the allegations.
Muller should still have his Nobel Prize because it was the first modern synthetic pesticide. No one knew of the harmful consequences it would bring but it was ideal for the era and time during World War 2 and helping the soldiers battling the insects and diseases.
Everywhere in this world there are food chains and humans are at the top. The animals like fish and birds are at the bottom. If they are removed then it will effect higher up in the chain, meaning the predators and also the humans. Therefore that is why it is crucial not to ruin the environment because humans will be affected in the end as well.
There are many pros and cons for all sides of having DDT and using it verse not using it. The pros that the Army was looking at were trying to save their soldiers in battle, “In some of the military units, up to 80 percent of the soldiers were out sick with malaria.” (Business Ethics Now pg.85) Making the drug for Montrose was a huge revenue for them as they produced it for 40 years. In South Africa’s KwaZulu-Natal province “22,000 people died in 1931-1932. But it had dropped to 1 death by 1977.” (Business Ethics Now pg.85) The cons of DDT were the effects it had on the environment as well as people. “DDT was found to be toxic to fish and indirectly toxic to birds due to its persistence in the environment.” (Business Ethics Now pg.85) There is no proof it leads to cancer but slowly people were seeing it in human breast milk as well.
Ethical CSR which is “Purest or most legitimate type of CSR in which organizations pursue a clearly defined sense of social conscience in managing their financial responsibilities to shareholders, their legal responsibilities to their local community and society as a whole, and their ethical responsibilities to do the right thing for all their shareholders.” (Business Ethics Now pg.74) This relates well to the company Montrose because they seem like they were simply trying to gain profits rather then help the environment. They were still producing the chemical after it was banned.
We feel like Montrose Chemical Corporation did not violate any ethical standards in manufacturing and selling DDT to the public. The company first started creating DDT in 1942 before they knew the side effects and everyone did not find out until 1962. For those 20 years, it was ethical selling to the public for their crops but once they knew the side effects then they should have stopped.
Instead of selling the chemical, Montrose should try to invest in something that has the same effects as DDT on Malaria for the poorer countries but needs to have no side effect on birds and fish.
Montrose Chemical Corporation did violate ethical standards in manufacturing and selling DDT after it was banned in 1972. If that product was banned in the country that it is being made in, then it should not be sold outside the country.
The Environmental Protection Agency did make the right decision in banning DDT, but if anything they should have looked at it early and banned it early. The ban went into effect 10 years after the allegations.
Muller should still have his Nobel Prize because it was the first modern synthetic pesticide. No one knew of the harmful consequences it would bring but it was ideal for the era and time during World War 2 and helping the soldiers battling the insects and diseases.
Everywhere in this world there are food chains and humans are at the top. The animals like fish and birds are at the bottom. If they are removed then it will effect higher up in the chain, meaning the predators and also the humans. Therefore that is why it is crucial not to ruin the environment because humans will be affected in the end as well.
There are many pros and cons for all sides of having DDT and using it verse not using it. The pros that the Army was looking at were trying to save their soldiers in battle, “In some of the military units, up to 80 percent of the soldiers were out sick with malaria.” (Business Ethics Now pg.85) Making the drug for Montrose was a huge revenue for them as they produced it for 40 years. In South Africa’s KwaZulu-Natal province “22,000 people died in 1931-1932. But it had dropped to 1 death by 1977.” (Business Ethics Now pg.85) The cons of DDT were the effects it had on the environment as well as people. “DDT was found to be toxic to fish and indirectly toxic to birds due to its persistence in the environment.” (Business Ethics Now pg.85) There is no proof it leads to cancer but slowly people were seeing it in human breast milk as well.
Ethical CSR which is “Purest or most legitimate type of CSR in which organizations pursue a clearly defined sense of social conscience in managing their financial responsibilities to shareholders, their legal responsibilities to their local community and society as a whole, and their ethical responsibilities to do the right thing for all their shareholders.” (Business Ethics Now pg.74) This relates well to the company Montrose because they seem like they were simply trying to gain profits rather then help the environment. They were still producing the chemical after it was banned.