Asbestos, tobacco, medical drugs, pesticides and many other products have been found to have noxious effects many years after they first hit the market. How can firms who sold these products make amends?
From the article American farmers pursue Syngenta over herbicide’s link to Parkinson’s disease
Please never forget that one principle reason for producing a product is to make money, sometimes vast amounts of money.
Please never forget that one principle reason for producing a product is to make money, sometimes vast amounts of money.
Certain people have a tendency to throw caution to the wind in order to have rather large & healthy bank accounts, & when things become very smelly they do the disappearing act, probably on their rather large boat or yacht.
That does`nt they are all crooks but some are.
You have been warned.
Companies must have liability for every single damage, on people, animals and environment. Yes accidents happen, mistakes can be made, but companies have to pay for their accidents and mistakes the same way we all pay for our individual accidents and mistakes. If there were stricter laws to make responsible industries for health and environmental damage, the planet would not be in danger now and people would not suffer the new modern society deseases.
As we did with God, man has created a good breakthrough and later turns out to be bad and evil.
كما فعلنا مع الله، فقد خلق الانسان على فطرة طيبة وتبيّن فيما بعد أنه سيئٌ وشرير.
Suppose that companies were not aware of the harmful effects or were urgently authorized to use them for commercial reasons. Here they cannot be held fully responsible, otherwise we can not develop any material in the future if companies and inventors are prosecuted in a way that leads to the financial termination of their entity.”
أفترض أن الشركات لم تكن تعلم بالتأثيرات الضارة أو أنه تم الاستعجال بتصريح استخدامها لأسباب تجارية، فهنا لا يُمكن تحميلها المسؤولية كاملة وإلا فلن يكون باستطاعتنا القيام بتطوير أي مادة في المستقبل إذا ما تمت ملاحقة الشركات و المخترعين بشكل يؤدي إلى إنهاء كيانها ماليا!
Investigate. If the company knew or should have know the product to be harmful before selling it, by all means, go after them. If not, they acted in good faith, then they get a pass.
It is certainly essential to favour short and local circuits for all the goods we consume.
It is much easier and more direct to see the disadvantages of a product.
At least during the first 5 to 10 years, before internationalizing it.
il est certainement indispensable de favoriser les circuits courts et locaux pour toutes les marchandises que nous consommons.
C'est beaucoup plus facile et direct de constater le ou les inconvénients d'un produit.
Au moins durant les premiers 5 à 10 ans, avant de l'internationaliser.
I think we should read carefully the debate topic and try to answer the topical question as neutrally and objectively.
Some are simply venting their frustrations here and they usually quote the "usual suspects".
There are consumer laws and much have evolved since the Tobacco days and Abestos debacle. Many companies are now more stringent and careful and not purely because they are out to profit by using dangerous materials.
We should discuss this as adults and not as bickering children with limited real life experience. For me, I work with real companies who try to make a difference and be very safety conscious. This is 2021. Not 1970s.
well vw did vialate consumption law and this month court say they will drop the case.... We should be allowed to espress our frustration about "usual suspects" because even in 2021 this companies are allowed to do what ever they want to us and the planet
Nothing has changed. Corrupt companies just got better evading the laws. I am not saying that there are decent companies too, but if you notice even the most environment protective companies contaminate the planet and damage our health. It is a business chain you cannot brake just like that.
We can only often deduce what the company business owners do in that scenario. There are laws which they need to adhere to and these laws protect the consumers from being harmed deliberately.
From my experience, many company and business owners are not criminals and they mean no harm. Then they should be following the laws and followups but consumers should not immediately bring out their sabres and make war cries to kill them. Oftentimes, they are the main ones suffering from the fallout too.
they just loose money, we loose our health or our planet... so don't know what you mean about them suffering more
Pay up. Or at least pay the health care costs. But at least the companies are trying. On a hot cup of coffee you see "This coffee is hot", or on a bag of nuts you see "contains nuts". Sometimes it's the consumer at fault. Cigarettes kills. Too much alcohol / drugs use means you should not drive. Junk food makes you fat. Everyone knows that. But it does not stop some people consuming these products. But maybe if they had to pay for their own health care, not via insurance, maybe they'd stop consuming these dangerous products.
Tout le monde sait que ces produits sont malsains. Vous vous étonnez que certains les consomment. Curieusement, vous ne vous étonnez pas de savoir pourquoi ils brillent sur les étals commerçants, rejettant la responsabilité sur le consommateur et non sur la chaîne qui va de la production à la vente. J'avoue que votre position est incompréhensible pour moi. En effet, si un consommateur (souvent jeune) peut ne pas savoir, ou encore être mu par une pulsion particulière, la chaîne en amont qui elle, est composée d'individus qui agissent selon un dessein bien plus raisonné, selon des objectifs précis de gain, et qui en a financièrement les moyens, n'est pas inquiétée. Or sensée être au services des clients, elle se devrait de contribuer ou y être obligée, au bien-être social, plutôt qu'à la somme d'intérêts financiers particuliers.
If a person consumes a product knowing it is dangerous it means the product is addictive and should be removed.
Make amends? A good start would be by NOT producing these harmful products again. But...profits come first, as usual. But these companies should be held responsible as, in most cases, they knew perfectly well that their products were causing harm. And the law lets them get away again and again.
That's a terrible accusation "in most cases, they knew..."
In many cases they did not know or they cannot know. Of course a business is a profit-seeking undertaking, and they will be pressured to use other materials or ingredients.
Stop making general statements when they are just emotional and not based on facts.
Many good people out there making business. Not everyone is a crook.
YES!!! they knew and still do. How many years did the tobacco industry make us believe smoking was harmless? The same goes for the asbestos industry. The same goes for the producers of DDT. The same goes for microwaves. The same goes for smartphones. The same goes for the oil, gas and coal industry. You a shareholder that you protect them???
This is simply delusional.
Cigarette companies knew that there was a lung cancer link back to 1912 and which was proven since the 50s.
Shell has known about the greenhouse effect since the 80s.
Similarly, companies like Goretex KNOW that their product is dangerous(PFAS, “forever” chemicals ).
Companies that make Bisphenol (in its various forms) KNOW the about their dangers in plastics and the effects on our bodies, but keep finding ways around the legislation due to slow moving governments and far too many corporate interests and lobbyists.
In nearly every problem in our society and environment there are corporate interests battling against science and common sense.
Time to read a little methinks..
Same, old same...everywhere. Profits before people any time. And the guilty political apparatus continues to look the other way. "Backshish" under the tables???
Some companies yes. Not every company.
With such strong accusations, you must have a lot of experience and solid proof.
Corruption is plaguing our world for a very long time - it has become society's cancer. Look at all the so-called 'trade' agreements...it isn't the worker who profits but the shareholders. Look at the upcoming WEF...a jamboree of the rich, for the rich - pretending to look after our interests...but first their own. Look at all the industries that were moved to China...for the sake of bigger profits, not for the sake of the worker's well-being. Cheap labour...as I said...profits before anything else.
Do you only buy Swiss local products from Swiss shops and you avoid supermarkets or shops who import foreign goods?
I think your true answer contradicts your comment about globalisation and moving production/agriculture offshore.
The key is "Balance".
I try to support local businesses as much as possible. I don't go to Germany to buy cheaper with only one exception: Niederegger Marzipan. And I don't shop exclusively at Migros or Coop - as long as I can afford it and for a few rappen more, I support smaller stores.
Join the conversation!