Showing Page:
1/4
Surname 1
Student’s Name
Your Instructor’s name
The Course
Date
Introduction
In this fast developing and highly competitive corporate world, many organizations are
determined to succeed in business at all costs. Some of them go to an extent of violating business
rules and regulations in relation to their operations, services and products. Numerous companies
in the United States are often accused of fake operations that endanger consumers’ lives. They
are charged for failure to observe ethical concerns in their areas of operation as they try to
increase their businesses at the expense of the consumer’s health. This paper intends to critically
assess the report by Cornucopia Institute on the ethical concerns of Dean Foods and other
companies in the United States.
Report assessment
The accusations of Dean Foods’ failure to adhere to the national regulations as regards
the production of organic foods are true. This is because the company is known to use synthetic,
unapproved nutritional oil in organics, in the production of their new product (Horizon Fat-free
Milk plus DHA Omega-3). Cornucopia is justified to complain because the food company is
using DHA Omega-3 is illegal additive in the production of organic milk. Therefore, the
statement is a fact since the company really uses the prohibited substances.
Moreover, the company’s that their products are safe and healthy have no scientific
support. Besides, Dean Foods has the new product bearing USDA seal in spite of the fact that the
ingredients are prohibited in any organic production. Therefore, the food company is
Showing Page:
2/4
Surname 2
intentionally violating the laws of organic foods. Mark A Kastel who is a coordinator of the
research institute of Cornucopia is justified to accuse the food company of its unethical practices.
The statement is a fact because the food company actually goes against the Federal laws.
The report also says that the Federal laws sternly prohibit any use of synthetic additives
in the production of organic foods, unless the additives are among the ones allowed by the
USDA’s National Organic Programs. This a true statement, but the law enforcers are at times
corrupt, as they allow other companies break the rules. Notably, the allowed ingredients are put
in the USDA list only after review and approval of the National Organic Standards Board
(NOSB). The statement is a fact since NOSB truly reviews and approves ingredients before they
are allowed in the USDA list (Cornucopia Institute 1-2).
Furthermore, the statement about the inclusion of the synthetic substances like baking
powder is a fact. This is because such ingredients are always in food companies, for they have
been approved by NOSB (Choate 248-250). The claim that the food company is using a synthetic
substance of DHA has neither been approved nor reviewed by NOSB is an opinion because the
research institute has no evidence to support its claims. Nonetheless, Vallaeys claim that it is
wrong for Dean Foods to produce a new product by suing illegal ingredients, and for the certifier
to endorse of the company’s actions, is absolutely true (Zimdahl 59-60). This because the
Federal regulators object the use of synthetic oils in producing organic foods, and that the
substances had earlier on been prohibited in the country (Cornucopia Institute 1-2).
Despite the fact other few food companies and many infant formula manufacturers use
synthetic additive in their productions, the statement is an opinion because there is no proof.
However, it is a fact that Martek Biosciences Corporation manufactures the synthetic additive
despite their prohibition. This is because it claims that the products are healthy in enhancing
Showing Page:
3/4
Surname 3
infants’ cognitive development. Besides, claims that USDA, in Bush Administration, unofficially
permitted the use of synthetic additives in organic foods is true. This is because of the evidence
provided by the Freedom of Information Act documents (Cornucopia Institute 1-2).
Additionally, the statement about Bush’s misinterpretation of Federal laws on organic
foods production is a bias by the USDA’s National Organic Program. This is because the body is
trying to defend itself from past illegal actions. What is more, Vallaeys’ statement that USDA
judgment is to phase out the use of prohibited additives in producing organic food is a fact. This
is because the USDA is now urging companies to avoid the use of the illegal substances in the
production of organic foods. Lastly, Valleays’ claim that Dean does not care about the
maintenance of organic integrity, and compliance with Federal laws on organic foods, is an
opinion. This is because there is no proof that the food company has taken this stance.
Conclusion
The statements made against Dean Foods and other food manufacturing firms are mostly
true. This is because there are numerous studies, particularly the one conducted by Cornucopia
Institute provide adequate evidence against the companies’ operations. Nevertheless, there are
some claims that are mere opinions and biases since insufficient information is provided to
justify them. Therefore, it is imperative that companies should adhere to the federal laws on
organic food production so as to promote integrity and strong health among consumers.
Showing Page:
4/4
Surname 4
Works cited:
Choate, Mary. Organic lies: misconceptions of the United States Organic Act in America and the
world. Arvada, CO: Coastalfields Press, 2007. PP. 248-250. Print.
Cornucopia Institute. Largest Corporate Dairy, Biotech Firm and USDA Accused of
Conspiring to Corrupt Rulemaking and Pollute Organics. Watchdog Requests Federal
Investigation, Files Ethics Charges. Washington DC, 2012. Pp. 1-2. Retrieved on March
9
th
2012. http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2012/02/02/dean-foods-biotech-usda-
conspiring-to- pollute-organics/
Zimdahl, Robert. Agriculture's Ethical Horizon. New York: Elsevier Science Ltd, 2012. Pp.59-
60. Print.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Surname 1 Student’s Name Your Instructor’s name The Course Date Introduction In this fast developing and highly competitive corporate world, many organizations are determined to succeed in business at all costs. Some of them go to an extent of violating business rules and regulations in relation to their operations, services and products. Numerous companies in the United States are often accused of fake operations that endanger consumers’ lives. They are charged for failure to observe ethical concerns in their areas of operation as they try to increase their businesses at the expense of the consumer’s health. This paper intends to critically assess the report by Cornucopia Institute on the ethical concerns of Dean Foods and other companies in the United States. Report assessment The accusations of Dean Foods’ failure to adhere to the national regulations as regards the production of organic foods are true. This is because the company is known to use synthetic, unapproved nutritional oil in organics, in the production of their new product (Horizon Fat-free Milk plus DHA Omega-3). Cornucopia is justified to complain because the food company is using DHA Omega-3 is illegal additive in the production of organic milk. Therefore, the statement is a fact since the company really uses the prohibited substances. Moreover, the company’s that their products are safe and healthy have no scientific support. Besides, Dean Foods has the new product bearing USDA seal in spite of the fact that the ingredients are prohibited in any organic production. Therefore, the food company is Surname 2 intentionally violating the laws of organic foods. Mark A Kastel who is a coordinator of the research institute of Cornucopia is justified to accuse the food company of its unethical practices. The statement is a fact because the food company actually goes against the Federal laws. The report also says that the Federal laws sternly prohibit any use of synthetic additives in the production of organic foods, unless the additives are among the ones allowed by the USDA’s National Organic Programs. This a true statement, but the law enforcers are at times corrupt, as they allow other companies break the rules. Notably, the allowed ingredients are put in the USDA list only after review and approval of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). The statement is a fact since NOSB truly reviews and approves ingredients before they are allowed in the USDA list (Cornucopia Institute 1-2). Furthermore, the statement about the inclusion of the synthetic substances like baking powder is a fact. This is because such ingredients are always in food companies, for they have been approved by NOSB (Choate 248-250). The claim that the food company is using a synthetic substance of DHA has neither been approved nor reviewed by NOSB is an opinion because the research institute has no evidence to support its claims. Nonetheless, Vallaeys claim that it is wrong for Dean Foods to produce a new product by suing illegal ingredients, and for the certifier to endorse of the company’s actions, is absolutely true (Zimdahl 59-60). This because the Federal regulators object the use of synthetic oils in producing organic foods, and that the substances had earlier on been prohibited in the country (Cornucopia Institute 1-2). Despite the fact other few food companies and many infant formula manufacturers use synthetic additive in their productions, the statement is an opinion because there is no proof. However, it is a fact that Martek Biosciences Corporation manufactures the synthetic additive despite their prohibition. This is because it claims that the products are healthy in enhancing Surname 3 infants’ cognitive development. Besides, claims that USDA, in Bush Administration, unofficially permitted the use of synthetic additives in organic foods is true. This is because of the evidence provided by the Freedom of Information Act documents (Cornucopia Institute 1-2). Additionally, the statement about Bush’s misinterpretation of Federal laws on organic foods production is a bias by the USDA’s National Organic Program. This is because the body is trying to defend itself from past illegal actions. What is more, Vallaeys’ statement that USDA judgment is to phase out the use of prohibited additives in producing organic food is a fact. This is because the USDA is now urging companies to avoid the use of the illegal substances in the production of organic foods. Lastly, Valleays’ claim that Dean does not care about the maintenance of organic integrity, and compliance with Federal laws on organic foods, is an opinion. This is because there is no proof that the food company has taken this stance. Conclusion The statements made against Dean Foods and other food manufacturing firms are mostly true. This is because there are numerous studies, particularly the one conducted by Cornucopia Institute provide adequate evidence against the companies’ operations. Nevertheless, there are some claims that are mere opinions and biases since insufficient information is provided to justify them. Therefore, it is imperative that companies should adhere to the federal laws on organic food production so as to promote integrity and strong health among consumers. Surname 4 Works cited: Choate, Mary. Organic lies: misconceptions of the United States Organic Act in America and the world. Arvada, CO: Coastalfields Press, 2007. PP. 248-250. Print. Cornucopia Institute. Largest Corporate Dairy, Biotech Firm and USDA Accused of Conspiring to Corrupt Rulemaking and Pollute Organics. Watchdog Requests Federal Investigation, Files Ethics Charges. Washington DC, 2012. Pp. 1-2. Retrieved on March 9th 2012. http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2012/02/02/dean-foods-biotech-usdaconspiring-to- pollute-organics/ Zimdahl, Robert. Agriculture's Ethical Horizon. New York: Elsevier Science Ltd, 2012. Pp.5960. Print. Name: Description: ...
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.
Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4