If you make the punishment for passing hazardous product high enough you could make a dent. Send the C-suite to jail if they cut enough corners that infants die -- you'll probably see a lot of improvements very quickly. Money fines won't be enough and are a complete waste of time and human life.
It still won't be perfect, but we can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
I've read elsewhere in expat forums that PRC citizen parents with infants visiting the US will load up big parts of their luggage allowance on the return trip with formula. Costco is their favorite store to use. They similarly trust the US-branded formula sold from Costco in the PRC. The general supply chain QA and integrity US citizens take for granted domestically cannot be overstated as an important differentiator until you've traveled extensively around the world. US and EU supply chain integrity problems are nothing compared to many parts of the world.
There's that bumper sticker: "I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one".
I mean, I know that the lawyers and finance people would create such convoluted ownership structures that forcing a company out of existence and liquidating its assets would be meaningless, but apart from that detail, it has a certain appeal in the way many ideas that fit on a bumper sticker do.
Which is why corporations get away with murdering, poisoning, and polluting. Lack of accountability combined with the incentive of obscene profits pretty much makes it impossible for anything to change. Throw in outright bribery and regulatory capture and it doesn't look like anything will improve any time soon. I doubt I'll see it happening in my lifetime, and it's sad that not even the ongoing poisoning of babies for profit is enough to force the needed changes.
I'll give congress some credit for being vocal about the problem at least. In a congressional report last year about the dangerous levels of heavy metals in baby foods they repeatedly concluded that the FDA's polices were "designed to be protective of baby food manufacturers" and they recommended more regulation, but still, I haven't seen any action that would address the underlying issues that allow a regulatory body to prioritize the profits of industry over the health and safety of the population.
you'll probably see a lot of improvements very quickly
More likely: people stop making baby formula entirely and women have no choice but to breastfeed, which is a problem if baby is lactose intolerant, among other things.
Even if we buy your premise that actually putting teeth behind food safety regulations would cause a capital strike, that just provides opportunity for others to step in and fill the gap. Like your post alludes to there is a large and stable demand for safe formula. The problem is right now one company owns a majority of the market share thanks to the poor way the existing govt reimbursement program is structured
someone says that after every scandal, and I’m open to it morally, but from an “actually improving compliance” standpoint: Is there any evidence it’s true?
I'm not sure we've tried it or anything like it in the US. Intrinsic in this idea is the requirement that we actually enforce the rules, so when folks dismiss it as ineffective because it won't be enforced, I think they're missing the point.
I'd bet on improvement if we enforced the law and actually sent people to jail.
incone123|3 years ago
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8375638.stm
yourapostasy|3 years ago
wonnage|3 years ago
aught|3 years ago
mauvehaus|3 years ago
I mean, I know that the lawyers and finance people would create such convoluted ownership structures that forcing a company out of existence and liquidating its assets would be meaningless, but apart from that detail, it has a certain appeal in the way many ideas that fit on a bumper sticker do.
supertrope|3 years ago
https://www.cnn.com/2015/09/21/us/salmonella-peanut-exec-sen...
autoexec|3 years ago
I'll give congress some credit for being vocal about the problem at least. In a congressional report last year about the dangerous levels of heavy metals in baby foods they repeatedly concluded that the FDA's polices were "designed to be protective of baby food manufacturers" and they recommended more regulation, but still, I haven't seen any action that would address the underlying issues that allow a regulatory body to prioritize the profits of industry over the health and safety of the population.
If you're curious, that report can be read here: https://oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house....
There was also a follow up report on the issue you can read here: https://oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house....
vkou|3 years ago
Short of shooting both the c-suite, and their families, I don't think this will align their interests with those of the public as well as you hope.
shiftpgdn|3 years ago
DoreenMichele|3 years ago
More likely: people stop making baby formula entirely and women have no choice but to breastfeed, which is a problem if baby is lactose intolerant, among other things.
seo-speedwagon|3 years ago
quantified|3 years ago
orzig|3 years ago
notreallyserio|3 years ago
I'd bet on improvement if we enforced the law and actually sent people to jail.
refurb|3 years ago
In pharmaceuticals, a executive needs to sign off, under penalties of imprisonment, if prices reported to the US government are incorrect.
Fraud still happens and nobody goes to jail because hell , people don’t jail for more severe crimes so no court would impose the punishment.
qiskit|3 years ago
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/pfizer-fined-23-billion-ille...
Today pfizer is one of the most trusted companies and many people will be mad at you if you criticize pfizer in any way.