Pesticides and Perfumes:
Ethical Dilemmas around Two Chemical Contradictions

Lecture outline

Section I

Pesticides and Perfumes defined.

Pesticides are complex chemical mixtures designed to kill insects, weeds, rodents, fungi, and other living things considered to be pests. The several thousand commercial pesticide products available on the market today are all mixtures of toxicants that are designed to fatally disrupt the life processes of certain classes of living things.

Artificial fragrances of the sort found in perfumes, colognes, hairsprays, lotions, soaps, detergents, fabric softeners, pesticides and household cleaning agents are mixtures of chemicals and solvents combined in such a way as to trick the brain into thinking that it is smelling something pleasant. Many of the chemicals included in fragrance mixtures are known carcinogens and many have been recognized as severely neurotoxic. (Cite information about some of these chemicals from EPA sources.)

Section II

Information about the growing incidence of toxicant induced illnesses such as asthma, cancers, endocrine and reproductive disorders, and chemical intolerance disorders which lead to respiratory distress, migraine headaches, and central nervous system dysfunction. A description of these adverse health effects, and their personal impact on the lives of the large percentage of people who suffer them

Section III

Elicit audience perceptions of what some of the benefits and costs of pesticides and perfumes are, both to individuals and to the community.

• Benefits of pesticides (e.g., control of disease vectors, lawn aesthetics, increased crop production, etc)
• Costs of pesticides (toxicant induced illnesses, pest resistance to pesticides, etc)
• Benefits of perfumes (aesthetic, economic, etc)
• Costs of perfumes (toxicant induced illnesses, asthma, lupus, etc)

The ethical question presented: What should be done? What would be the best social policies for regulation (if any) of perfumes and pesticides. Examples of such questions would include:

• Should society find it acceptable that a certain percentage of the population be effectively barred from public buildings because of pesticide or perfume intolerance?
• Should it be acceptable that a certain percentage of the population be restricted from attending church, work, movie and drama theaters, from going into restaurants and other public places because of the presence of pesticide residues and people wearing fragranced personal products?
• Should the use of these products be regulated in any way?
• Should ingredient and health effects labeling be required?
• Should there be pesticide free or perfume free zones for the benefit of those who are pesticide intolerant or fragrance intolerant?

Section IV

Introduce the utilitarian method of ethical decision-making, i.e., the method of weighing anticipated costs and anticipated benefits of a given action, and then opting for the course of action that has the most benefits and the fewest costs.
Explore how this method of thinking would answer the above questions.

Section V

Introduce the human rights (deontological) approach to decision-making. Then ask the related human rights questions: Do people have a right to not be poisoned? Do people have a right to be informed about the ingredients in the products to which they will be exposed? Do schools and office buildings have a right to control the indoor air quality of their rooms and buildings? Do people have a right to spray pesticides and/or wear perfumes wherever they wish?

Section VI

Sum up audience discussion and arguments, and draw conclusions.

Curriculum Vita | TK homepage | Public lectures | Jenner homepage |

Philosophy homepage