Colgate, a global leader in the toothpaste market, faces current health concerns regarding their most popular toothpaste, Colgate Total. According to the Cosmetic Dentistry Guide, Colgate Total contains the ingredient triclosan, a chemical with antibacterial properties originally used as a surgical scrub. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is paying close attention to the potential health hazards surfacing. Research shows this chemical may be causing humans harm including gum and bacterial mutations, not exactly what most people want from brushing their teeth. However, triclosan proves to fight gingivitis as well as some other benefits. According to the magazine Business Ethics, this is why Colgate was approved by the FDA in 1997 to use triclosan in their product Colgate Total.
Although health concerns for Colgate's product continues to rise, the FDA has yet to ban it or deem it unsafe and will not know until spring 2011. This is where the ethical question comes into play. Should Colgate inform their customers that the product they use to clean their teeth at night and before work could potentially be harming them? This would definitely impose some questions, discontinuation of Colgate products, and fear among many Colgate customers. But if the chemical is technically not banned, is it really necessary for Colgate to hurt profits, credibility, and customer loyalty right now?
Corporate social responsibility is becoming an increasing factor in today's business world. Should Colgate inform its customers that a key ingredient in their toothpaste is facing questions and health concerns? Or should Colgate simply wait until spring 2011 for official results?
I believe that as an industry leader in toothpaste who places this potentially harmful ingredient in the mouths of millions worldwide, Colgate is obligated to inform customers right now as it deals with the health and safety of Colgate Total consumers. It is best to err on the side of conservatism and assume the worst results in spring 2011. If the results released in spring 2012 come back to prove triclosan's harm to be substantial, and customers find out Colgate did not inform them of the potential risks, Colgate could suffer exponentially and lose goodwill with consumers globally.
According to Barbara Burton, a corporate responsibility consultant of the Burton Company in La Jolla, Califronia, only time will tell if Colgate is informing consumers enough to put itself in the best position as we await the results and the FDA's official decision on triclosan. The following link provides a detailed article about Colgate's current situation regarding triclosan:
http://business-ethics.com/2010/10/03/5050-controversial-chemical-poses-disclosure-challenge-for-colgate-palmolive/
Ethically yours,
Heather
I agree. In my opinion, it is better to inform your customer now that there is a potential problem with your product rather than waiting for the problem to surface. Although toothpaste is quite different than cars. The very same principle applies.
ReplyDeleteIn "Toyota Recall: What to do if your car is on the list.", an article on CNNMoney.com, Peter Valdes-Dapena informs Toyota owners of the problem Toyota cars have been experiencing with the gas pedal. He discusses what one should do if they notice a problem but also informs owners how to notice the problem and warns them of important triggers signaling a problem with their specific car. They were addressing the issue NOW instead of LATER.
Colgate should do the same.