Re: [OPE] Venezuela bans sale of Coke Zero

Jerry, It’s not a problem of the property rights of a multinational corporation. Give proofs supporting a real public health issue and the ban would be justified. There is not room in a rule of law for **…seems to be some question**. Why is it so difficult for you to reason in terms of institutional neutrality? Then, it’s easy to understand why actually existing socialism has prevented the development of internal mechanism for the contestation of executive power.   Regards,A. Agafonow ________________________________ De: GERALD LEVY <gerald_a_levy@msn.com> Para: Outline on Political Economy mailing list <ope@lists.csuchico.edu> Enviado: viernes, 12 de junio, 2009 3:05:46 Asunto: RE: [OPE] Venezuela bans sale of Coke Zero Alejandro: Your concern for the property rights of a multinational corporation, Coca-Cola, is touching. There is an interesting story here, though. Coke Zero, when sold outside of the US, often contains the artificial sweetener, sodium cyclamate.  This ingredient was banned by the Food and Drug Administration in 1969, but when Coke introduced Coke Zero for sale in Latin America it included sodium cyclamate - a known carcinogen.  The reason - yes, you guessed it - is that sodium cyclamate is considerably cheaper than other artificial sweeteners such as aspartame. This was a controversy in both Mexico and Chile - which were two of the primary target markets for Coke Zero in Latin America - when health authorities in those countries discovered that the ingredients were different in the Coke Zero sold in their countries than the ingredients sold in the US market. Following the scandal that ensued, Coca Cola agreed to change the formula so that it was identical to the US version. There seems to be some question whether all or part of the Coke Zero sold in Venezuela contained the carcinogen.  In any event, the real story here is that of a multinational corporation, intent on cost-cutting, which purposely marketed a commodity to consumers in Latin America which contained an ingredient banned by many countries in the world. This is not a new story, of course. There are many other similar stories over the years: e.g. after a certain type of IUDs (a birth control device) was banned in the US because it was found to mutilate women, the producer simply exported their product and sold them to women in India and elsewhere. All of the above information can readily be verified by a simple Internet search. No, the source is not 'venezuelanalysis'. In solidarity, Jerry _______________________________________________ ope mailing list ope@lists.csuchico.edu https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Fri Jun 12 02:19:03 2009