There are two agencies in the government that deals with the consumer products and the food, drugs and chemicals that the end user buys in the market. These are the CPSC or the Consumer Product Safety Commission and FDA or Food and Drug Administration. According to cpsc. gov, CPSC is responsible in protecting the public from the consumer products that are sold in the market by the manufacturers under the jurisdiction of CPSC. On the other hand, according to fda.gov, FDA is authorized by the Congress to implement the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and Public Health Laws in the country. The agency monitors the manufacture, import, transport, storage and sale of goods that pertains to food, drugs, cosmetics and medical equipment and instruments. The CPSC commits itself in protecting the consumers from the products that may cause a threat such as fire, electric, chemical or mechanical hazard.
The products that CPSC had jurisdiction in are toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters and household chemicals.the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible in guaranteeing that the food , cosmetics, medicine, medical devices and radiation emitting consumer products are safe to use and consume. FDA is not only responsible for the humankind but it also includes the feed and drugs for animals. The researcher of this paper had been affected by both agencies in different ways. CPSC had recalled the toys with lead paint last 2007.
These were supposed to be gifts for children in time for Christmas however, because of the recall, the items that children would like to have been not sold in the market or department stores.There have also been issues on food safety of canned goods from China and Pet Food from China that had been recalled because of the formaldehyde presence in these particular products which has happened also in the year 2007. There have been news that artificial sweeteners are linked with carcinogens that causes bladder cancer. This particular item is needed by he recent warnings about the lead content of cosmetics have also affected the proponent of the study because these are items that are being used everyday such as lipstick and lip gloss.John Hood (1990) had shown several evidences that the CPSC have not been able to truly fulfill its mission as an agency. He had shown several examples such as the children’s pajama being treated with a fire-retardant chemical which had later on been discovered to increase the risk of cancer and the product “Worm Gett’r” which had caused 28 people to be fatally electrocuted. The reasons stated by the CPSC regarding this product shows that the CPSC only sees only one side of the product but they do not check all angles of the product that they are approving in the public.The researcher of this paper agrees with John Hood that the agency must look in at all angles and having able to approve a particular product is not a static yes or no only.
It requires further investigation and studying before it is deemed suitable for consumption. Looking at FDA, is Noel Campbell (1997). Campbell (1977) had stressed in his policy analysis that FDA worries more about the products that would be introduced in the market rather than review the existing products that are available in the market. He had further identified that FDA answers to the beck and call of the politicians to date.His opinion has merit, thinking about the problem at hand, FDA must consider both. The agency must concentrate on the products that are being introduced in the market and at the same time review and assess the products that had been in the market.
This is so to prevent if there are further damages that the products in the market may cause the consumers. REFERENCES Campbell, N. (12 November 1997). Policy Analysis: Replace FDA Regulation of Medical Devices with Third Party Cerification. Cato Policy Analysis 288. Retrieved last February 8, 2007 from The Cato Institute .
Website: https://www.cato. org/pubs/pas/pa-288.
pdf US Food and Drug Administration (2008). Retrieved last February 7, 2008 from US Department of Health and Human Services. Website: http://www. fda. gov/default. htm US Consumer Product and Safety Commission (2008). Retrieved last February 7, 2008 from the Consumer Product and Safety Commission Hood, J.
(April 1990). Let the Market Protect Consumer Safety. The Freeman: Ideas on Liberty Vol.
40 No. 4. Retrieved last February 6, 2008 from Foundation for Economic Education. Website: http://www. fee. org/publications/the-freeman/article. asp? aid=648