Ethics Of Freegan Movement Outweigh And Dumpster Diving For Dinner

Question: Discuss about the Ethics Of Freegan Movement Outweigh And Dumpster Diving For Dinner. Answer: The ethics behind the freegan movement does outweigh the health risks associated with the practice of dumpster diving. As explained by the authors of both the articles that dumpster diving is a comparatively safer for those people who are doing so for the sake of conserving the environment, as they have adequate protective gears to wear before jumping down the dumpster in search of food. Jim Chan who has been a health inspector for 30 years has stated that he has not come across any person suffering from illness after eating from dumpster (Tibbetts 2015). According to Quincey Brandt who is a 28 years old student dumpster diving is an easy way of getting food and saving the environment at the same time and also promoting anti consumerism. He has been doing so for the past 5 years and has faced no problems or has fallen sick after eating food taken from dumpsters. At the same time studying the evidences from the second article it can be said that almost fresh food items are discarded b y the supermarkets who are unable to store the same and they throw out these food items as waste. A group of freegan enthusiasts discovered a number of fresh food items from the waste bins outside the parking lots and the supermarkets. Even these foods were packed in bags and the beers that they found were placed in a carton. Thus judging from the above facts it can be said that all the foods foraged by the freegans are quite safe to consume and there are no serious health risks associated with the foods gathered from dumpsters. The freegan movement promotes an idea of a self-sustainable future and conservation of natural resources and at the same time it sends a strong statement against anti consumerism. After the fact has been established that freegan movement has no health risks, now the positive sides of the movement can be highlighted. The freegans who have joined this movement, most of them does this by their own choice and not because they cannot afford food. These people are trying to take a step against the societys wasteful behaviour. Freegans believe in consuming only that much which is necessary and not more than that, they are even careful to leave enough food for others as well and they follow certain rules for the benefit of others. Instead these foods which are thrown away for silly reasons should be donated away to the needy and the poor people who cannot afford food. People should understand the importance of conserving natural resources so that in the future humans are able to have enough resources to live. There are certain parts of the world where people starve daily yet in other developed countries food of good quality is thrown away and not distributed among the needy people (Charlton and Cosgrove 2015). This is another important reason why the ethical grounds of freegan movement is far important than the health risks it has. Another important reason why the ethics of freegan movement outweigh its health risks is that nowadays people are continuously being driven by excessive consumerism which is not a healthy way to live ones life, the freegan movement teach everyone that to live a healthy life it is not necessary to depend upon several products at the same time. One should not be influenced too much by the marketing techniques of the product based companies. Buying more than what is actually necessary creates excessive wastage of environmental resources. Thus to save the future of human beings and protect the present generation from the influences of consumerism understanding freegan movement is crucial. References: Charlton, K and Cosgrove, S.,2015. Dumpster diving for dinner: do you have what it takes to eat 'freegan' food?', The Conversation, viewed 4February 2018, https://theconversation.com/dumpster-diving-for-dinner-do-you-have-what-it-takes-to-eat-freegan-food-37117 Tibbetts, J., 2015. 'Freegans risk the hazards of dumpster diving', Canadian Medical Association Journal, vol. 185, no. 7, pp. 282-283.