Reader Bill wrote to us wondering about some cheap flashlights he bought from Amazon. Their warning label says to “Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when using this product…Normal everyday use of this product is likely to expose the user to dust and microscopic particles containing lead and other chemicals known in the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects and other reproductive harm.” Should Bill be worried about the cancer risk and reproductive harm of his flashlights?
In its current state, Proposition 65 is a catch-all for huge list of substances which if used on any product in California, must comply with the required warning labels like the kind we see below on Bill’s flashlight. Because of the way that Proposition 65 is written, the warning label must be used, even if only a minute amount of lead is present.
According to Dr. Subhuti Dharmananda,
The warning labels required by Proposition 65 do not present information about the safety or the risk of the products; the warning about lead does not specify the actual amount of lead that is present or whether any particular amount is harmful. The requirement for a warning label is triggered when the amount of a regulated substance in a product exceeds a certain regulatory level, which is very low in the case of lead. According to the way Proposition 65 is worded and with the limited data about effects of exposure to lead, the labeling must be done if the total daily lead intake exceeds just 0.5 micrograms (µg).
In fact, many contend that Proposition 65 is really just a nuisance which does little more than provide ammunition for private citizens to collect damages from companies that they don’t like. Wikipedia says,
Labeling requirements conceded the reality that listing and classifying substances did not help the consumer if the contents of a purchase were unknown. At the same time, there were no other labeling requirements to support the proposition. Industry critics and corporate defense lawyers charge that Proposition 65 is “a clever and irritating mechanism used by litigious NGOs and others to publicly spank politically incorrect opponents ranging from the American gun industry to seafood retailers, etc.” [4]
In addition, because the law allows private citizens to sue and collect damages from any business violating the law, there have been cases of lawyers and law firms using Proposition 65 to force monetary settlements out of California businesses.[5] The Attorney General’s office has cited several instances of settlements where plaintiff attorneys received significant awards without providing for environmental benefit to the people of California, resulting in the requirement of the Attorney General’s approval of pre-trial Proposition 65 settlements.[6]
Given the proposition’s overly broad scope, even companies who aren’t using hazardous materials, simply go ahead and post the warnings, perhaps, if only to say “don’t sue us!” Wikipedia says,
Nearly all businesses in the state post similar notices on their premises, even when they are unaware of any listed chemicals being present. Warning signs are always posted at gas stations, hardware suppliers,[2] grocery stores, drug stores, and medical facilities.[3] Most government agencies,[4] parking garages, apartment complexes,[5] retail stores,[6] banks, and restaurants[7] also post warning signs because of the possibility of hazardous chemicals being present in everyday items, such as a car or a computer, or because tobacco smoke from a passerby might drift in through an open window. Some large businesses, such as utility companies, mail a Prop 65 notice to all customers each year to warn them of dangerous substances like natural gas[8] or the sand used in sandblasting.[9]
Warning labels that warn against any infinitesimal risk are essentially useless. The outbreak of warning labels spawned by Proposition 65 is so widespread that consumers are being conditioned to ignore them. Even if some of these labels are trying to warn us against a legitimate risk, we are likely to ignore them since these labels “cry wolf” more often than they protect us.
California Proposition 65 (1986) [Wiki]
Proposition 65 [OEHHA]
Frequently Asked Questions About Proposition 65 Lead Warning Labels [ITMOnline]
More From Consumerist
-
Supreme Court Agrees: Cigarette Warning Labels Don’t Violate Big Tobacco’s Free Speech
-
Buy Lengthy Legal Document, Get Free Space Heater
-
Where’s The Beef From?: U.S. Regulators To Propose New Meat Label Requirements
-
FDA Tells Hershey's It Has No Right To Claim Chocolate Syrup With Vitamins Is Nutritious
-
Whole Foods Warns Of Mix-Up Involving Vegan, Chicken Salads
Here’s the point to what I was trying to point out; this country has gone over board with warnings. There is a such a thing as personal responsibility. If you burn yourself with hot coffee, it’s no one’s fault but your own. These unnecessary warnings are put on products because of the stupidity of the users. And to protect the company from being sued because of that stupidity. I saw tons of it when I was a cop and I see even more of it in management.
@opsomath: It will never happen. People just don’t understand.
@ARP:
The phrase separation of church and state comes from a constitution, just not the USA’s.
“In the USSR, the church is separated from the state, and the school from the church. “
[www.constitution.org]
Here, we have the limited requirement that the government not endorse any church… not expunge it from public discourse.
@brettbee:
Good question – I’m in Kentucky, and haven’t personally voted on a “Proposition” before. I hadn’t considered that possibility. They call them a Referendum vote here, when the public votes to certify a decision by the gov’t.
@newfenoix:
Thinking like my thinking, or like the guy I was responding to?
Oh wait, you’re the guy. So now I totally don’t understand what you’re trying to say.
MADE IN CHINA is the real warning. They are innovators in lead delivery and it seems they’ve gotten lead to bond with photons. Cool, a death ray!
@Kevin Cotter: Yes, whenever California has a natural or man-made (riots, arson wildfires) disaster, a special division of the National Guard has to go around putting up those “Substances known to the State of California to cause cancer” signs everywhere…
@AgentTuttle:
The funny thing is that import restrictions in China are extreme, especially with lead. If your product includes lead, it’s almost impossible to import into China.
Now, that doesn’t stop them from exporting tainted dog food or flashlights – but then again, all their laws are set up to bring foreign dollars in, and keep them in.
@Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy: Removing ‘under God’ would not have the same relevance as removing a phrase which was part of the original.
The Bill of Rights vs. the “original Constitution”??? Are you serious?
So “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” doesn’t count?
No, instead, let’s continue to piss off:
1. People in this country who don’t believe in “God” by leaving “under God” there, and putting it on our currency, which a. isn’t ours (the Federal Reserve Bank is not part of the government), and b. didn’t start until the late 1950′s, but that doesn’t matter either I guess.
AND
2. People in other countries and this one who are offended by politicians and others talking about our “God-given” rights to invade other countries to protect our ‘freedoms’ and this “God Bless America” crap. So bless America, but the hell with the rest of the world?
It upsets me how relatively recent additions to the national lexicon (“GOD”) are now inferred by many to be the intent of the founding fathers. This country was started by people who didn’t like the fact that religion was forced upon them. How is “under God” and “In God we trust” ANY DIFFERENT?
Sorry to hijack the comments
@doctor_cos: Go get ‘em, doc. I find it hilarious that anybody could seriously think (as the KoC apparently did) that communist spies couldn’t possibly bring themselves to say “under God”, but would be capable of falsely swearing to the rest of the Oath of allegiance.
BTW, California still has a “loyalty oath” for public employees — because really, nobody who was planning to commit a crime would ever compound it by falsely swearing loyalty to the state, would they?
@ARP: Sorry, I missed your reply about “under God” , didn’t mean to step on you as your #4 illustrates my attitude.
@LostAngeles: Apologies to you also, your turn of phrase (‘The Congress who put…’) does sound a bit more civil.
And I’m not attacking Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy personally, as that would expose the jealousy over the much cooler screen name
And amen to theczardictates for pointing out the utter absurdity as opposed to ‘loyalty oaths’.
Lost in all there, I still would defend the idiocy of California’s Proposition 65 as a symptom of the country as a whole becoming a venomous, litigious group of self-entitled, self-centered bastards who on one hand need protection from every little thing which might hurt us, while at the same time whine and complain about gubbamint interference.
I have an answer. When you hear the obviously stupid crap coming out of the mouths of Republicans AND Democrats, stand up and let them know that you know it’s Bullshit (with a capital B.) Don’t change the channel, change the programming
Damn, California seems to have a lot of these problems. We need to keep all these things away from there; they seem to turn dangerous when they cross that border…must be the illegal immigrants.
It does seem as though these warnings are a bit pointless though. For example the law requires a warning on ethylene glycol (anti-freeze) for reproductive reasons. Of course you are probably going to die from poisoning first. But according to the state of California the real worry is about the reproductive health impact it can have.
I once saw this label (“known in the State of California . . .”) on a package of pencils (yes, pencils) and I couldn’t help but laugh by thinking, “Well at least I’m not in California, because then these things might give me cancer or cause reproductive harm!”
I do think these labels diminish the effect of warnings on truly hazardous materials and that is a clearly bad development.
The worst thing about it, is that it’s Made in China.
@Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy: I’ll never say “under god” in the Pledge of Allegiance. Never. Separation of church and state.
@Ubermunch: Maglite, own two mini’s. They have been dropped, washed, abused and they don’t even flicker. Made in the USA. Looking at one now, managed to wear it down to the metal.
@mrearly2: Ditto.