Everyone makes fun of California’s prop 65 warnings, but this is exactly the situation they exist for: knowing which colorful plate sets to avoid at Crate & Barrel.
The problem is it doesn’t have a minimum quantify before reporting is required, so 1 pay per trillion of any of 10,000 different substances triggers the warning, so there isn’t anything that doesn’t require the warning.
The standard essentially requires an unachievable level purity along every step of the manufacturing and distribution process in order to NOT have the label.
The result is over-labeling, which results in products that we should actually be concerned about sneaking into our homes because we ignore warning labels.
Wouldn’t it have been better to have the manufacturer state the amounts? That way, you just need to read the fine print. Like one does for food products.
Except the law was really poorly worded with no downside for false reporting. As a result literally everything has the label on it, up to and including a generic message at the front doors of the store telling you that going in the building will cause cancer and reproductive harm.
AESTHETIC reasons?? girl lead poisoning isn’t worth a pretty pot.
Everyone makes fun of California’s prop 65 warnings, but this is exactly the situation they exist for: knowing which colorful plate sets to avoid at Crate & Barrel.
The problem is it doesn’t have a minimum quantify before reporting is required, so 1 pay per trillion of any of 10,000 different substances triggers the warning, so there isn’t anything that doesn’t require the warning.
The standard essentially requires an unachievable level purity along every step of the manufacturing and distribution process in order to NOT have the label.
The result is over-labeling, which results in products that we should actually be concerned about sneaking into our homes because we ignore warning labels.
Interesting.
Wouldn’t it have been better to have the manufacturer state the amounts? That way, you just need to read the fine print. Like one does for food products.
Ok but can we make fun of the fact that they aren’t required to specify which material? Like let me decide if it carcinogenic enough
Except the law was really poorly worded with no downside for false reporting. As a result literally everything has the label on it, up to and including a generic message at the front doors of the store telling you that going in the building will cause cancer and reproductive harm.
But it doesn’t work when every manufacturer puts those stickers on literally everything just in case.