• It should probably be more accurately stated that black licorice contains molasses, a food product that contains lead. Molasses is the culprit, and should be advertised thusly.

    • The CA Prop. 65 labeling law was passed as a direct voter initiative in a well fina, and makes ridiculous statements of “fact” about all manner of dangers. As such, Prop.65 is not a scientifically accurate list of dangerous chemicals in food. It is a silly list foisted on ignorant voters by environmental activists and maintained by CA’s hyperactive EPA.

      For example: testosterone is listed as a dangerous carcinogenic chemical. Therefore all males are in grave danger by virtue of being born.

      I’ve never heard of molasses (or licorice) containing significant (or even measurable) quantities of Pb. I grew up eating black strap molasses on anything and everything I could slather it on. I loved the stuff. I don’t think I suffered Pb poisoning.

      Please advise the source for the statement that molasses (or licorice) contains significant Pb.

      I’m genuinely curious. It’s news to me.

      Prop. 65 Warning: This comment contains chemicals known by the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.

      • The statement that licorice flavored candies contain lead comes from the Centers for Environmental Health.

        The statement that the lead in the licorice is coming from molasses appears to be coming from representatives of the National Confectioners Association.


        • Thanks MattS.

          From the article you cited, the FDA (ie: the government) says .1 ppm Pb is acceptable.

          The same article says that the Centers for Environmental Health (CEH), an activist “nonprofit” organization, has used lawsuits to bully candy manufacturers to agree to no more than .035 ppm.

          The CEH allows only about 1/3 of what the government allows.

          Apparently CEH has a strategy to attain human perfection: ratchet down requirements until either there is no more Pb or no more candy or molasses. Then we Yahoos can eat whatever Pb-free hay our Houyhnhnm masters deign to provide, and learn wisdom from their tautological teachings of purest reason untainted by connection to human reality.

  • I hate licorice, therefore I am ok with this.

  • Through the years, Proposition 65 has benefitted exactly one segment of society: sign painters and makers. The Proposition 65 warning signs in California are ubiquitous. One well known peril of over warning is that people no longer take notice. I have yet to see any study demonstrating with statistical rigor that Proposition 65 has actually improved public health.

    • Proposition 65 has benefitted a lot more than one segment of society. In fact, out of all of them, the sign makers have struggled to stay solvent, because signs are cheap. You’re more likely to see them in bankruptcy court than any of the lawyers.

      Attorneys representing Proposition 65 bounty hunters and the defendants they sue have reaped hefty attorney fees for their service, and the testing laboratories, consultants, and toxicologists have also profited significantly.