Comments on: California judge: Prop 65 requires warnings on coffee

By: cecil

cecil — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 13:56:48 +0000

Are the inks/paints/dyes involved in the signs carcinogenic?

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 03 Apr 2018 18:35:38 +0000

I wonder if there’s any way of calculating if the additional amount of shipping, trucking, and manufacturing involved in producing Prop 65 warning signs has contributed to any fatalities (using statistics like deaths per mile for commercial drivers, or deaths per hour worked for printers and manufacturers).

I suspect that if carefully analyzed, Prop 65 has taken more lives than it could have possibly saved.

By: Allan

Allan — Mon, 02 Apr 2018 16:30:58 +0000

Perhaps this is the time to invoke: “Have you no sense of decency?

By: great unknown

great unknown — Mon, 02 Apr 2018 01:43:31 +0000

What is considered a cancer risk in California is not considered so anywhere else. Perhaps it is California that is the cancer risk.

By: CarLitGuy

CarLitGuy — Sun, 01 Apr 2018 14:03:51 +0000

California aready considers every one to be a cancer risk. Both males and females of the species naturally produce the sex hormone Progesterone, a substance known to the State of CA to cause cancer. Testosterone is listed. Also Androstenedione, all forms of estrogen and conjugated estrogens (used in hormone replacement therapy), and all oral contraceptives.

The List (Dec 29, 2017)

Hopefully, that doesn’t cause you stress – the ethanol in your alcoholic beverage gets a prop 65 warning, as does the Diazepam (Valium) sometimes proscribed for anxiety disorders, as is the anti-psychotic Haloperidol (Haldol). Aspirin is on there too, as is the Pravastatin Sodium now being widely recommended for broad consumption by hypertensives and pre-hypertensive patients begining about middle-age. I’m sure there are other extremely common chemicals either naturally produced by the body or extremely popular (widely proscribed) miracles of modern medicine.

The Prop 65 “warning” has lost any value it might once have had, its marginal utilty being drowned out by its presence nearly everywhere and on everything in California. Indeed, I’m being only a bit facetious when I suggest it should be tattooed on the foot of newborns as warning to future doctors who may come into contact the carcinogenous body at some future point…

By: LTMG

LTMG — Sun, 01 Apr 2018 01:29:01 +0000

The judge, along with those who recommended adding coffee to the Prop 65 list, has driven the notion of credibility in California deeper into the ground.

There is zero evidence that the whole Prop 65 fallout has benefitted anybody other than sign makers and attorneys.

By: Rusty Bill

Rusty Bill — Sat, 31 Mar 2018 23:51:22 +0000

California should probably post signs on all the roads leading into the state: “California considers everything to be a cancer risk.”

By: Walter Olson

Walter Olson — Sat, 31 Mar 2018 23:31:26 +0000

In reply to AFPV. Whoops. Fixed now.

By: AFPV

AFPV — Sat, 31 Mar 2018 19:39:19 +0000

The furniture warning link doesn’t work (my system, Windows 10 with Chrome).

By: MattS

MattS — Sat, 31 Mar 2018 16:40:46 +0000

In reply to cc.

“We require certain nutrients in low doses that at high doses are toxic or cancerous: iron, selenium, copper, salt, potassium (and others).”

Even things we require at fairly high doses can become toxic at higher doses, things like water and oxygen.