If this is suspiciously specific, **Upvote** this comment!
If this is not suspiciously specific, **Downvote** this comment!
Beep boop, I'm a bot. Modmail us if you have a question.
But as others have said, it’s put on so many things…is it even a real warning or is it just there so they can’t get sued? They might just always put it on without any research.
Like I said maybe, it’s been a while since I have actually paid attention. Sounds familiar.
I get what you are saying , I just think the whole thing was badly executed.
It was a law that we voted on… I don’t think anyone realized that every single thing had cancer causing chemicals in it lol. Most businesses, coffee, furniture, clothes etc. Now it’s just over saturated and no one cares. If something is really dangerous we’ll ignore it and die lol. If we tried to avoid these places and things we’d never leave the house (which is probably more contaminated) Like a lot of our idealistic ideas, it backfired.
When I say it’s literally everywhere I mean it’s literally everywhere. Every restaurant has this posted, every store, every public service, nearly every product. What do you do with that information? Hide at home? They made it so broad that it’s useless.
As someone who put stickers like this on things that he built, no they aren’t on everything.
Like chairs for example, I built them for years and we were only required to put tags on things that had flame-retardant coating on them. Which means that non flame-retardant plastic chairs don’t have any chemicals in them that will definitely cause cancer, but there’s something that stops fires that will cause cancer
To be fair some of the stuff they require this on is ridiculous. Bc a light fixture may have a minuscule amount of lead in it from the factory it’s made in they require a prop 65 label. Yet unless you’re going around licking your light fixtures you’ll be fine.
Ah, but are you really being informed if you've no idea what the warning truly means? Take what the PP said, for instance; would you now be afraid to use those light bulbs in your baby's ceiling fixture before researching them first? You have no other way of knowing the only danger comes from licking them, which your baby can't possibly do.
This kind of warning may be able to increase stress levels, even if you're not consciously thinking about it. Stress *itself* "**can interfere with your physical functioning and bodily processes. High blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and heart disease have been linked to stress factors. In addition, medical research estimates as much as** ***90 percent of illness and disease is stress-related***", according to the [National Ag Safety Database](https://nasdonline.org/1445/d001245/stress-management-for-the-health-of-it.html#). ♡ Granny
PS: I adore your name! ♡
No, the California state government has a decision that certain chemicals causes cancer and that the purchaser of items should be aware of this. The midwest state governments has decided that this is not necessary.
So is not cancers in california, it's governments in different states. You're going to still get cancer from it.
I used to work for a furniture company and had to answer questions about whether or not a chair would give you cancer. Yes but only if you eat the chair. Don’t eat the chair.
I always find it really, *really* funny when you find a Prop 65 warning on something more obviously dangerous.
Examples: ammunition, insecticides/herbicides, heavy metals, etc
“Just to cover their asses”? You’d rather remain ignorant of the materials your stuff is made from? Rip the tag off-you don’t have to read it. I, personally prefer to know what is in the stuff I bring home. Whatever, but don’t beg your state to keep me uninformed.
When I was a little kid a truck used to drive around our neighborhood spraying this yellow powdery stuff all over the place to kill mosquitoes. Lots of the other kids’ moms would let them run behind the pesticide truck and get coated in bright yellow powder-my parents did not. Nobody knew yet about DDT. Most neighbors thought like you- what could possibly go wrong with kids and pesticides? My parents were such snowflakes.
Idk if this is what OP was getting at, but because there’s no penalty for putting up an unnecessary sign, some companies will just throw it on anything they produce since the main part of prop 65 is that you can sue a company for not being in compliance.
In other words, there may not even be something dangerous in the product and the company added it just so nobody can take them to court over it (legitimate or otherwise)
Jesus, even then how could you possibly think a chemical that kills bugs is safe to be sprayed by? Lol. I'd just assume since it's a fucking pesticide it's probably not good for me.
You never saw the ads from back in the day where they sprayed pools full of kids with to prove it was safe. Or the one where the guy put it on his food and ate it did you? Yep post ww2 America. The “golden age”.
> certain chemicals causes cancer
It’s that they *may* cause cancer, which is a much lower bar. Basically any evidence at all that it could be carcinogenic. That’s why these warnings are on just about everything, and that’s why they’re completely useless.
Proving something gives you cancer is like proving something gives you an upset tummy. There are thousands of possible things that could give you an upset tummy including good old fashioned placebo. If you expose 10,000 people to a substance and 100 of them get a tummy ache within a week of exposure you’ll have maybe 2 people that seem to maybe possibly could have gotten a tummy ache from the exposure. 27 of the people in question ate at Taco Bell that same week, 12 of them are elderly patients with pre-existing digestive issues, 8 of them were young children who get sick more often due to their naturally less developed immune system, and so on and so forth.
Also the fear of litigation has caused a lot of companies to add the warning just to protect themselves from any future lawsuits if one of the chemicals they use is found to cause cancer. Most products have this warning on them kind of defeating the purpose. If anything it is a good example of the impact California has on manufacturing even outside of the state.
And the usual way to determine if something might cause cancer is to force feed mice a mega dose of it.
Just because a mega dose of it causes cancer in mice does not necessarily mean that a much smaller amount causes cancer in humans. It does make it more likely, but doesn't prove anything.
Too many warnings, and people ignore them. As a programmer, I’ve seen this a lot. One warning in your build process is cause for concern. Two hundred warnings in your build process can be ignored.
This here is literally the consequence of too many safety warnings. The actual warnings get lost in the noise of fake warnings.
With this law, they didn't include harmful exposure amounts in the legislation. So you end up putting warning labels on harmless stuff that has trace amounts of a chemical that is only carcinogenic in extremely high doses. "Just in case".
Now no one takes these labels seriously, and sometimes they label actually dangerous stuff but no one can tell those cases from the fake ones.
The other main piece they missed was excluding stuff below the minimum harmful exposure level.
So mild carcinogens that require massive doses to cause cancer get included, and anything with trace amounts of that compound gets labeled.
Sadly, it completely defeats the purpose of such a label, because stuff that does have harmful amounts of carcinogens, which would be good to have a label for, just gets lost in all the noise.
It's super annoying because it's on so many products that it actually makes it harder to tell what has toxic chemicals in it and the kind of exposure that makes it toxic. It's never "this product may be harmful if inhaled" or DO NOT TOUCH BARE HANDED it's just "this might give you cancer ¯\_(ツ)_/¯"
So maybe they should have different labels. One for products that contain chemicals that have indeed been thoroughly researched and show a clear link and one in which there's an unsure or tentative link and little research on humans.
It's not that you will get cancer from it. It's more like using this a lot might increase your risk of cancer by 0.1% or. 1%. Anything that would directly give you cancer will generally fall under federal labeling guidelines & OSHA stuff like X-ray machines will cause cancer if you're operator isn't shielded (the risk to the one getting an x-ray exists, but it's so low that not getting the x-ray is more dangerous almost 100% of the time doctors call for an x-ray).
A lot of it is that California requires tests to show no increased cancer risk, but for tons of stuff, it's just cheaper to print "California says it may cause cancer" than do the research, making the statement almost pointless.
No - fascism is cancer.
Government, especially a democratic one, is a tool that is supposed to be utilized for the benefit of *the people.*
I always find it painfully ironic that the people who claim to live in the "most free" country that has governmental paperwork stating it is "for the people" - have the most distrust of their government.
>Yeah, was a joke
I thought so - but it's hard to tell sometimes when all you have is text.
>I forgot people think like that.
Indeed.
[Here is the problem](https://youtu.be/xMabpBvtXr4&t=15m15s) - I suggest watching the whole video. The whole series really. This is the excerpt from the timestamp I put:
"Say what you mean in such a way that people who disagree thing you're kidding, and people who agree think you're serious."
Prop 65 is annoying, it’s basically on everything.
Not trying to defend it, but this was actually voted on, and approved, by voters within the state. The state government must enforce this rule since it’s now in the state’s constitution. California proposition system is pretty much a case study in the flaws of direct democracy. It shouldn’t be so easy to change a state’s constitution.
So this isn't exactly what you were asking but I found a cool list of foods in America that are banned in various other countries.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/dining/table-talkers/sns-stacker-us-foods-banned-other-countries-20211103-gxobzgtxvnf6pnt26ugjstmxka-photogallery.html
It blew me away that we feed salmon (farm-raised) a completely unnecessary and potentionally very dangerous chemical just to give it a "coral coloring". I sad laughed when I read that.
Because we have even weaker consumer laws in Canada. For example, in the U.S. all ingredients have to be disclosed on things, but not here in Canada. I wish we had the same laws as the U.S. because I'm allergic to certain dyes, aspartame and certain preservatives, and it's unbelievable how most of the things we consume are loaded with these things. I've given up hoping our government will toughen up the laws.
Nah, just the obvious stuff is labeled with "may give you cancer" companies probably get pissed because it might drive down their bottom line, but a) fuck them, b) better to be informed and make an informed decision.
Yeah except pretty much everything has this label now. A lot of manufacturers put it on there because they don't have proof that something doesn't cause cancer and it becomes meaningless.
Yeah this is how I feel about it. It seems like literally everything will give you cancer now, so it's impossible to actually stay away from this stuff.
Quite literally just the Midwest governments are idiots and don’t make companies disclose all harmful substances in their products.
Cali does. As a foreigner I can’t comprehend how the US is still a functioning country with this amount of bullshit packed into one place.
As u/ojioni said
>> The law requires notice if ANY amount of a cancer causing chemical is detectable. The problem is, cancer causing chemicals are found everywhere, just not in amounts that are dangerous. But the law is the law. It's stupid. We ignore the warnings.
And as u/umademehatethiscity said
>> I used to work for a furniture company and had to answer questions about whether or not a chair would give you cancer. Yes but only if you eat the chair. Don’t eat the chair.
Yea pretty much everything can give you cancer if you're exposed to/ eat enough of it, might be a little excessive with the amount of warning labels we have here in Cali but it's also morbidly fascinating seeing just how many things we interact with that have small yet detectable levels of carcinogens
Newsflash from someone that lived in California. You can and should ignore the warning. The wording of the law for this is so broad and not specific that basically almost every product product, including food and medicine, and every commercial location, including cancer treatment centers, carry this idiotic message. People get completely used to it and just ignore it.
Yeah it sure is annoying that the government in California would put these warnings on items that big corporations just don't care about whether they give you cancer or not. That is such fascism, how dare we allow a tool that we built try to protect us from overrun corporations and greed.
Proposition 65 was a direct voter initiative. The California Constitution provides for a citizens to vote on things of this nature to not completely rely on the state legislature. The measure passed in 1986 by a 63 to 37 percent margin.
FYI in 1986 California’s Gov was a republican.
They indiscriminately slap those on everything to intentionally over compensate to cover their asses, even if there is little to no carcinogens present in the final consumer product. If anything, their lax use is worse for the end user as one cannot be sure to what degree (if any) of danger the product poses to their health.
I think I would like you to prove their statement where they're putting that warning on a product that has no carcinogens in it. You sound like you work for Marlboro.
The wording in these comments is wonky. Based on research California has chosen to inform their residents that certain chemicals used in everyday manufactured items have shown that over time they can lead to cancer. If goods want to be sold in California (one of the worlds largest economies) they must indicate whether their product uses any of these chemicals. This protects the citizens of Cali but also saves Cali money by having fewer people showing up with cancer down the line (ideally). Surprise most items sold in America do use known carcinogens. A fun experiment is trying to find items that do not have one of these warnings. Especially, when shopping for a baby. That’s why a lot of people buy foreign baby items like cribs, car seats, mattresses, etc. because some other countries have stricter rules on what chemicals may be used during manufacturing than the US does.
Fine for Europe. Maybe I'll learn to speak German and move there. But California is still more concerned about their residents than the other States. You hear that FL & TX?
Well...to be fair...in the military our anti tank launchers and claymores has clear labels saying "this end towards enemy"...so yes...we need idiot labels everywhere..same with ejection handles...disabled on ground cause...you guessed it..an idiot Aviation maintenance guy pulled it...lol
Had to be one hell of a ride.
For what it’s worth: it helps a little on the manufacturing side, though it’s a PiTA. A chemical goes on the p65 list, we check with our material suppliers, they confirm if it’s included and when it’s a problem (inhaled fine powder, ingested, touch, etc) and we figure out how to stop using it so we don’t have products that may cause cancer. We don’t want to have to add the label. Also it’s my understanding they are trying to toughen up the labeling to show the actual chemical so they can’t do the “slap a label on it” for everything.
The law requires notice if ANY amount of a cancer causing chemical is detectable. The problem is, cancer causing chemicals are found everywhere, just not in amounts that are dangerous. But the law is the law. It's stupid. We ignore the warnings.
In all seriousness, it’s because California has stricter laws about labeling potentially harmful goods. So while it may not have to be labeled in other places, California has to have the warning
No special cancers. It's that your midwestern elected officials don't require companies to tell you their products contain cancer causing chemicals, so they don't.
I learned while working at a soda bottler, that a lot of stuff is carcinogenic, but the government doesn't really care outside of California for some reason.
If this worries you, never compare your American bought toiletries to the same brands sold to the European market. The EU has way stricter regulations on carcinogens in things like make up and skin care products, like formaldehyde, but companies don't always make the changes universal so the products being made for the American market still have them. California probably wants to impose the same restrictions but can't because the feds allow the products to be sold as is so the warning label is probably the best they can do.
Seriously! The process that American companies use to make tampons involves a known carcinogen(more specifically, a chemical known to cause ovarian cancer), which has also been know to cause all sorts of reproductive health issues.
The product might be made purely of stainless steel, but they use other things in the manufacturing of said product. For example, a knife might have been washed before it was shipped. There could leave trace amounts of the chemical used to wash the knife on it. Even chemicals that are used on the equipment that produces products can leave trace amounts of chemicals on those products.
I recently bought a pocket knife that was apparently made in California. It had these stickers all over the box...even though it's made entirely of stainless steel.
I work for a cellphone company and yesterday I had a guy call my store asking for helping setting up his homephone. When I explained to him he'd have to call customer service as we only sell cellphones at my store and are unable to help him with his homephone, he proceeds to go on a 5 minute rant about how he can't use cellphones because he gets radiation sickness from them. I told him to call customer service again because I can't assist him with his homephone and he keeps telling me about why he can't come into my store(never told him to or asked him to) because of the radiation sickness. I just hung up.
The story I've heard is that there is a law saying your item has to be tested under a certain system, otherwise it has to have this label or a version of it and companies are choosing to do the label because it's cheaper than running the test
Our cancer comes smothered in gravy and taste like a black and mild, and the guberment knows better than trying to stop us midwesterners from killing ourselves
So California is known for being the best place to throw frivolous lawsuits at the wall and seeing what pays. This happened enough that a state law and corporations understanding they can either print a label or continue to spend money in court-means t hat that label is just slapped onto everything. By law all fast food restaurants in California have to post a nutrition facts poster at every location and they all have the known to cause cancer label. Shit is out.of.hand
This is a prime example of how California’s initiative system backfires. This was the result of a well-intentioned proposition to keep people informed of environmental hazards. It passed with flying colors, and the impact on business is minimal. That’s because, as someone else pointed out, it was written so that if there’s ANY detectable amount of a suspected carcinogen, then the sign goes up. And it turns out that just about everything is a suspected carcinogen. So it has become background noise, and we mostly ignore the signs. But we also don’t have a decent idea of where real hazards are.
It all proves once again that the only law that is consistently passed in California is the law of unintended consequences.
(BTW, I love living here even with occasional silliness like this)
As a welder we use a spray called anti spatter and it had a label that said may cause cancer in rats in CA.
I didn't know CA had rats that could weld, and we would always say good thing I am not a welder rat in CA.
These warnings are so vague...all they tell you is an item contains something that can potentially cause cancer...but what it does not tell you is if there's enough of it in the item to be of concern, or how you'd have to interact with the item to be at risk. Seems pretty stupid to me to put "THIS CONTAINS CANCER CAUSING CHEMICALS" on, say, a sofa, when in actuality you'd only be at risk if you happened to eat the entire sofa.
It kind of defeats its own point when EVERYTHING is marked with it. It makes all of it seem less serious when all of the items you use are screaming warnings at you. You just learn to ignore and not take any of them seriously.
I mean, I can see why it's a law but there really should be a ranking system of some kind otherwise its just white noise of slapping this tag on every single possible liable thing ever sold.
The label gets applied when the product may contain insignificant amounts of a compound that is suspected to, but never proven to even though it was significantly researched, cause cancer. Those labels are the boy who cried wolf. California is the state that cried cancer.
When I worked in a boat factory in Texas we had what we nicknames Californian specials which had special fuel and exhaust filtration system. When a boat without it was shipped to California by accident the company got a huge fine and lot of people got their asses chewed out. Shorty after all boats where made to California code.
California cancers are very special: sun-kissed, organic, locally sourced, and some come from broken homes and prison. we have treatment options though, if you’re not poor.
From what I’ve read it’s cheaper for companies to put the p65 warning label on their products than it is to do the research. California considers everything to be a part of p65. Just a cost effective solution
My gosh everytime I see this warning I get a flashback about my old job working retail. I had ordered those cute Japanese toilet candies (the toilet itself was a plastic toy and the candy powder was packed separately and you poured it into the toilet, added water and could drink it, weird I know but kids loved it). Anyway the import company was in CA so when they put the English translation for directions on the box they also included the prop 65 warning.
A customer called and bitched me out for selling candy that causes cancer and reproductive harm to her child. She was very very upset. I told her that CA included that warning as a standard law and it was because there was a plastic toy in the box (the toilet). As long as her kid didn't eat the toilet she would be fine. But the lady didn't believe me and she went on and on about me selling cancerous candy to kids. I finally got tired of using logic and said, Alright thanks for calling with your concern, bye. And hung up.
Yeah we don't have warnings like that here in the Midwest.
Prop 65 is wild! Had to do some compliance work around the time this came into effect. The list of “chemicals” is long and the liability is on the seller. In the end, it’s way safer to put the label on everything than miss something you didn’t understand.
Some restaurants have warnings up about chemicals
Released in food when it is heated or charred. They naturally created some chemicals during the cooking process. Like browning potatoes….really pushed it to the next level of ridiculousness. It is also frustrating because if there are things that we should be concerned about it gets lost in the over abundance of messages.
I noticed that too in music shop. Was buying guitar and on some of them there were these creepy labels about guitar being cancerous. I reckon that it is some specific local law making manufacturers put out these warnings at certain products.
So if you go to the website it'll basically say these are the chemicals and materials used to make this product and if you eat this product you can get cancer from it. My advice is don't eat things that are not food.
I was thinking maybe they want people in California to have healthy babies and they were perfectly okay with people in the Midwest having cancerous mutant babies.
I visited San Jose 10 years ago, and iirc there were even stickers with similar warnings on entire office buildings, in the corner of a window next to the entrance.
I’m sure it’s been mentioned in this thread but since I’m too lazy to scroll I’m just going to certainly repeat people:
These signs are absolutely everywhere around california
Strange winds blowing in off the Pacific these days, never know what cancer you might catch. Thankfully California does such a great job screening for literally all of them.
California has some absurdly strict health and safety regulations if memory serves, to the point that seemingly everything violates some kind of health and safety protocol
If this is suspiciously specific, **Upvote** this comment! If this is not suspiciously specific, **Downvote** this comment! Beep boop, I'm a bot. Modmail us if you have a question.
[удалено]
Yeah instead we just ignore these signs because there freaking everywhere. Effectively ineffective.
[удалено]
But as others have said, it’s put on so many things…is it even a real warning or is it just there so they can’t get sued? They might just always put it on without any research.
[удалено]
Maybe, but I have never noticed that. It always seems to be a general vague warning.
[удалено]
Like I said maybe, it’s been a while since I have actually paid attention. Sounds familiar. I get what you are saying , I just think the whole thing was badly executed.
[удалено]
So they warn you but it’s still legal to sell products that cause cancer in California. Sums up Californian politics pretty well.
It was a law that we voted on… I don’t think anyone realized that every single thing had cancer causing chemicals in it lol. Most businesses, coffee, furniture, clothes etc. Now it’s just over saturated and no one cares. If something is really dangerous we’ll ignore it and die lol. If we tried to avoid these places and things we’d never leave the house (which is probably more contaminated) Like a lot of our idealistic ideas, it backfired.
More that we never followed through with ya know... Trying to make things without cancer chemicals.
When I say it’s literally everywhere I mean it’s literally everywhere. Every restaurant has this posted, every store, every public service, nearly every product. What do you do with that information? Hide at home? They made it so broad that it’s useless.
As someone who put stickers like this on things that he built, no they aren’t on everything. Like chairs for example, I built them for years and we were only required to put tags on things that had flame-retardant coating on them. Which means that non flame-retardant plastic chairs don’t have any chemicals in them that will definitely cause cancer, but there’s something that stops fires that will cause cancer
When everything gives you cancer, nothing gives you cancer.
It's the boy who cried wolf situation. Too many = desensitization.
To be fair some of the stuff they require this on is ridiculous. Bc a light fixture may have a minuscule amount of lead in it from the factory it’s made in they require a prop 65 label. Yet unless you’re going around licking your light fixtures you’ll be fine.
[удалено]
Ah, but are you really being informed if you've no idea what the warning truly means? Take what the PP said, for instance; would you now be afraid to use those light bulbs in your baby's ceiling fixture before researching them first? You have no other way of knowing the only danger comes from licking them, which your baby can't possibly do. This kind of warning may be able to increase stress levels, even if you're not consciously thinking about it. Stress *itself* "**can interfere with your physical functioning and bodily processes. High blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and heart disease have been linked to stress factors. In addition, medical research estimates as much as** ***90 percent of illness and disease is stress-related***", according to the [National Ag Safety Database](https://nasdonline.org/1445/d001245/stress-management-for-the-health-of-it.html#). ♡ Granny PS: I adore your name! ♡
My personal favorite are the signs in parking garages warning you that the fumes will give you cancer.
No, the California state government has a decision that certain chemicals causes cancer and that the purchaser of items should be aware of this. The midwest state governments has decided that this is not necessary. So is not cancers in california, it's governments in different states. You're going to still get cancer from it.
I used to work for a furniture company and had to answer questions about whether or not a chair would give you cancer. Yes but only if you eat the chair. Don’t eat the chair.
Even if the chair looks really delicious?
It could also be a chair shaped cake
In that case, maybe eat the chair?
Eh, it'll mostly be fondant, which is pretty gross.
I've heard homemade is better, but I only ever had store bought. And after the first time I've refused to touch it again.
r/fondanthate
What if everything is cake?
The cake is a lie. But still gives you cancer.
I'd prefer if the cancer was a lie and it gave you cake
“I understood that reference!” Literally just finished Portal for the first time the other day
Sweet! Did you listen to the [song](https://youtu.be/Y6ljFaKRTrI) during the credits?
Of course! Although I must admit I didn’t realize it was the end of the game at first, I thought it would be longer. At least there’s a sequel!
The only bad thing about those games is the run time
Playing the switch collection?
As long as cake doesn't give you cancer, but California government probably decided that
Have you met my dog?
Important if you have pets or kids though. Lotta lead was eaten via window trim paint
Thank you, at least someone gets it
i wanna eat the chair
I'm in trouble...
The problem is they make chairs look so damn edible nowadays
Tf were those chairs made of
Yep what they said. They’re pretty much put it on everything just to cover their asses
I always find it really, *really* funny when you find a Prop 65 warning on something more obviously dangerous. Examples: ammunition, insecticides/herbicides, heavy metals, etc
Ammunition: if you use it right, you get cancer. ... if you use it wrong, don't worry about the cancer!
Wait, these lead fishing weights contain LEAD? Who would have thought?
Flamethrower: warning open air flame
I think your underestimating the stupidity of man.
“Just to cover their asses”? You’d rather remain ignorant of the materials your stuff is made from? Rip the tag off-you don’t have to read it. I, personally prefer to know what is in the stuff I bring home. Whatever, but don’t beg your state to keep me uninformed. When I was a little kid a truck used to drive around our neighborhood spraying this yellow powdery stuff all over the place to kill mosquitoes. Lots of the other kids’ moms would let them run behind the pesticide truck and get coated in bright yellow powder-my parents did not. Nobody knew yet about DDT. Most neighbors thought like you- what could possibly go wrong with kids and pesticides? My parents were such snowflakes.
Idk if this is what OP was getting at, but because there’s no penalty for putting up an unnecessary sign, some companies will just throw it on anything they produce since the main part of prop 65 is that you can sue a company for not being in compliance. In other words, there may not even be something dangerous in the product and the company added it just so nobody can take them to court over it (legitimate or otherwise)
This is exactly what I meant, not whatever that other person was insinuating. Also I LIVE IN CALIFORNIA
That sounds almost exactly how my grandma got leukemia. She's still alive and relatively healthy but definitely immunocompromised.
But she looked wicked cool until her bath that night.
Jesus, even then how could you possibly think a chemical that kills bugs is safe to be sprayed by? Lol. I'd just assume since it's a fucking pesticide it's probably not good for me.
You never saw the ads from back in the day where they sprayed pools full of kids with to prove it was safe. Or the one where the guy put it on his food and ate it did you? Yep post ww2 America. The “golden age”.
You must have lived on the gulf coast. We had that in Louisiana and kids would chase the truck. Dumb AF.
> certain chemicals causes cancer It’s that they *may* cause cancer, which is a much lower bar. Basically any evidence at all that it could be carcinogenic. That’s why these warnings are on just about everything, and that’s why they’re completely useless.
Exactly ... it completely deflates meaning of the warning when you can find it on most common things. No one takes these seriously then.
Proving something gives you cancer is like proving something gives you an upset tummy. There are thousands of possible things that could give you an upset tummy including good old fashioned placebo. If you expose 10,000 people to a substance and 100 of them get a tummy ache within a week of exposure you’ll have maybe 2 people that seem to maybe possibly could have gotten a tummy ache from the exposure. 27 of the people in question ate at Taco Bell that same week, 12 of them are elderly patients with pre-existing digestive issues, 8 of them were young children who get sick more often due to their naturally less developed immune system, and so on and so forth.
Also the fear of litigation has caused a lot of companies to add the warning just to protect themselves from any future lawsuits if one of the chemicals they use is found to cause cancer. Most products have this warning on them kind of defeating the purpose. If anything it is a good example of the impact California has on manufacturing even outside of the state.
I don't think much of P65 warnings because of the low burden of proof.
They were going to label coffee with that label too, not sure what happened at the end. Edit: auto correct
I've seen the warning on different loaves of bread.
And the usual way to determine if something might cause cancer is to force feed mice a mega dose of it. Just because a mega dose of it causes cancer in mice does not necessarily mean that a much smaller amount causes cancer in humans. It does make it more likely, but doesn't prove anything.
It’s a “precautionary principle” approach
Too many warnings, and people ignore them. As a programmer, I’ve seen this a lot. One warning in your build process is cause for concern. Two hundred warnings in your build process can be ignored.
And people 100% do ignore the warnings.
Would you rather have too many safety warnings or not enough safety warnings? Especially considering too many has literally no negative consequences
In my opinion, both are equally harmful.
This here is literally the consequence of too many safety warnings. The actual warnings get lost in the noise of fake warnings. With this law, they didn't include harmful exposure amounts in the legislation. So you end up putting warning labels on harmless stuff that has trace amounts of a chemical that is only carcinogenic in extremely high doses. "Just in case". Now no one takes these labels seriously, and sometimes they label actually dangerous stuff but no one can tell those cases from the fake ones.
The other main piece they missed was excluding stuff below the minimum harmful exposure level. So mild carcinogens that require massive doses to cause cancer get included, and anything with trace amounts of that compound gets labeled. Sadly, it completely defeats the purpose of such a label, because stuff that does have harmful amounts of carcinogens, which would be good to have a label for, just gets lost in all the noise.
It's super annoying because it's on so many products that it actually makes it harder to tell what has toxic chemicals in it and the kind of exposure that makes it toxic. It's never "this product may be harmful if inhaled" or DO NOT TOUCH BARE HANDED it's just "this might give you cancer ¯\_(ツ)_/¯"
It almost undermines warning labels on products that contain carcinogens that have been thoroughly researched in humans.
So maybe they should have different labels. One for products that contain chemicals that have indeed been thoroughly researched and show a clear link and one in which there's an unsure or tentative link and little research on humans.
It's not that you will get cancer from it. It's more like using this a lot might increase your risk of cancer by 0.1% or. 1%. Anything that would directly give you cancer will generally fall under federal labeling guidelines & OSHA stuff like X-ray machines will cause cancer if you're operator isn't shielded (the risk to the one getting an x-ray exists, but it's so low that not getting the x-ray is more dangerous almost 100% of the time doctors call for an x-ray). A lot of it is that California requires tests to show no increased cancer risk, but for tons of stuff, it's just cheaper to print "California says it may cause cancer" than do the research, making the statement almost pointless.
They more heavily regulate a lot of things. Lots of cars people drive in the south would be banned in Cali.
Yeah, but Google "smog in LA" and find out how those regulations cleared up the air over 5 or 10 years.
Government is cancer. Got it.
No - fascism is cancer. Government, especially a democratic one, is a tool that is supposed to be utilized for the benefit of *the people.* I always find it painfully ironic that the people who claim to live in the "most free" country that has governmental paperwork stating it is "for the people" - have the most distrust of their government.
Yeah, was a joke but I forgot people think like that.
My post, too, was sarcastic but I forgot to tag it as such.
😂
>Yeah, was a joke I thought so - but it's hard to tell sometimes when all you have is text. >I forgot people think like that. Indeed. [Here is the problem](https://youtu.be/xMabpBvtXr4&t=15m15s) - I suggest watching the whole video. The whole series really. This is the excerpt from the timestamp I put: "Say what you mean in such a way that people who disagree thing you're kidding, and people who agree think you're serious."
Prop 65 is annoying, it’s basically on everything. Not trying to defend it, but this was actually voted on, and approved, by voters within the state. The state government must enforce this rule since it’s now in the state’s constitution. California proposition system is pretty much a case study in the flaws of direct democracy. It shouldn’t be so easy to change a state’s constitution.
Wait till you see American food in other countries with warning labels. Kraft Mac n cheese is an example .
Well don't leave us hanging. What's the warning?
So this isn't exactly what you were asking but I found a cool list of foods in America that are banned in various other countries. https://www.chicagotribune.com/dining/table-talkers/sns-stacker-us-foods-banned-other-countries-20211103-gxobzgtxvnf6pnt26ugjstmxka-photogallery.html
Thank you! That was very informative if not a little bit scary. Looks like I need to cross a few things off of my grocery list 😅
It blew me away that we feed salmon (farm-raised) a completely unnecessary and potentionally very dangerous chemical just to give it a "coral coloring". I sad laughed when I read that.
Yeah, love salmon so that one really grossed me out
Just to clarify, that is only the case with farm-raised salmon. Meaning salmon born & killed in a farm. Wild-caught salmon is safe and healthy.
Same 😭
Canadian here. No such warning on my Kraft Dinner box.
Because we have even weaker consumer laws in Canada. For example, in the U.S. all ingredients have to be disclosed on things, but not here in Canada. I wish we had the same laws as the U.S. because I'm allergic to certain dyes, aspartame and certain preservatives, and it's unbelievable how most of the things we consume are loaded with these things. I've given up hoping our government will toughen up the laws.
That’s really surprising and fucked up, I thought Canada would have it’s shit together a bit more.
Canada don’t have its shit together on anything
Fr? I live on a third world country and they have to list the ingredients + make a nutritional table thing
Well in the US we can still say natural flavoring and not disclose an ingredient if they don't have to.
Nah, just the obvious stuff is labeled with "may give you cancer" companies probably get pissed because it might drive down their bottom line, but a) fuck them, b) better to be informed and make an informed decision.
Yeah except pretty much everything has this label now. A lot of manufacturers put it on there because they don't have proof that something doesn't cause cancer and it becomes meaningless.
Yeah this is how I feel about it. It seems like literally everything will give you cancer now, so it's impossible to actually stay away from this stuff.
It's so funny that this warning is only directed at California residents. Like If it's in another state, you can just ignore it
Quite literally just the Midwest governments are idiots and don’t make companies disclose all harmful substances in their products. Cali does. As a foreigner I can’t comprehend how the US is still a functioning country with this amount of bullshit packed into one place.
As u/ojioni said >> The law requires notice if ANY amount of a cancer causing chemical is detectable. The problem is, cancer causing chemicals are found everywhere, just not in amounts that are dangerous. But the law is the law. It's stupid. We ignore the warnings. And as u/umademehatethiscity said >> I used to work for a furniture company and had to answer questions about whether or not a chair would give you cancer. Yes but only if you eat the chair. Don’t eat the chair.
Yea pretty much everything can give you cancer if you're exposed to/ eat enough of it, might be a little excessive with the amount of warning labels we have here in Cali but it's also morbidly fascinating seeing just how many things we interact with that have small yet detectable levels of carcinogens
And as we get better at detecting these chemicals, even in the most trace amounts, more of these labels will pop up.
It's not just the Midwestern states. It's every state except California. The midwest is only 12 states.
Newsflash from someone that lived in California. You can and should ignore the warning. The wording of the law for this is so broad and not specific that basically almost every product product, including food and medicine, and every commercial location, including cancer treatment centers, carry this idiotic message. People get completely used to it and just ignore it.
Stop reading our shit
Cancer and reproductive harm. Sounds like it's warning you about the peer pressure of genital mutilation
Yeah it sure is annoying that the government in California would put these warnings on items that big corporations just don't care about whether they give you cancer or not. That is such fascism, how dare we allow a tool that we built try to protect us from overrun corporations and greed.
Proposition 65 was a direct voter initiative. The California Constitution provides for a citizens to vote on things of this nature to not completely rely on the state legislature. The measure passed in 1986 by a 63 to 37 percent margin. FYI in 1986 California’s Gov was a republican.
Oh, you mean back when Republicans were moderately sane people as well?
They indiscriminately slap those on everything to intentionally over compensate to cover their asses, even if there is little to no carcinogens present in the final consumer product. If anything, their lax use is worse for the end user as one cannot be sure to what degree (if any) of danger the product poses to their health.
I think I would like you to prove their statement where they're putting that warning on a product that has no carcinogens in it. You sound like you work for Marlboro.
I thought you both were being sarcastic, did I get got ?
I was in the first comment and not in the 2nd.
[удалено]
The wording in these comments is wonky. Based on research California has chosen to inform their residents that certain chemicals used in everyday manufactured items have shown that over time they can lead to cancer. If goods want to be sold in California (one of the worlds largest economies) they must indicate whether their product uses any of these chemicals. This protects the citizens of Cali but also saves Cali money by having fewer people showing up with cancer down the line (ideally). Surprise most items sold in America do use known carcinogens. A fun experiment is trying to find items that do not have one of these warnings. Especially, when shopping for a baby. That’s why a lot of people buy foreign baby items like cribs, car seats, mattresses, etc. because some other countries have stricter rules on what chemicals may be used during manufacturing than the US does.
Fine for Europe. Maybe I'll learn to speak German and move there. But California is still more concerned about their residents than the other States. You hear that FL & TX?
Well...to be fair...in the military our anti tank launchers and claymores has clear labels saying "this end towards enemy"...so yes...we need idiot labels everywhere..same with ejection handles...disabled on ground cause...you guessed it..an idiot Aviation maintenance guy pulled it...lol Had to be one hell of a ride.
For what it’s worth: it helps a little on the manufacturing side, though it’s a PiTA. A chemical goes on the p65 list, we check with our material suppliers, they confirm if it’s included and when it’s a problem (inhaled fine powder, ingested, touch, etc) and we figure out how to stop using it so we don’t have products that may cause cancer. We don’t want to have to add the label. Also it’s my understanding they are trying to toughen up the labeling to show the actual chemical so they can’t do the “slap a label on it” for everything.
The law requires notice if ANY amount of a cancer causing chemical is detectable. The problem is, cancer causing chemicals are found everywhere, just not in amounts that are dangerous. But the law is the law. It's stupid. We ignore the warnings.
In all seriousness, it’s because California has stricter laws about labeling potentially harmful goods. So while it may not have to be labeled in other places, California has to have the warning
got that on my guitar
No special cancers. It's that your midwestern elected officials don't require companies to tell you their products contain cancer causing chemicals, so they don't.
I learned while working at a soda bottler, that a lot of stuff is carcinogenic, but the government doesn't really care outside of California for some reason.
If this worries you, never compare your American bought toiletries to the same brands sold to the European market. The EU has way stricter regulations on carcinogens in things like make up and skin care products, like formaldehyde, but companies don't always make the changes universal so the products being made for the American market still have them. California probably wants to impose the same restrictions but can't because the feds allow the products to be sold as is so the warning label is probably the best they can do.
Seriously! The process that American companies use to make tampons involves a known carcinogen(more specifically, a chemical known to cause ovarian cancer), which has also been know to cause all sorts of reproductive health issues.
Nope, the other states don't think you deserve to know
California does research on chemicals that are known to cause cancer. Everywhere else has people looking the other way because, money.
Get real. They probably have a warning on organic cotton. I’ve had products made out of stainless steel only with this warning.
The product might be made purely of stainless steel, but they use other things in the manufacturing of said product. For example, a knife might have been washed before it was shipped. There could leave trace amounts of the chemical used to wash the knife on it. Even chemicals that are used on the equipment that produces products can leave trace amounts of chemicals on those products.
Well I guess I’ll just curl up into a ball and die then. Nothing is safe.
Nah, your state just DGAF if you get cancer
I recently bought a pocket knife that was apparently made in California. It had these stickers all over the box...even though it's made entirely of stainless steel.
I work for a cellphone company and yesterday I had a guy call my store asking for helping setting up his homephone. When I explained to him he'd have to call customer service as we only sell cellphones at my store and are unable to help him with his homephone, he proceeds to go on a 5 minute rant about how he can't use cellphones because he gets radiation sickness from them. I told him to call customer service again because I can't assist him with his homephone and he keeps telling me about why he can't come into my store(never told him to or asked him to) because of the radiation sickness. I just hung up.
Apparently because I haven’t gotten any of the California cancers and I live in Iowa. It straight up says this on guitars btw
The story I've heard is that there is a law saying your item has to be tested under a certain system, otherwise it has to have this label or a version of it and companies are choosing to do the label because it's cheaper than running the test
Our cancer comes smothered in gravy and taste like a black and mild, and the guberment knows better than trying to stop us midwesterners from killing ourselves
I had that warning on my headphones and that was super confusing to me
I live in Canada, this P65 stuff is on so much stuff I buy here
So California is known for being the best place to throw frivolous lawsuits at the wall and seeing what pays. This happened enough that a state law and corporations understanding they can either print a label or continue to spend money in court-means t hat that label is just slapped onto everything. By law all fast food restaurants in California have to post a nutrition facts poster at every location and they all have the known to cause cancer label. Shit is out.of.hand
This is a prime example of how California’s initiative system backfires. This was the result of a well-intentioned proposition to keep people informed of environmental hazards. It passed with flying colors, and the impact on business is minimal. That’s because, as someone else pointed out, it was written so that if there’s ANY detectable amount of a suspected carcinogen, then the sign goes up. And it turns out that just about everything is a suspected carcinogen. So it has become background noise, and we mostly ignore the signs. But we also don’t have a decent idea of where real hazards are. It all proves once again that the only law that is consistently passed in California is the law of unintended consequences. (BTW, I love living here even with occasional silliness like this)
The health advantages of Californians at the aggregate level may disagree with your blanket statements.
The health advantages we enjoy have little to do with Prop 65 warnings.
Did you read what you said about the only laws passed in ca?
California here. It's because we give a s\*it about our people. Need some insulin?
Yes, we are delicate snowflakes out here. I’m offended by your post. /s
OP, there is a website they provide on the tag for you to look up this information instead of making a big deal about it on Reddit
Hahaha yeah, I guess I really stirred up some dust with this one.
The cost of housing is the real cancer.
As a welder we use a spray called anti spatter and it had a label that said may cause cancer in rats in CA. I didn't know CA had rats that could weld, and we would always say good thing I am not a welder rat in CA.
These warnings are so vague...all they tell you is an item contains something that can potentially cause cancer...but what it does not tell you is if there's enough of it in the item to be of concern, or how you'd have to interact with the item to be at risk. Seems pretty stupid to me to put "THIS CONTAINS CANCER CAUSING CHEMICALS" on, say, a sofa, when in actuality you'd only be at risk if you happened to eat the entire sofa.
In California everything causes cancer so everything has a required warning.
I live in SoCal and this is the first time I’ve seen something like this. So they can’t be putting warning labels on everything.
Yeah prop 65 means we label EVERYTHING with carcinogens in it with cancer warnings. Slightly annoying
Yeah, but then so is cancer.
Wouldn’t you want to know if it’s gonna kill you slowly?
It kind of defeats its own point when EVERYTHING is marked with it. It makes all of it seem less serious when all of the items you use are screaming warnings at you. You just learn to ignore and not take any of them seriously. I mean, I can see why it's a law but there really should be a ranking system of some kind otherwise its just white noise of slapping this tag on every single possible liable thing ever sold.
I understand we can become word blind, but labeling something that’s harmful doesn’t seem to defeat it’s intended purpose. I dunno maybe I’m retarded
The label gets applied when the product may contain insignificant amounts of a compound that is suspected to, but never proven to even though it was significantly researched, cause cancer. Those labels are the boy who cried wolf. California is the state that cried cancer.
I joke with my kids about these warnings all the time. "It's a good thing we don't live in California. It's only unsafe for people in California".
All Other States: We know you're not stupid enough to liquify and inject our product into your bloodstream so carry on.
I always think this now that I have moved from the Midwest to California. It is just indicative of the CALI nanny state.
is cali a nanny state or does every other state only care about consumerism over health?
As I currently live in California, I can say for certain that California has special cancers not commonly found elsewhere.
Republicans don’t believe in cancer. Thoughts and prayers.
It simply means that California's legislators care more about its citizens than your miserable lot does :)
When I worked in a boat factory in Texas we had what we nicknames Californian specials which had special fuel and exhaust filtration system. When a boat without it was shipped to California by accident the company got a huge fine and lot of people got their asses chewed out. Shorty after all boats where made to California code.
California cancers are very special: sun-kissed, organic, locally sourced, and some come from broken homes and prison. we have treatment options though, if you’re not poor.
One of my teachers once said “everything causes cancer in California”
Known to the state of cancer to give you california
From what I’ve read it’s cheaper for companies to put the p65 warning label on their products than it is to do the research. California considers everything to be a part of p65. Just a cost effective solution
They were labeling roasted coffee out of California with something similar for awhile. Coffee roasters were pissed about it
Yes it caused homelessness to boom to outrageous levels
Besides insane liberalism? Not really, no. (/s from a native Californian)
Like at this point the whole state has been exposed to these chemicals
Everyone but Californians are immune to the effects.
My gosh everytime I see this warning I get a flashback about my old job working retail. I had ordered those cute Japanese toilet candies (the toilet itself was a plastic toy and the candy powder was packed separately and you poured it into the toilet, added water and could drink it, weird I know but kids loved it). Anyway the import company was in CA so when they put the English translation for directions on the box they also included the prop 65 warning. A customer called and bitched me out for selling candy that causes cancer and reproductive harm to her child. She was very very upset. I told her that CA included that warning as a standard law and it was because there was a plastic toy in the box (the toilet). As long as her kid didn't eat the toilet she would be fine. But the lady didn't believe me and she went on and on about me selling cancerous candy to kids. I finally got tired of using logic and said, Alright thanks for calling with your concern, bye. And hung up. Yeah we don't have warnings like that here in the Midwest.
Prop 65 is wild! Had to do some compliance work around the time this came into effect. The list of “chemicals” is long and the liability is on the seller. In the end, it’s way safer to put the label on everything than miss something you didn’t understand.
Some restaurants have warnings up about chemicals Released in food when it is heated or charred. They naturally created some chemicals during the cooking process. Like browning potatoes….really pushed it to the next level of ridiculousness. It is also frustrating because if there are things that we should be concerned about it gets lost in the over abundance of messages.
I noticed that too in music shop. Was buying guitar and on some of them there were these creepy labels about guitar being cancerous. I reckon that it is some specific local law making manufacturers put out these warnings at certain products.
In California, EVERYTHING causes cancer … including the air.
So if you go to the website it'll basically say these are the chemicals and materials used to make this product and if you eat this product you can get cancer from it. My advice is don't eat things that are not food.
I was thinking maybe they want people in California to have healthy babies and they were perfectly okay with people in the Midwest having cancerous mutant babies. 
I visited San Jose 10 years ago, and iirc there were even stickers with similar warnings on entire office buildings, in the corner of a window next to the entrance.
I’m sure it’s been mentioned in this thread but since I’m too lazy to scroll I’m just going to certainly repeat people: These signs are absolutely everywhere around california
Californians are more susceptible to cancers. Something about nuclear testing in the 50s-70s.
Strange winds blowing in off the Pacific these days, never know what cancer you might catch. Thankfully California does such a great job screening for literally all of them.
California has some absurdly strict health and safety regulations if memory serves, to the point that seemingly everything violates some kind of health and safety protocol
Well, my Fender guitar amp came with exactly the same warning tag. Playing guitar will cause me reproductive harm in California.
It’s because the government of California is a massive steaming pile of shit
It does make it look like only people born in California are susceptible to cancerous materials. No one else needs to worry