Prop 65 is the notorious piece of California legislation that results in labels on countless products saying, "This product contains chemicals known to the state of California," etc. It's been criticized -- accurately, I think -- for casting too wide of a net, and therefore winding up crying wolf more than actually educating consumers about possible hazards.
But I think the really awful thing about it is that it doesn't require the companies to list what chemicals specifically triggered the Prop 65 warning.
My son got a model train set from the grandparents for Christmas, and it's got a Prop 65 warning, which has my wife spooked. I explained to her that, generally speaking, "known to the State of California to cause cancer" is a meaningless statement. But she wants to know exactly what the chemicals are, so she can make her own decision. And I can't tell her.
Most likely, it has something to do with the plastics, in which case "Don't let baby Griffy eat the trains" is plenty of precaution. But maybe it is the lubricants used on the track? In which case then maybe the really cautious approach would have my son washing his hands after using the train set.
I dunno, it's just frustrating. It is not right to go around scaremongering without explaining yourself.
Nunes said it was a “judgment call”
1 hour ago