Sure. The article also goes along the line of "let's label things as a great way to build trust with consumers", and that's obviously a good thing. Though I wo

Sure. The article also goes along the line of "let's label things as a great way to build trust with consumers", and that's obviously a good thing. Though I wonder if the asymmetrical requirements for this type of labelling is overall a good thing. Consumers will instinctively treat it as a warning message. Along similar lines, is it a good thing that medicines are strictly regulated and labelled? Definitely. Is it a good thing that unproven and scientifically highly implausible "cures" get placed on the same shelves, sans warnings? I'm not so sure. We shouldn't be creating market opportunities for lesser technologies aimed at an uniformed public.