3 ms·

Are you alleging that California claims stuff to be carcinogenic without evidence? Do you have a supposed motive? Any evidence? Whilst it's a bit of a meme,

Are you alleging that California claims stuff to be carcinogenic without evidence? Do you have a supposed motive? Any evidence? Whilst it's a bit of a meme, isn't it just true that a lot of stuff is carcinogenic.

ceejayoz 5mo ago
California’s threshold is far too low to be useful. The end result is basically https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarm_fatigue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarm_fatigue
- PaulHoule 5mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide is the one that gets me. Fried snacks from Asia frequently have a Prop 65 warning. Thing is it is produced by ordinary cooking techniques from ordinary and can be found in both traditional and ultra-processed foods.
voakbasda 5mo ago
Well, the “experts” say a charred steak is carcinogenic. At that point, I stopped listening to anything out of their mouths. It might be true, but it’s also a matter of degree. California has set such a low threshold that one cannot take their label seriously about anything. It applies to nearly everything, making it effectively a useless warning.
- lanstin 5mo ago
  It also never lists the specific substances nor what one can do about it (not enter the building, don’t lick the ceiling, wear a mask, whatever). Good intentioned but utterly useless.
- robocat 5mo ago
  In the seventies, the view was often expressed to me by lay audiences that there was no point in stopping smoking, since everything was a carcinogen and so ubiquitous as to be unavoidable. This view was certainly pushed by the tobacco companies with the bizarre support of many environmentalists, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0273230087900493 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0273230087... Also see carcinization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcinisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcinisation
dlcarrier 5mo ago
Pretty much every state, national, and international health or safety organizations deals with possible carcinogens, or sometimes probable carcinogens, because testing to prove something is a carcinogen is expensive.

ceejayoz 5mo ago

California’s threshold is far too low to be useful. The end result is basically https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarm_fatigue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarm_fatigue

PaulHoule 5mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide is the one that gets me. Fried snacks from Asia frequently have a Prop 65 warning. Thing is it is produced by ordinary cooking techniques from ordinary and can be found in both traditional and ultra-processed foods.

voakbasda 5mo ago

Well, the “experts” say a charred steak is carcinogenic. At that point, I stopped listening to anything out of their mouths. It might be true, but it’s also a matter of degree. California has set such a low threshold that one cannot take their label seriously about anything. It applies to nearly everything, making it effectively a useless warning.

lanstin 5mo ago
It also never lists the specific substances nor what one can do about it (not enter the building, don’t lick the ceiling, wear a mask, whatever). Good intentioned but utterly useless.
robocat 5mo ago
In the seventies, the view was often expressed to me by lay audiences that there was no point in stopping smoking, since everything was a carcinogen and so ubiquitous as to be unavoidable. This view was certainly pushed by the tobacco companies with the bizarre support of many environmentalists, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0273230087900493 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0273230087... Also see carcinization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcinisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcinisation

dlcarrier 5mo ago

Pretty much every state, national, and international health or safety organizations deals with possible carcinogens, or sometimes probable carcinogens, because testing to prove something is a carcinogen is expensive.