What is the pupose of the Cancer warning signs posted almost everywhere.in California?

Nanny state.

Some lobbying group back in 1985 decided that people needed to be warned about things they might come in contact with. So they got a law passed, which is entirely stupid and ineffective.

Read all about it(1986)

@elbanditoroso Thanks for the link. Now I know the rule. That looks like a case of good legislation gone bad. I noticed that there are trolls looking to slap lawsuits on facilities that don’t post and that 71% of all damages went to legal fees!
Ugh!
Does even one person say: “I’m not staying in that hotel because it uses cancer causing chemicals?” Can they find a hotel that doesn’t?

I would bet that 80% of hotels and restaurants have items made with cancer causing chemicals (anything with polyurethane, plastics, flame retardants), or use cancer causing chemicals (cleaners, most pesticides). Maybe staying in a tent is a better, more cancer free alternative (that’s a joke, btw).

I’ll bet it is more like 100% . The list is ridiculous. I see that until 2010 Saccharin was on it. That means a slimy lawsuit troll could walk into a restaurant not see a sign and then ask for saccharine for his coffee. If he gets it, boom! Threat of lawsuit and $2500 fine per day. The lawyer gets 71% and the straw man gets 29%. Justice served. Not!

Was probably useful when the law was originally passed (like with the old dry cleaning solvents or radioactive materials), but the tort lawyers and others ultimately messed it up to the point that it is silly. The labels I see usually say: “This item contains substances known to the State of California…”. If I were the state of Oregon, I would be annoyed with that know-it-all California.

CA seems to have the ability to go from common sense to the absurd faster than some cars go from zero to 60.

@jca Agreed. Living in a tent somewhere far away from civilization feels like the only safe way to live.

Two words: Screw California.

Californication.

As a proud California who voted for Prop 65, it may have outlived its usefulness a bit, but it has been an eye opener to learn that cancer causing chemicals are so prevalent in modern life.

And, it has helped raise awareness so that people don’t blindly believe, “oh it is harmless, otherwise somebody would tell us.” That is how we in California learned of vast exposure to BPA in infant supplies, and in the canning industry.

@zenvelo – I understand its original intent. But the signs are everywhere – every gas station, every restaurant, every office building – they’re so prevalent that they are immediately ignored. They’re alarmist for really no reason at all.

Worse yet, the signs are not remotely informative. Some substance somewhere might exceed a limit. Is it cleaning fluid? Is it orange juice (which is mildly acidic)? If the signs had some more information – what to be aware of, what to avoid – they might have some possibility of being taken seriously.

@zenvelo @elbanditoroso The sign I saw was prominently displayed on the wall adjacent to the hotel breakfast buffet. I did not see one person respond or avoid the food.
The sign appeared to be worthless. Less than worthless actually – It probably cost about $100 to make, mount on the wall, and keep clean. They could have purchased a lot of little soaps and toilet paper for that money.

Maybe I’m just used to it because I live in Califirnia. For the most part (like in hotels where it can’t really be avoided), I just kind of gloss over it.

But I find it helpful when purchasing items that are easily avoided. I’ve decided against purchasing things like shoes and purses that have this warning printed on them.

When I’m pregnant, I’m more likely to ask them what specifically is the concern. And then I weigh the risks accordingly.

I’d rather have the option to ignore the information. Rather than not having it at all.