Bill to put health warnings on soda and sugary drinks advances in California

Re:Bill to put health warnings on soda and sugary drinks adv... by opencl on Friday May 24, 2019 @09:44AM (#20001352)

The problem with prop 65 is that it has a ridiculously low bar for evidence of harm for chemicals to be placed on the list. So the list is full of things that were found to cause cancer when fed to rats at ridiculously high doses, and then not found to cause cancer in human studies.

Like acrylamide, which has landed every restaurant a prop 65 warning because it is present in literally all baked goods and also coffee.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bill to put health warnings on soda and sugary drinks adv... by jasonsync on Friday May 24, 2019 @10:15AM (#20001733)

That's a more difficult problem to solve. Can we trust these warnings? Do we err on the side of caution? Seems like some humans are more sensitive than others to certain chemicals, and that there's motivation from both sides .. corporate and even political.

Imagine a warning label: this product known to cause global warming in a test environment ....

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bill to put health warnings on soda and sugary drinks adv... by djrogers on Friday May 24, 2019 @12:08PM (#20002962)

> Can we trust these warnings?

If we 'trusted' all prop 65 warnings, nobody would ever enter a building, as all of them have that warning tag on them somewhere.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bill to put health warnings on soda and sugary drinks adv... by jasonsync on Tuesday June 04, 2019 @09:07AM (#20094573)

Risk vs. reward?

[ Parent | on HN ]