"TCP is recognized in California as a human carcinogen, and extensive animal studies have shown that it causes cancer. Short term exposure to TCP can cause throat and eye irritation and can affect muscle coordination and concentration. Long term exposure can affect body weight and kidney function."

Doesn't sound like something one should gargle tho.

It's literally the intended correct medical use.

https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/files/pil.3917.pdf

> TCP is recognized in California as a human carcinogen, and extensive animal studies have shown that it causes cancer.

They also say that about coffee in California.

You don't want to drink this, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1,2,3-Trichloropropane and the data supporting it is far better than coffee. (the california law is stupid, but some of the things it lists actually are dangerous).

Different TCP. Unsurprisingly, those 3 letters are used in a variety of applications, often in overlapping domains.

Should be able to guess which given that we're talking about gargling it for its antiseptic qualities.

I've never heard of TCP, I don't think it's marketed in the US at all.

It's a traditional antiseptic introduced in the UK in the 1920s. It has a strong, somewhat medicinal, smell. I gargled it once, and regretted it because it tastes foul.

http://www.capetalk.co.za/articles/303079/new-antiseptic-tcp...

https://www.wilko.com/en-uk/tcp-antiseptic-liquid-200ml/p/02...

Ah, that's how you know it must work. The worst tasting a medicine is, the better it must be for you. Stands to reason.

It is effective against gingivitis and mouth ulcers and will also ward off vampires and werewolves. Actually smells better than garlic and is cheaper than silver, so win win.

It really isn't that bad to gargle but not particularly pleasant either. It is effective though and that's the real point.

There are carcinogens and there are CARCINOGENS. Hot water is technically a carcinogen. Drinking water that is too hot can increase the risk of throat cancer. This doesn't mean we can't use them. We just have to be aware of the risks.

https://www.nhs.uk/news/cancer/drinking-very-hot-tea-linked-...

> We just have to be aware of the risks.

No, not if the "risks" is comically small. The warning label becomes meaningless when applied to anything with an astronomically low chance of causing cancer.

Like seaweed snacks...

The list of things California says doesn't cause cancer is much smaller than its list of recognized human carcinogens. And animals studies are not 1:1 to humans.

It's literally a medical antiseptic designed to be gargled after dilution.

there is confusion in this thread due to multiple chemicals having the initials TCP, one is an antiseptic the other is a harsh solvent

Wouldn't be surprised if both are on the list. Alcohol based mouthwash has a warning label about causing cancer too.

Baked goods carry a warning label about causing cancer. I'm convinced this is some sort of live study about warning dilution.

To be fair my multimeter has that cancer warning on it from California. A multimeter!?!?

My new Fender guitar had a warning printed out in the case saying the product contains chemicals known to cause cancer...

Titled: California Proposition 65 Warning

Probably not RoHS compliant :)

It’s definitely RoHS compliant as I’m in the UK and it says it is on the box.

Fluke 87V so not some cheapy banger.

My guess is lead solder, although there are lots of other possibilities.

I believe lead-free solder is required for RoHS compliance.

I would not put too much stock in Prop 65 warnings. Any restaurant with grilled or fried food is required to have them. Eyeglasses are known to cause cancer in CA. Until recently, so was coffee (buy after a long legal battle, coffee is no longer known to cause cancer here)

California should label things that don’t cause cancer. It’ll be a shorter list. My doormats have the same warning (at least the carcinogen part).