Californian cancer warning

Discuss Spyderco's products and history.
BornIn1500
Member
Posts: 637
Joined: Tue May 08, 2018 10:04 pm

Re: Californian cancer warning

#41

Post by BornIn1500 »

The fact that Cali is always the most divisive state really speaks volumes about those who run it.
Last edited by BornIn1500 on Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Woodpuppy
Member
Posts: 3700
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:38 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Californian cancer warning

#42

Post by Woodpuppy »

MichaelScott wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:04 pm
Yep, stir fry is good, but sushi, mmmmmmm…
Agreed!!!
User avatar
SpyderEdgeForever
Member
Posts: 6325
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:53 pm
Location: USA

Re: Californian cancer warning

#43

Post by SpyderEdgeForever »

tvenuto wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:12 pm
You have to admit that putting a cancer warning on a sharpmaker is absurd.

The notion that Spyderco would be sued after someone got cancer (“I rue the day I sharpened that Delica!!! I’ll get you for this, Spyderco!!!) is equally absurd.
If you were to speculate, do you think any judge with even the least bit of rational thought would obviously throw out such a nonsensical case, of someone suing a company over that claim, or, in this day and age, there would be a potential danger of them siding against the company? That would be in the same league with someone suing Stanley Tools because they accidentally hit their thumb when using one of their hammers to hammer a nail.
User avatar
cabfrank
Member
Posts: 2857
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 9:07 pm
Location: Northern California, USA, Earth

Re: Californian cancer warning

#44

Post by cabfrank »

tvenuto wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:24 pm
That was a completely different scenario.
Of course. But not in concept.
User avatar
tvenuto
Member
Posts: 3790
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 8:16 am
Location: South Baltimore

Re: Californian cancer warning

#45

Post by tvenuto »

cabfrank wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 2:49 am
tvenuto wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:24 pm
That was a completely different scenario.
Of course. But not in concept.
Something to think about.
User avatar
The Deacon
Member
Posts: 25717
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:33 am
Location: Upstate SC, USA
Contact:

Re: Californian cancer warning

#46

Post by The Deacon »

cabfrank wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 2:49 am
tvenuto wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:24 pm
That was a completely different scenario.
Of course. But not in concept.

Not true. There was a direct, obvious, link between the temperature of the hot coffee and the burn. Whether McDonalds or the customers ineptitude was at fault, was the only question. Showing that a person's Spyderco Sharpmaker was the sole, or even a significant, source of exposure to whatever chemicals it contains would be difficult. Proving those particular chemicals were specifically responsible for their tumor or three headed child when many products in the average home contain something that California considers either carcinogenic or mutagenic would be virtually impossible.
Paul
My Personal Website ---- Beginners Guide to Spyderco Collecting ---- Spydiewiki
Deplorable :p
WTC # 1458 - 1504 - 1508 - Never Forget, Never Forgive!
User avatar
sal
Member
Posts: 16964
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Golden, Colorado USA

Re: Californian cancer warning

#47

Post by sal »

If we don't put the label on the product, any lawyer in CA can sue us. And trust me, they are lining up looking for prey.

sal
VashHash
Member
Posts: 4832
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:49 pm
Location: Louisiana

Re: Californian cancer warning

#48

Post by VashHash »

sal wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:00 am
If we don't put the label on the product, any lawyer in CA can sue us. And trust me, they are lining up looking for prey.

sal
It's a shame that this is what everything boils down to.
User avatar
Lord vader
Member
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:24 pm
Location: U.S.A.

Re: Californian cancer warning

#49

Post by Lord vader »

A trace amount of a chemical in a product is enough to trigger a proposition 65 warning label, doesn't necessarily mean that the product will cause cancer, or reproductive harm. I wouldn't worry about it.
btbyrd
Member
Posts: 89
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 11:07 am

Re: Californian cancer warning

#50

Post by btbyrd »

Bakeries and coffee shops in California have to display Prop 65 warnings because baked and roasted foods contain chemicals known to cause cancer. They used to have the same warning on bags of potato chips before manufacturers figured out ways to torture their production process to sidestep the regulation. I don't know if places selling french fries or freshly made chips have to display the warning, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Also cars and airplanes.

It's the sort of warning that defeats its own purpose. It's the parable of The Boy who Cried "Cancer!". If things like coffee, bread, french fries, automobiles, airplanes, and even Disneyland itself are forced into carring warning labels, warnings lose credibility. The Californian cancer warning often says more about the state of California than it does about the product it's trying to warn you about.
The Meat man
Member
Posts: 5856
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 8:01 pm
Location: Missouri, USA

Re: Californian cancer warning

#51

Post by The Meat man »

^Exactly.
The warnings are defeating themselves. They have become so ubiquitous that nobody pays any attention to them anyway.
- Connor

"What is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?"
User avatar
ZrowsN1s
Member
Posts: 7324
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:08 pm
Location: San Diego, California USA

Re: Californian cancer warning

#52

Post by ZrowsN1s »

The State of California (my state) has so many cancer causing items in it that I think it's suitable to say that entering the State of California may cause cancer due to exposure to all of the cancer causing items that reside within the state.

Therefore we must find a very large cancer warning label and cover the entire state with it as soon as possible.

Prop.65 warning: California may cause Cancer.
-Matt a.k.a. Lo_Que, loadedquestions135 I ❤ The P'KAL :bug-red

"The world of edges has a small doorway in, but opens into a cavern that is both wide and deep." -sal
"Ghost hunters scope the edge." -sal
garret
Member
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:28 pm

Re: Californian cancer warning

#53

Post by garret »

Friends, with the best of my intentions I will tell you that they have very strange laws on the other side of the ocean. Greetings and I hope not to offend anyone seriously!
Last edited by garret on Sun Oct 07, 2018 1:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sjucaveman
Member
Posts: 1158
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 1:00 pm
Location: Central Mn

Re: Californian cancer warning

#54

Post by Sjucaveman »

ZrowsN1s wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 1:13 pm
The State of California (my state) has so many cancer causing items in it that I think it's suitable to say that entering the State of California may cause cancer due to exposure to all of the cancer causing items that reside within the state.

Therefore we must find a very large cancer warning label and cover the entire state with it as soon as possible.

Prop.65 warning: California may cause Cancer.
Warning: reading California's crazy laws may cause a brain tumor. (Or at least make you scratch your head)
I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. Philippians 4:13
Adam
TomAiello
Member
Posts: 6655
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 10:34 pm
Location: Twin Falls, ID

Re: Californian cancer warning

#55

Post by TomAiello »

VashHash wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:19 am
sal wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:00 am
If we don't put the label on the product, any lawyer in CA can sue us. And trust me, they are lining up looking for prey.

sal
It's a shame that this is what everything boils down to.
Last time I looked (it's been a few years), 50% of the world's lawyers practiced in the USA, and 70% of the nations lawyers practiced in California, meaning that 35% of the lawyers _on Earth_ practice in California.
SF Native
Member
Posts: 1431
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 8:25 am
Location: Fairfax, Ca

Re: Californian cancer warning

#56

Post by SF Native »

Ugh. It’s a proposition law. My apologies to the world. CA has this process where citizens can make laws in the form of a proposition. It’s been nothing but a scam for years. Every year we have everyone from lawyers, doctors, to the garbage man trying to pass some law that will make them rich. They almost never pass. They are always poorly written and have unintended consequences. I vote no on all of them and have for years. And you can complain about CA but most of these propositions are written by people on other states.
User avatar
cabfrank
Member
Posts: 2857
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 9:07 pm
Location: Northern California, USA, Earth

Re: Californian cancer warning

#57

Post by cabfrank »

The Deacon wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 4:09 am
cabfrank wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 2:49 am
tvenuto wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:24 pm
That was a completely different scenario.
Of course. But not in concept.

Not true. There was a direct, obvious, link between the temperature of the hot coffee and the burn. Whether McDonalds or the customers ineptitude was at fault, was the only question. Showing that a person's Spyderco Sharpmaker was the sole, or even a significant, source of exposure to whatever chemicals it contains would be difficult. Proving those particular chemicals were specifically responsible for their tumor or three headed child when many products in the average home contain something that California considers either carcinogenic or mutagenic would be virtually impossible.
Your opinion. Mine is that it is also absurd and virtually impossible to blame the coffee, or McDonald's, for the the fact that you spilled it, and burned yourself. But that's what happened. As Sal said, there are probably lawyers just waiting to take any case, and try to prove damages, and sometimes they win.
User avatar
Tucson Tom
Member
Posts: 1629
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:19 pm
Location: Somewhere in Arizona

Re: Californian cancer warning

#58

Post by Tucson Tom »

dreadpirate wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 8:26 am
Accutron wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 5:18 am
Don't eat your Sharpmaker.
Good advice! :D
Too late! Man, I wish I had discovered this forum sooner.
ThePeacent
Member
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:45 am
Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: Californian cancer warning

#59

Post by ThePeacent »

this came in my Custom Shop Buck 110... :confused: :p

Image
User avatar
The Deacon
Member
Posts: 25717
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:33 am
Location: Upstate SC, USA
Contact:

Re: Californian cancer warning

#60

Post by The Deacon »

cabfrank wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:42 pm
The Deacon wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 4:09 am
cabfrank wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 2:49 am
tvenuto wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:24 pm
That was a completely different scenario.
Of course. But not in concept.

Not true. There was a direct, obvious, link between the temperature of the hot coffee and the burn. Whether McDonalds or the customers ineptitude was at fault, was the only question. Showing that a person's Spyderco Sharpmaker was the sole, or even a significant, source of exposure to whatever chemicals it contains would be difficult. Proving those particular chemicals were specifically responsible for their tumor or three headed child when many products in the average home contain something that California considers either carcinogenic or mutagenic would be virtually impossible.
Your opinion. Mine is that it is also absurd and virtually impossible to blame the coffee, or McDonald's, for the the fact that you spilled it, and burned yourself. But that's what happened. As Sal said, there are probably lawyers just waiting to take any case, and try to prove damages, and sometimes they win.

I agree that blaming McDonalds, rather than the customer's own clumsiness, was absurd but I still say that it's patently obvious that the coffee, and only the coffee, caused the burn while trying to establish the chemical or chemicals in one specific product as the primary cause of a persons cancer or birth defects would be much harder. Just think back on how hard it was for smokers to win lawsuits against cigarette companies, Vietnam era vets to win them against Dow Chemical for Agent Orange, or the folks up in Niagara Falls to win them against Hooker Chemical for Love Canal.
Paul
My Personal Website ---- Beginners Guide to Spyderco Collecting ---- Spydiewiki
Deplorable :p
WTC # 1458 - 1504 - 1508 - Never Forget, Never Forgive!
Post Reply