Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   General Cycling Discussion (https://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/)
-   -   Proposition 65 Warnings (https://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/1216872-proposition-65-warnings.html)

taylorgeo 11-05-20 01:02 PM

Proposition 65 Warnings
 
I've noticed some manufactures of cycling apparel and gloves have Proposition 65 Warnings on the label.

Does anyone avoid purchasing such apparel and gloves?

thinktubes 11-05-20 01:17 PM

ECC = everything causes cancer. Deal with it.

FiftySix 11-05-20 01:33 PM


Originally Posted by taylorgeo (Post 21776587)
I've noticed some manufactures of cycling apparel and gloves have Proposition 65 Warnings on the label.

Does anyone avoid purchasing such apparel and gloves?

A California law that seems to affect everyone that might sell something that ends up in California. So Prop 65 warnings are added which really don't mean squat since the products are still able to be sold and purchased in California.

The best I can tell, 95% of all products I've come across in the last year have a Prop 65 label. No matter where that product came from or where it is sold to.

Bottom line, the Prop 65 label does not affect my purchases.

Germany_chris 11-05-20 01:42 PM

As a real answer to your question I don’t wear anything that has a prop 65 warning

Mojo31 11-05-20 01:45 PM

I'll buy it, but try not to ingest it.

mstateglfr 11-05-20 01:46 PM


Originally Posted by taylorgeo (Post 21776587)
I've noticed some manufactures of cycling apparel and gloves have Proposition 65 Warnings on the label.

Does anyone avoid purchasing such apparel and gloves?

I dont know of any clothing I own that has a prop65 warning.
I also dont look for it before ripping off the tags.

I do not avoid purchasing clothing with that warning as it never enters my mind as a consideration before purchase. Now I am slightly curious to see how much cycling clothing has a prop65 warning.

FiftySix 11-05-20 01:57 PM

Prop 65 on clothing, but "complies with all state and federal product safety standards".


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...558574e5bd.jpg

bbbean 11-05-20 03:16 PM


Originally Posted by taylorgeo (Post 21776587)
I've noticed some manufactures of cycling apparel and gloves have Proposition 65 Warnings on the label.

Does anyone avoid purchasing such apparel and gloves?


I'm sure someone does, but the warnings are ridiculous. The State of California uses unrealistic standards and ignores the simple fact that dosage makes the poison. Caffeine and alcohol may cause cancer. Everything MAY cause cancer.

Buy the gear you need. If you're buying from a reputable store and a reputable brand, it's safe.

CargoDane 11-05-20 03:18 PM

I bought an MSR stove at one point (the Reactor). It too had that warning. When they warn about everything, it becomes meaningless.

GlennR 11-05-20 04:08 PM

I just bought some N95 masks made in the USA and they have a Prop 65 warning.

Pratt 11-05-20 06:51 PM

Bu t they continue to make a glaring omission. Sunlight is not just suspected, but actually, known to cause cancer, and yet it has no warnings.

cb400bill 11-05-20 06:55 PM

As I don't live in California, I'm safe.

unterhausen 11-05-20 06:55 PM

The fact that it's called "Prop 65" means that it was a ballot initiative and it didn't become law through the normal legislative process. I'm a little surprised that nobody in California has introduced a proposition to cancel it.

Lemond1985 11-05-20 06:57 PM


Originally Posted by Pratt (Post 21777083)
Bu t they continue to make a glaring omission. Sunlight is not just suspected, but actually, known to cause cancer, and yet it has no warnings.

Sadly, there's no way to squeeze money out of the manufacturer.

JohnDThompson 11-05-20 07:37 PM


Originally Posted by CargoDane (Post 21776762)
I bought an MSR stove at one point (the Reactor). It too had that warning. When they warn about everything, it becomes meaningless.

Nah, it protects the manufacturer from liability. If you bought it and use it despite the warning, the risk is on you.

CargoDane 11-05-20 07:41 PM


Originally Posted by JohnDThompson (Post 21777139)
Nah, it protects the manufacturer from liability. If you bought it and use it despite the warning, the risk is on you.

If so, it's not a warning, and it could have been relegated to the documents/user manual. Instead, it was wired (a thin wire) with other huge warnings about safety. Had to use a wire cutter to cut off the wire without destroying the cooker itself.

Some it is to protect themselves from liability, other things are by law (Prop 65).

Maelochs 11-06-20 08:05 AM

Life remains the leading cause of death---and Nobody Talks About It.

The fact that there is no proof of the conspiracy is proof of the conspiracy.

Oxygen Oxide is so corrosive it actually destroys iron and steel. Yet no one warns us? And Dihydrogen Oxide is almost a universal solvent, and is implicated in countless swimming, boating, and fishing deaths---yet no one says a word.

We should be thankful that those brave Californians are not afraid to be afraid of everything, and are willing to spend money they don't have to warn the rest of us.

Reflector Guy 11-06-20 08:14 AM


Originally Posted by Maelochs (Post 21777692)
And Dihydrogen Oxide is almost a universal solvent, and is implicated in countless swimming, boating, and fishing deaths---yet no one says a word.

That is one crazy substance. It is used to make concrete, it is used to smother fires..... And some people actually drink the stuff!

Milton Keynes 11-06-20 12:01 PM


Originally Posted by thinktubes (Post 21776611)
ECC = everything causes cancer. Deal with it.

But only in California.

Milton Keynes 11-06-20 12:05 PM


Originally Posted by bbbean (Post 21776755)
I'm sure someone does, but the warnings are ridiculous. The State of California uses unrealistic standards and ignores the simple fact that dosage makes the poison. Caffeine and alcohol may cause cancer. Everything MAY cause cancer.

And when they test substances on laboratory rats, they tend to give them a proportionate dosage that's WAY above what the average person is likely to encounter.

Gresp15C 11-06-20 12:07 PM

The cancer warnings are just the unintended side effect of Prop 65 that is visible to the rest of the world. The law created an incentive to over-report toxic substances in products, hence the vague labels.

But people forget the actual reason for Prop 65, which was that the EPA was not enforcing its own regulations in California, and the people wanted a stricter law. And the law has been credited with greatly reducing toxic emissions according to what I've been able to dig up on the topic.

Milton Keynes 11-06-20 12:08 PM


Originally Posted by unterhausen (Post 21777089)
The fact that it's called "Prop 65" means that it was a ballot initiative and it didn't become law through the normal legislative process. I'm a little surprised that nobody in California has introduced a proposition to cancel it.

So, in other words, it is a measure voted on by a bunch of idiots in the voting population, rather than a measure dreamed up by an idiot representative of a bunch of idiots in the voting population.

Milton Keynes 11-06-20 12:10 PM


Originally Posted by Maelochs (Post 21777692)
Life remains the leading cause of death---and Nobody Talks About It.

Just like how marriage is the chief cause of divorce. The thing about life, though, is that nobody gets out of it alive.

CargoDane 11-06-20 12:17 PM


Originally Posted by Gresp15C (Post 21778048)
The cancer warnings are just the unintended side effect of Prop 65 that is visible to the rest of the world. The law created an incentive to over-report toxic substances in products, hence the vague labels.

But people forget the actual reason for Prop 65, which was that the EPA was not enforcing its own regulations in California, and the people wanted a stricter law. And the law has been credited with greatly reducing toxic emissions according to what I've been able to dig up on the topic.

That's sounds right. It's just annoying it is everywhere. It loses its meaning.

phughes 11-06-20 01:00 PM


Originally Posted by taylorgeo (Post 21776587)
I've noticed some manufactures of cycling apparel and gloves have Proposition 65 Warnings on the label.

Does anyone avoid purchasing such apparel and gloves?

No, I just don't eat the gloves, and I avoid California since the state must be full of people who would eat gloves.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:27 AM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.