We are providing the following warning to products linked to this page:
Warning: This product may expose you chemicals, like lead, which are known to the state of California to cause cancer, and birth-defects, or other reproductive harm.
WHAT IS THE PROP 65 WARNING?
California’s Proposition 65 entitles California consumers to special warnings for products that contain chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm if those products expose consumers to such chemicals above certain threshold levels….Coffee products for example.
Periodically you will see a product that has a warning label denoting the following: “This product contains a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer or reproductive harm.” California has two different types of warnings – those for cancer and those for reproductive health effects.
Some products have one or the other of these warnings and some products have both warnings. These warnings are required by California labeling law Proposition 65 (or Prop 65 for short), which is meant to notify individuals in California of possible exposures to Prop 65-listed chemicals. Prop 65 does not ban the sale of any products containing these chemicals… it only requires warnings.
DOES THIS LAW APPLY EVERYWHERE?
The “Prop 65” warnings are only required under California law. Prop 65 criteria are among the most stringent and unrealistic standards in place anywhere.
WHAT KINDS OF SUBSTANCES REQUIRE WARNINGS?
Over 800 chemicals have been listed under California Prop 65. They include pesticides, heavy metals, food dyes, etc. Certain listed chemicals, such as lead, are widely distributed through the environment (air, soil, water, and rocks). As a result, these types of chemicals are naturally found in commonly eaten foods and in every grocery store throughout the world.
WHY DON’T ALL SIMILAR PRODUCTS CARRY THE WARNING?
There are 2 main reasons why a company would opt-out of placing the Prop 65warning label on their products.
1) They have no intention of selling to the state of California, which would necessarily preclude any possible lawsuit.
2) Organizations simply take advantage of the inconsistent Prop 65 enforcement. Obviously companies naturally want to shy away from any wording on their label relating the product they sell to cancer or birth-defects. A lack of warning on similar products does not mean that the product is free of the same substance, and at similar levels. At the end of the day, it remains at the company’s discretion to apply the warning label or not.
Comparison of the Prop 65 Standards vs National Standards
Let’s use lead as an example. Lead is a naturally occurring element that is found in the environment, including soil. According to the EPA, natural levels of lead in soil can range between 50 parts per million (ppm) and 400 ppm. Human-spread lead contamination widens this range, of course, with reports of over 10,000 ppm in certain types of areas, such as industrial facilities.
International standards for lead in dietary supplements and food are often set at no more than 5 ppm. The Prop 65 Safe Harbor Maximum Allowable Dose Level for lead is 0.5 micrograms per day, meaning that a person may not be exposed to lead above this amount, by any product, without a Prop 65 warning. Setting aside the difficulties of translating this exposure level to a concentration level in a specific product, applying this standard to herbs and supplements means that lead content levels would need to be many times lower than federal levels in order for a product to be sold without a Prop 65 warning.
To learn more about California’s Proposition 65 Warning, please feel free to follow the link below.