Fuses cause cancer in the State of California - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: X
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 04:08:16 am
content: I received my latest shipment from DigiKey which included some fuses.Apparently RoHS-compliant fuses contain lead, which is known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm, thanks to the presence of lead.So users of Weller irons can rest easy knowing that, although their iron might catch fire, at least they won't get cancer.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 04:21:13 am
content: It says "including".In this case most likely reason for the warning is plastic part of the fuse. P65 list includes a lot of common plastics and solvents used in production of plastic parts.

author: X
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 04:29:35 am
content: It does say "including Lead" but surely if the plastic housing contained lead, it wouldn't be RoHS compliant?I also have fuse holders in that shipment where the warning says "including Cobalt  oxide" which I presume have something to do with what you mention, or even the contacts.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 04:33:19 am
content: Plastic does not contain lead. It is the plastic itself that is potentially dangerous.I'm not sure what cobalt oxide would be doing in the fuses. It is often used as a blue die. Were those holders colored?

author: X
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 04:47:47 am
content: So why would they even mention lead on the warning? I could understand if the plastic had something else in it (then they should say "including ").The fuse holders are black, and there are no components in the holders of any other colour (other than the two metal contacts of course).

author: ArthurDent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:05:26 am
content: This is a new requirement that took place on August 30, 2018 to regulations that have been in place since 1986 from California. I just got a catalog from Marlin P. Jones & Assoc.INC, in Florida and every item on every page had a warning symbol on the item and at the bottom of every page in the entire catalog was this warning message."WARNING: All products on this page can expose you to chemicals including terabromobisphenol-A, lead, nickel, styrene which are known to the state of California to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm. For more information visitwww.P65Warnings.ca.gov"I live in New Hampshire, BTW.

author: jh15
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:12:16 am
content: I got dragged kicking and screaming to Maine from NH. Geeze no sales tax, no income tax, less light pollution than maine, though PSNH tries to ruin the sky anyway, rivers clean enough to swim in, maybe not now...

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:12:22 am
content: "Plastic" fuses are generally amelamine composite. Formaldehyde is on the P65 list.

author: Tomorokoshi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:20:03 am
content: It's a very broad list. At first glance it appears to be overdoing it; another foible of irrational government overreach.However, if we look at the history of chemicals that were widely used and are now strictly controlled, most reasonable people wouldn't consider using them broadly without careful controls.For metals, lead, mercury, and cadmium were widely used, and all were responsible for widespread public health issues.If we narrow the scope to electronics, formaldehyde, PCBs, and asbestos were also hazards. That 55 year old piece of Hewlett Packard equipment on my table? Yes, there are some quite troublesome chemicals in there.It took a buildup of public health events before those materials were restricted. With the much higher levels of mass production and mass consumption these days, at least moving the awareness of the potential of issues closer to the source where the component is designed or designed into a product will help to mitigate issues in the future.It could be considered to be an inconvenience, but it also makes for another engineering specification and engineering goal.

author: ruffy91
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:24:00 am
content: Does anybody know the fable of the boy who cried wolf?...

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:25:01 am
content: My only complaint about P65 is that it does not require to identify exact items from the list.Right now if walk by any office building in CA you will see that warning. And it may mean that nuclear waste is handled inside, or people are smoking. Or anything in between.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:28:54 am
content: Quote from: ruffy91 on December 31, 2018, 05:24:00 amThose warnings prevent lawsuits. There are still commercials from sleazy lawyers asking to contact them if you have mesothelioma. They try to milk money from corporations using people's disease.Having an over-cautious list helps with that, since the only people getting any money here are those lawyers. This is stupid, but this is American way of doing things.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:41:34 am
content: If you live in California, you get used to the fact that nearlyeverythingis known to the State of California to cause cancer or other harm. The warning is so ubiquitous as to be meaningless these days.Also, I don't think it's fair to blame government overreach for this. Apparently it is the result of Proposition 65, which was mandated by popular vote.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:41:58 am
content: Everything causes cancer in the state of California. Their prop. 65 has been the butt of jokes for decades. The powers that be in CA seem blissfully unaware that they are the laughing stock of the nation. There are SO many things on the warning list that it's completely meaningless, and absolutely useless as a tool to manage risk.

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:47:27 am
content: Yeah, it's mostly useless. It didn't have to be, but, you know, politicians.The warning is only required for items that are sold, used, or consumed in California. There is no penalty for unnecessary warnings, and burden of proof is on the producer, not the government. So the safest solution to avoid legal problems is just put the warning on everything.Apparently, despite being in effect for over 30 years, there is no evidence that the regulation has done anything to reduce cancer rates in California.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:52:18 am
content: It would be useful if it actually contained information about the substances.Consider nutrition information label on the food. The label is present everywhere, so you may also argue that it is useless (So what? Everything contains high fructose corn syrup). But with the label it is up to me to research and decide whether I want to be anywhere near the product.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:55:32 am
content: Well duh, how could it possibly reduce the cancer rates? The warning is on everything, I don't live in CA and practically everything I buy has a warning that it contains substances known by the state of California to cause cancer, everyone just laughs about it. I've never heard of anyone taking it seriously, it's a joke.And yeah, if it was a warning that listed specific substances then it could conceivably have some useful purpose, but as implemented it is both useless and absurd and only serves to give an impression that California is a silly place inhabited by a bunch of fools.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 06:26:26 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on December 31, 2018, 05:52:18 amActually, very little if anything I buy contains high fructose corn syrup. I look at the labels and avoid things with that in the list of ingredients. I also avoid products containing canola oil or soybean oil. It is possible to make choices with labels that contain specific information.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 06:28:30 am
content: Quote from: IanB on December 31, 2018, 06:26:26 amExactly! Imagine if P65 warnings also contained actual information. I could chose to use products with lead in them, but avoid asbestos. Everyone could decide what their allowed substances vs convenience are.

author: X
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 06:57:36 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on December 31, 2018, 05:28:54 amThere needs to be some better legislation then, ensuring that theidiotperson filing the lawsuit took reasonable steps to ensure their own safety. The fact that this is not required anywhere except California is a joke, and as can be seen by my fuse example, results in stupid but comical situations.A few weeks ago, I found a pair of calipers in the hardware store with a warning to wear eye protection when using them.I'm not 100% sure what the standard of proof for civil proceedings like that are in the USA, but in Australia the standard of proof in a typical civil suit is "balance of probabilities." It means "if there's proof of a reasonable chance that something happened, then we can safely assume something happened."As some pointed above, I wouldn't have an issue with the warnings if they were more specific. What substances, and what cancer are they known to have caused, for example.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 08:07:10 am
content: Quote from: X on December 31, 2018, 06:57:36 amAgain, it helps to understand the system of ballot propositions in California. Members of the public can submit proposals to be put to a popular ballot in an election, and if enough people vote yes they become law. The same situation could happen in any state anywhere in the world that allows propositions to be put to a popular vote outside the legislature. (Case in point, the UK and Brexit.)It may be undesirable to leave law making to legislative bodies, but it is even less desirable to leave law making to the public at large.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 08:19:49 am
content: Quote from: IanB on December 31, 2018, 08:07:10 amI think the problem is lack of followup, not the initial ballot. This is a good law in its nature. Practical implementation showed some issues. In case of engineering project, there will be an investigation and an ECO. In case of a law there is nothing unless some interested group pushes really hard again. And it is hard to maintain that interest for a large group of people. This is understandable, there are other issues as well.The laws need to have "owners" that would be focused on specific laws. Similar to how industrial standards have committees working on a specific standard and only on that standard. We don't have Wi-Fi people go and all of a sudden contribute to food industry standards.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 11:37:17 am
content: so do non vacuum relays and most switches.If you look at industries that work with arc suppression systems for mechanical switching, they list air pollution decrease as a benefit of using their systemsdid you ever see what happens if a glass fuse overloads? you get copper plating near by, from vaporized metal and whatever else is in the fuse including glass turning into plasma which condenses into a gas.The chemistry is not that well known and its possible the hot plasma acts to strip the PCB and shit.And hot ozone will react with plasticizers to possibly make dioxanes (they seem to be produced by burning plastic trash, even in well made hot incinerators).Also the arc will make ozone and the metal is turned into plasma, so its similar to being exposed to a electric welder. But you don;'t normally weld copper too often.I recommend ceramic fuses anyway. Maybe not a good idea to breath deep when you service something that is not well ventilated that is doing lots of switching at high currents for long periods of time.it always made me wonder if PCB heatsinks are a good idea or if they can possibly turn the PCB into a slow vapor generator.I would like to see warm PCBs connected to a gas chromatograph compared to cooler ones.

author: German_EE
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 04:31:01 pm
content: <sigh>http://www.lazerhorse.org/2013/06/15/list-daily-mail-give-cancer/#The list is very long and by the time you have finished reading it there will be no point getting out of bed in the morning.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 04:36:00 pm
content: I don't think its fair to lump a engineered electrical device with potato chip concerns

author: Raj
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 04:36:49 pm
content: you know, it's better to put that warning on there, than someone doing some stupid research and then blaming your new old stock for cancer

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:56:57 pm
content: As has been already observed, many vendors (like MPJA and All Electronics) have taken to simply labeling EVERYTHING in order to stay within the idiotic law. Of course a warning that applies to everything contains no useful information.Yes, it was a silly proposition, but the state has historically struck down other propositions after the voters approved them.

author: ruffy91
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 06:07:30 pm
content: In most other legislations you would get in big trouble with these warnings.Why?Because if someone gets cancer and blames you you would have a good chance to lose the case in front of a judge. Because you sold something where you KNEW it could cause cancer.The same applies for security measures on electromechanical machines (CNC, 6 axis roboter etc.)Sometimes customers want to have a machine without the standard security measures (light curtain, two hand switches etc.).They offer to write a letter which tells that they take all the liability. Never ever take it.If someone dies you will get sued, because you intentionally sold something you knew could kill someone. Better not to have a paper trail and the customer removes the security measures itself.

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 06:09:45 pm
content: Note the language: "Known to the State of California", not "known to us".Of course because I know the State of California knows something does not imply that I know it. The State could be wrong.Quote from: ruffy91 on December 31, 2018, 06:07:30 pmA hopeless legal standard. Anyone with a brain knows that common items like steak knives or frying pans can be lethal.As the recent EU Copyright legislation shows, the sorry state of the US legal system doesn't mean that other places are better.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 06:44:17 pm
content: Quote from: ataradov on December 31, 2018, 05:28:54 amThis is exactly the reason for all these warnings and scaremongering. You can't have rational scientific discussion if lawyers are trying to make a living by exaggerating the risks.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 07:11:51 pm
content: Somehow 49 other states seem to get by without warnings on *everything* that it causes cancer.I can't count the number of times I've seen someone look at that label and say something along the lines of "Hahah good thing I'm not in California!"

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 07:14:23 pm
content: some how california has better cancer rates then most states, take a lookdespite all the sunny weather.https://www.businessinsider.com/map-of-cancer-rates-in-the-united-states-2017-5?IR=T#this-map-looks-at-the-rate-of-new-cancer-cases-by-state-per-100000-people-this-is-specifically-looking-at-2013-which-is-the-most-recent-year-available-the-darker-the-color-the-higher-the-rate-1it almost looks like a health cluster around California actually.maybe its all the 'new age bullshit' . I heard that kinda stuff is popular in Colorado too.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 07:29:40 pm
content: Seems like earlier in this thread someone posted a study showing that California did not have lower cancer rates than elsewhere. That's the problem with statistics, it's very easy to massage them into supporting whatever result you want. I remember a math teacher I had in highschool quoted something along the lines of "There are three kinds of liars out there. Liars, damn liars and statisticians." It was mostly a humorous comment he had heard somewhere but there is some truth to it.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 07:35:52 pm
content: Quote from: amyk on January 01, 2019, 06:44:17 pmEspecially those assholes that encourage suig over drugs causing this and that, and the ones purpetuating the stupid talcum powder cancer myth. There was even one that claimed you could sue over chemo causing hair-loss.Makes me want to prank call the hell out of the bastards with an untracable autodialer. They're nothing more than dirty phone scammers who happen to have legit businesses.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 07:46:35 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on January 01, 2019, 07:29:40 pmwhere?i dunno if I put too much faith in your disregard for medical research but whatever

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 08:47:58 pm
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on January 01, 2019, 07:46:35 pmHe's probably disregarding the same "medical research" that just popped up on my TV saying Roundup causes lymphoma!Talcum powder yet again!

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 08:52:19 pm
content: Of course, the issue is NOT what is the current cancer rate in California today.The issue is whether the rate has gone DOWN after Prop 65 warnings went on everything?If that were the case, wouldn't we expect loud proclamations of success? I haven't noticed any. Have you?Now, coffee must be labeled as containing a "California Carcinogen". (Acrylamide) Starbucks must be thrilled.Never mind that you would drown in the amount of coffee it would take to produce any significant risk from Acrylamide.Will they require barrage balloons floating in the Los Angeles basin smog to fly warnings about the air quality?"WARNING: The air you are breathing contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause Cancer....."

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 09:36:59 pm
content: culture may have preceded law by the nature of the people that live there and the rules were perhaps a response to perceived threats?you know, keeping the status quo.california had a good health reputation for a long time before 1986compare the coast lines, the area around new york looks like it has chicken poxhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Superfund_sites

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 09:44:11 pm
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on January 01, 2019, 08:52:19 pmI have already encountered this warning in an underground parking lot.

author: calexanian
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2019, 11:56:00 pm
content: That is basically compulsory on all non food or drug items in California. The key word on those labels is “Can” and go from there. Technically replacing a fuse in an oldPiece of gear “Can” or in this case could possibly expose one to lead. Super silly yes I know, but California is a silly place. Again, if it were not for my business being so gerographicaly tied I would have left years ago from all this rediculous garbage. Oh and for those not from here, the public actually voted for this kind of product labeling. Nanny state in Action, by our own hands.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 12:01:50 am
content: Quote from: calexanian on January 01, 2019, 11:56:00 pmI sort of agree, but not with this part. The public voted a long time ago and on a much simpler version of the law. But once it was in place, minor amendments did not require a public vote.The list of chemical was much shorter at the beginning. There is no way for public to know how the law will be developed after the vote is over. You think you are voting on a good thing, but then it turns out to be a bad thing. Nobody can predict this, but unfortunately it is very hard to change "bad" laws.There is really need to be a vote "do you still think P65 the way it is implemented right now a good thing?". And only after that vote you could blame the public.If somebody tells you that every decision they make ends up being a good one after multiple years, you know they are lying. Everybody makes mistakes, but in real life we have ways to correct them.And also, people that wrote Patriot Act said that the resulting law is not what they envisioned at all. Yet here we are.

author: calexanian
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 04:06:51 pm
content: I agree.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 07:16:13 pm
content: It's a common problem with laws that get voted in by the public, I've long had mixed feelings on the initiative process. On one hand it's nice that the public can create laws, however it's a double edged sword because the laws are often poorly crafted and rife with unintended consequences. Then there is the issue that the public is often not well informed, they'll vote on a law that "does X" not even realizing that "X" is only a portion of the law and it also does Y, Z, A, B and C. Many of the initiative laws also turn out to be unconstitutional and are soon struck down in court after wasting a bunch of resources to implement and then battle over.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 01:17:36 am
content: Quote from: IanB on December 31, 2018, 05:41:34 amWell, "government" in this case includes the popular vote. Just like Brexit. It is a part of the system of government. Like Mencken said "democracy is the theory that the people deserve to get what they vote and they deserve to get it good and hard". The people are now enjoying what they voted.I would vote for a proposition that promised two women to every man ... and two men for every woman.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 01:20:46 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on December 31, 2018, 05:52:18 amJust like every single web site pops up a warning that "this web site uses cookies". What a useless PITA!

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 01:22:09 am
content: They should also put a cancer warning out about the smoke from the wildfires.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 01:22:55 am
content: Quote from: soldar on January 03, 2019, 01:20:46 amTo be fair, that's because most website makes cop out. They put the burden on the visitor, while they really should be mitigating the requirements by properly designing their website. Complain to the website owner, even though he's likely to respond with some sob story about being forced to display the message.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 01:46:15 am
content: I don't really care about cookies, they're annoying but I can deal with them on my end. The warnings annoy me far more than the cookies do.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 01:46:31 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on January 03, 2019, 01:46:15 amHear, hear! +1"Cookies are know to the state of California to be annoying to the general public and may cause aggravation, high blood pressure, ulcers, homicidal thoughts, etc."