Jump to content

California proposition 65 warning!


bottomfeed

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Downunderwonder said:

Everything I ever got from Parts Express came with a

Prop65 disclaimer. None of it is dangerous when used in the normal way. 

 

Which is why it's a strange thing to put on the package. 

 

I could understand if it was something to make sure it was disposed of properly, otherwise what's the point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TimR said:

I could understand if it was something to make sure it was disposed of properly, otherwise what's the point?

It's a CYA exercise.

 

There was a big discussion on Talkbass about it. As I recall it boiled down to:

 

The law only applies in California. Californians would have been unable to buy anything that hadn't passed muster. That didn't go down too well so they let out of state manufacturers have the disclaimers which of course had the Californian manufacturers crying foul so in the end the law became fully toothless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, TimR said:

You don't have that labelling on peanuts.

 

I must have been imagining it 🙄, although the less tentative 'contains peanuts' is more common.

 

Strictly a nut is any  fruit capsule that doesn't split open to release the contained seeds, so a peanut is a nut and a conker isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TimR said:

When it comes to allergies. Peanuts and nuts are different.

 

First link I found:

 

https://www.allergy.org.au/patients/food-allergy/peanut-tree-nut-and-seed-allergy

 

Not my point.

 

I don't want to confuse people with allergies, but most of the allergies to 'nuts' are tree-nut allergies. Yes peanuts are completely different (actually the Fabaceaae these days, Leguminosae has gone the way of Paipillionaceae).

 

Even this isn't very helpful, for example many close relatives of the panut are trees, and peanuts are more closely related to oak trees they oak trees are to ash trees.

 

Phylogenetic-tree-of-the-139-plant-famil

 

Vast numbers of plants have nuts, including peanuts, but unless you are a botanist (like me) you wouldn't consider them nuts. Similarly, Almonds and Walnuts aren't nuts, to a botanist they are seeds - they come from inside a fleshy outer fruit. It's just like a tomato is really a fruit, a pineapple is a vegetable and a strawberry is neither.

 

Edited by Stub Mandrel
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

 

Vast numbers of plants have nuts, including peanuts, but unless you are a botanist (like me) you wouldn't consider them nuts. It's just like a tomato is really a fruit and a pineapple is a vegetable.

 

 

It doesn't matter what you do for a living. If you are allergic to nuts you are not necessarily allergic to peanuts and vice versa.

 

Which is why the labelling is very specific on packets of peanuts and certain cakes and menus. 

 

I had a friend who was allergic to pecans but not peanuts. He died when someone used a cake slice used for a pecan pie to serve him cake. I have a friend who is allergic to walnuts but not peanuts.

 

As the article says, they have different proteins that trigger your immune system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TimR said:

 

It doesn't matter what you do for a living. If you are allergic to nuts you are not necessarily allergic to peanuts and vice versa.

 

Which is why the labelling is very specific on packets of peanuts and certain cakes and menus. 

 

I had a friend who was allergic to pecans but not peanuts. He died when someone used a cake slice used for a pecan pie to serve him cake. I have a friend who is allergic to walnuts but not peanuts.

 

As the article says, they have different proteins that trigger your immune system. 

 

Yes, yes. It's that old straw man again, I'm not saying they are the same, you decided I was.

 

That said the confusion among the laity is useful in terms of public safety as many people who have one allergy have the other, and they are processed in similar ways and often the same places.

 

Those who actually have an allergy usually have the capacity to make the discrimination themselves, it's best that non-experts err on the side of caution (which was my original point about all this labelling taking non-technical broad brush approaches which are most straightforward to implement at the expense of generating amusement rather than ambiguity).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

Yes, yes. It's that old straw man again, I'm not saying they are the same, you decided I was.

 

No straw man you specifically stated a peanut was a nut. And you said you'd seen 'may contain peanuts on a bag of peanuts'.

 

The wording of a packet of peanuts says 'warning may contain nuts'. It may also contain warnings about oils used in the production like sesame seed oils. 

 

It's irrelevant what the technical class of nut is. If the general public buy a bag of mixed nuts to eat, they won't be expecting acorns and conkers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TimR said:

No straw man you specifically stated a peanut was a nut. And you said you'd seen 'may contain peanuts on a bag of peanuts'.

 

A peanut is a nut.

 

I said I'd seen 'may contain peanuts' on a bag of peanuts.

 

But I didn't say peanut allergy is the same as a tree nut allergy.

 

A walnut isn't a nut, by the way. It is the seed of a large fleshy green fruit - if you haven't ever seen one, rather like a conker (which isn't a nut either).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TimR said:

It's irrelevant what the technical class of nut is. If the general public buy a bag of mixed nuts to eat, they won't be expecting acorns and conkers.

 

I know, I said as much.

 

Acorns are nuts. Conkers and almonds aren't. Whether  something is a nut is not a good guide to what's in a bag of mixed nuts.

 

Same with screws. What most people call bolts are screws; bolts have a plain shank, usually fitted to a hole.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

Same with screws. What most people call bolts are screws; bolts have a plain shank, usually fitted to a hole.

 

Apparently it's the usage that determines which they are. Both bolts and screws can be partially or fully threaded. Bolts are used to assemble unthreaded objects, using a nut (but not a botanical nut). Screws are used to assemble to threaded objects.

Edited by tauzero
Clarification of nut. Never thought I'd say that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, tauzero said:

Apparently it's the usage that determines which they are. Both bolts and screws can be partially or fully threaded. Bolts are used to assemble unthreaded objects, using a nut (but not a botanical nut). Screws are used to assemble to threaded objects.

 

The definition is vague and contested. I stand by mine as the most usual British usage 🙂

 

I use a fixing with an unthreaded section of shank to locate and fix an unthreaded part to a threaded one. It's both a bolt and a screw by your definition, a bolt by mine. 😈

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...