Just noticed that Coronado's bottles have the fun Prop.65 label on them. Is this a joke or were part of some lawsuit? I haven't seen this on other Cali produced beers before.
A lot of screenprinted glass from CA has it. I've seen it on buildings, it's a pretty common sight to see the prop 65 warning, it means nothing and nobody pays any attention to it, pointless law. From wikipedia... "Some businesses in the state post similar notices on their premises, even when they have not evaluated the actual level of risk from a listed chemical they know is present.[14] Warning signs are often posted at gas stations,[15] hardware suppliers,[16] grocery stores, drug stores, medical facilities, and many other businesses.[17][18] Government agencies,[19] parking garages, hotels,[18] apartment complexes,[20] retail stores,[21] banks, and restaurants[22] also post warning signs because of the possibility of hazardous chemicals being present in everyday items or the nearby environment. Some large businesses, such as utility companies, mail a Prop 65 notice to all customers each year to warn them of dangerous substances like natural gas[23] or the sand used in sandblasting.[24] There is no penalty for posting an unnecessary warning sign.[25] Because of the overuse of the vague warning, the ubiquitous signs ultimately communicate very little information to the end user.[15][26] This problem has been recognized by California courts,[27][28] advocates,[15][29] and businesses.[18]"
It's not pointless. Have you even read the law? Prop 65 is a labeling requirement posted on consumer products to warn them that a product may contain carcinogens, or cancer causing chemicals. Whether or not your risk is high is at your discretion, but it is certainly not pointless.
Whether or not they have to put the label on depends on the daily dosage of said chemicals. I used to work as an analytical chemist doing prop 65 testing for a vitamin company. Coronado would be wise to adjust their ingredients to avoid using these labels. I wouldn't want to drink a beer with that label.
even if it DOESNT contain the stuff thats bad, everyone puts it on everything to be safe and avoid lawsuits! usually its the red ink on bottles/glassware (i think!!), and even if there isn't any red on it, people still put the warning on there
Oh got ya. I still think they should use different paint, there are other options aside from lead based paint. Also, I can't see why anyone would put prop 65 labels on if they weren't needed. Some simple testing and adequate record keeping is enough to ensure you are in compliance.
Prop 65 was written by a James Wheaton so that he can sue people who don't post the sign. He and his law firm have abused prop 65 since he got it passed and tried to do the same thing with failed prop 37 labeling GMO's. Neither are bad on their face, but they both allow trial attonerys to file claims with no evidence and no plantiff. If the laws didn't put the entire burden of proof on the buisness and didn't allow for the abuse they might acctually help, but that was never the intent. So the beer just mocks that the signs are everywhere. As they say the dose makes the poison.
This reminds me of that one former Florida lawyer that would constantly file lawsuits against video games and do whatever he could to get companies like Rockstar in courts. Good times.
Well, ethanol is part of prop 65. If it's paint based warning then it's most likely titanium dioxide used in white.
Bingo. I recall Greg Koch provided an explanation a few years ago, stating it was because of the ink used on glassware.
In California, there was a ruling that said all alcohol producers could avoid putting the prop 65 label on their bottles/cans as long as each alcohol retailer posted a Prop 65 sign (Prop 65 applies to all alcohol as being known to cause birth defects - has nothing to do with "bad" ingredients or "bad" ink). Unfortunately, recently, plaintiffs have been allowed to sue manufacturers if it is noted that the retailer doesn't have a sign posted...so if your local corner market sells Coronado and doesn't have a prop 65 sign posted, then people can sue Coronado...yeah, genius right? so Coronado is being proactive...
thats insane. and it makes it so much less effective when we have to go and put it on everything even if it isn't made with the red ink just so people cant sue you
The reason a lot of shops have that sign is because a few years back. Some douche bag and his douche bag lawyer were going around suing store that did not have a warning label...
