Why does amazon say that this product has a Proposition 65 warning when there is no mention of it on the bottle and no red flag ingredients?
1792579
I have never heard of a Proposition 65 warning before. I have looked it up online and I now know what it is. I was not aware Amazon had a Proposition 65 warning on this product. However, for more product information visit www.nowfoods.com/2810.
1418032
I don't recall off hand and I already tossed the empty bottle. I think they listed the ingredients on the ad?
1987666
Presumably you purchased a California-bound product. Prop 65 is a unique California statute that requires warning for trace amounts of various chemicals. Some of these are naturally-occurring. For details, I would suggest going to the product website - at this link http://www.genesispureteampritchard.com/uploads/2/4/9/1/24915939/faq.pdf and scrolling down to their explanation on Prop 65. I have no independent knowledge about this product, but I presume this is the issue.
1085251
After reviewing the ingredients on the bottle, it does not appear to have that ingredient.
325664
Its sold in California. In California you must put a prop65 warning if your products contain 1 of over 2000 materials. The penalty for not putting the sign or label is huge. The penalty for needlessly labeling is nothing. Starbucks, whole foods and every darn store in California has prop 65 warnings all over. Google prop 65 for more info. The toothpaste is made from Redmond clay, a naturally occuring product, so while it may contain thousands of micro amounts of minerals, organic lead may fall in there. This lead threshold will be less than the water you use to wash your mouth out from your sink. All tap water has inorganic lead present from deterioration of supply lines.
1730500
I just looked at the label and that is not listed as an active or inactive ingredient.
1135150
I purchased the crib, although not from Amazon. There was absolutely no sign of Prop. 65 warnings on either the packing, paperwork, or the crib itself. I feel confident, that along with CBF's investigations, that Amazon has just screwed up and needs to correct the page.
928833
All the information I've been able to find on Proposition 65 is pretty vague. It it supposed to warn consumers of "chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm"As far as I can tell, there is no thought given to the amount of these chemicals - some of which you can't escape in the manufacturing process. More info can be found here: http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/p65faq.html Although the most helpful line from the faq seems to be: "To request more information regarding the chemical exposures that are the basis of the warning, contact the manufacturer of the product."If I had to guess what chemical warranted the proposition 65 warning, I would guess cadmium. All the information I've been able to find on Proposition 65 is pretty vague. It it supposed to warn consumers of "chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm"As far as I can tell, there is no thought given to the amount of these chemicals - some of which you can't escape in the manufacturing process. More info can be found here: http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/p65faq.html Although the most helpful line from the faq seems to be: "To request more information regarding the chemical exposures that are the basis of the... » Read More All the information I've been able to find on Proposition 65 is pretty vague. It it supposed to warn consumers of "chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm"As far as I can tell, there is no thought given to the amount of these chemicals - some of which you can't escape in the manufacturing process. More info can be found here: http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/p65faq.html Although the most helpful line from the faq seems to be: "To request more information regarding the chemical exposures that are the basis of the warning, contact the manufacturer of the product."If I had to guess what chemical warranted the proposition 65 warning, I would guess cadmium. « Show Less
1278484
Unfortunately the list of ingredients provided on the Amazon site is misleading. The bottle I received has multiple parabens listed in the ingredients. I will be contacting Amazon about this misinformation.
7889
Hi, The state of California enacted Proposition 65 which entitles their residents to be notified when ingestible products contain any ingredients described in the Prop 65 list of compounds that may cause cancer or birth defects. The products that you encounter everyday may have a Prop 65 warning that you were unaware of such as tap water, eye glasses, kitchen applicances etc. Macrolife has listed this on the label that may contain naturally occurring metals. This is due to the naturally occurring state that the products are grown in the ground. We believe in wild harvesting most of our ingredients to preserve their integrity. Prop 65 warning does not necessarily mean a product is in violation of any product-safety standards or requirements. Hope it helps. Thank you.
465432
thanks much. i appreciate your feedback. i wonder why most supplements on amazon do NOT list all ingredients? and why doesn't the supplier answer questions as well??!! strange...
618808
On the label of the bottle it says this product has not been endorsed by the FDA. Keep in mind most suplements have similar demarcations and this is essentially a legal disclaimer more than it is any type of condemnation.
2277357
I notified Amazon about this. The bottle is currently unavailable so I'm assuming they're (finally) looking into this.
192945
Good question I've already tossed the box. The bottle has only one mark on it I do not recognize that says P51424-2, but I have no idea what that is in reference to. Sorry I will look at box next time
928834
All the information I've been able to find on Proposition 65 is pretty vague. It it supposed to warn consumers of "chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm" As far as I can tell, there is no thought given to the amount of these chemicals - some of which you can't escape in the manufacturing process. More info can be found here: http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/p65faq.html Although the most helpful line from the faq seems to be: "To request more information regarding the chemical exposures that are the basis of the warning, contact the manufacturer of the product." If I had to guess what chemical warranted the proposition 65 warning, I would guess cadmium.
850606
They often have a picture of the back of the bottle showing ingredients. If not on yhat particular listing then you'll have to try another listing to see.
1669517
It does not say on the bottle, I would go to the companies website and double check