Feds file suit against Buckyballs, retailers ban product(usatoday.com)
usatoday.com
Feds file suit against Buckyballs, retailers ban product
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/story/2012-07-25/buckyballs-ban/56481316/1
21 comments
Other things marketed as playful or safe for kids in the US;
- Bicycles (Over 500 deaths a year)
- Battery powered toys (Roughly 2500 battery ingestions a year, Roughly 2% Fatality Rate)
- Bottles, Pacifiers etc. (2200 ER Injuries per year)
- Bicycles (Over 500 deaths a year)
- Battery powered toys (Roughly 2500 battery ingestions a year, Roughly 2% Fatality Rate)
- Bottles, Pacifiers etc. (2200 ER Injuries per year)
You're being deceptive. How many deaths per bicycle, per battery, and per bottle?
You're quite right I am being somewhat deceptive to make a point. However to my knowledge there are no deaths related to Buckyballs, and the rate of ingestion is something like 0.0000048%.
Well, lets say serious injuries requiring emergency surgery, then - and lets find the actual statistics.
There is only 1 listed victim for Buckyball injury requiring surgery.
So 1 surgery for 2.5million Buckyball products sold thus far. I'm gonna take a gamble and say the rate for bicycles is going to be worse than that.
So 1 surgery for 2.5million Buckyball products sold thus far. I'm gonna take a gamble and say the rate for bicycles is going to be worse than that.
[deleted]
Agreed. Some other factors...these are a toy, having no other useful function. And, perhaps they could be designed to be more safe. There are lots of other magnet toys that are more safe.
That isn't actually deceptive though, if the question is of how the government should be spending its time and getting involved with our business. If buckyballs are a relatively rare novelty toy with a clear warning label but a minuscule number of injury cases nonetheless, while a number of other products are more popular and are hurting more kids, then why should the government screw around with buckyballs at all? Aren't there better places they could be intervening?
Why regulate toys at all while there are so many car accidents?
Cars are regulated.
You need a license to drive them.
The fact that most accidents are caused by licensed drivers[0], though, is an interesting discussion point.
[0] I don't have any data to back this up, it just seems reasonable...
[0] I don't have any data to back this up, it just seems reasonable...
You don't need a license to own a car or to drive it on your own property or to transport it (without driving it) from point A to point B. A 10-year-old can legally own a car and can legally drive it on private land. It's only driving on public roads that requires a license. So if we regulated magnets (or, heck, guns) the way we regulate cars, anybody could buy as many as they wanted of the regulated product and use it pretty freely.
I'm all for regulating toys, and this toy has been adequately regulated. It has a big warning label saying that it's not for kids, and that it's dangerous if you swallow it. The step that goes too far is trying to ban them outright.
[deleted]
Your last line is an excellent point and really the crux of the issue. These buckyballs are marketed as a toy and widely understood to be a toy. Just glancing at the website there's "NOT A TOY" in large font but a little further down is a quote saying "There's no better desktoy". It's not surprising that there is some confusion. People just don't associate magnets with danger and the toy-ness of this product certainly doesn't help.
But toys aren't necessarily for kids. There are many toys which are intended for adults. Now, in some cases they may be called things other than toys (fashion accessories, schwag, sports equipment, sex toys), but at their heart, they are toys, just toys targeted to adults, not kids. Should every one of those that's dangerous be banned because it might be mistaken for a toy for a kid? Does the fact that a vibrator or handcuffs are sold as "sex toys" mean that they should meet all of the safety guidelines for children's toys?
Or should we say, maybe, that people should just exercise better judgement themselves; that people should realize that a collection of many small round magnets that are easily lost and difficult to do anything with without some fairly fine manual dexterity probably isn't the best toy for someone who might be tempted to eat them?
Or should we say, maybe, that people should just exercise better judgement themselves; that people should realize that a collection of many small round magnets that are easily lost and difficult to do anything with without some fairly fine manual dexterity probably isn't the best toy for someone who might be tempted to eat them?
Agreed, but BuckyBalls look very harmless to most adults and kids (they're basically beads), so most people don't put much care into hiding them from young kids.
Also the Reuters story mentions one kid thought they were chocolates: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/25/us-usa-buckyballs-...
Also the Reuters story mentions one kid thought they were chocolates: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/25/us-usa-buckyballs-...
Some animals are purposely fed magnets to improve their health. For example, the Cow Magnet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cow_magnet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cow_magnet
It's only one magnet though, more could span a pipe and cause a blockage or trap internal linings as described above.
The cows have magnets because they eat metal. The danger for humans isn't just 2 magnets, it's 1 magnet + something ferrous, of which a magnet is just one possibility.
I think the key point there is that a cow magnet is large enough that it never gets past the rumen.
Also, if a swallowed magnet hurt 0.1% of cows, but helped the rest because cows inadvertently eat lots of metal objects, then those 0.1% are seen as necessary collateral damage in the meat and dairy industry. On the other hand, if swallowed magnets hurt 0.1% (they don't, but bear with me) of kids, then it isn't seen as a necessary evil.
Also, if a swallowed magnet hurt 0.1% of cows, but helped the rest because cows inadvertently eat lots of metal objects, then those 0.1% are seen as necessary collateral damage in the meat and dairy industry. On the other hand, if swallowed magnets hurt 0.1% (they don't, but bear with me) of kids, then it isn't seen as a necessary evil.
Interesting application of what I might call the "visible effect bias" here. (See: "That Which is Seen and That Which is not Seen" http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html)
The CPSC sues, complaining that warning labels are ineffective, because parents introduce the toys to their children anyway. The warning labels are ineffective because almost every toy small enough to be put in a mouth has a warning label attached to the effect of "choking hazard; not suitable for children", even if the toys are perfectly safe (which is to say, harm almost never occurs).
Toys are attached with false warning labels because if by some chance a child does choke, either the parents or the CPSC can sue, citing the absence of warning labels. The suitors can win even if the incident was unlikely, due to hindsight bias. Hence, it costs the company nothing to exaggerate the danger by adding a warning label, in order to protect themselves from liability.
So, what is seen by the regulatory system is that putting on a warning label could have prevented such-and-such a case of choking/injury. What is not seen is that adding redundant warning labels decreases the informational value of true warnings, causing increased future cases of choking/injury from truly dangerous products.
Ironically in this case the regulators then sue, arguing that warning labels are insufficient because parents ignore them, due to a problem that was originally created by regulators being too eager to sue!
Now, I haven't looked for any data showing that this is what happened in this case, but it seems to be a common pattern (for example, "may contain traces of peanuts"; and excessive waiting times for FDA approval of livesaving drugs).
The CPSC sues, complaining that warning labels are ineffective, because parents introduce the toys to their children anyway. The warning labels are ineffective because almost every toy small enough to be put in a mouth has a warning label attached to the effect of "choking hazard; not suitable for children", even if the toys are perfectly safe (which is to say, harm almost never occurs).
Toys are attached with false warning labels because if by some chance a child does choke, either the parents or the CPSC can sue, citing the absence of warning labels. The suitors can win even if the incident was unlikely, due to hindsight bias. Hence, it costs the company nothing to exaggerate the danger by adding a warning label, in order to protect themselves from liability.
So, what is seen by the regulatory system is that putting on a warning label could have prevented such-and-such a case of choking/injury. What is not seen is that adding redundant warning labels decreases the informational value of true warnings, causing increased future cases of choking/injury from truly dangerous products.
Ironically in this case the regulators then sue, arguing that warning labels are insufficient because parents ignore them, due to a problem that was originally created by regulators being too eager to sue!
Now, I haven't looked for any data showing that this is what happened in this case, but it seems to be a common pattern (for example, "may contain traces of peanuts"; and excessive waiting times for FDA approval of livesaving drugs).
The CPSC does some fantastic things for product safety, but this isn't one of them. In fact, some of the items they're complaining about are just plain ridiculous; griping that a product was in a child-safe container seems beyond silly.
Though this did bring up two thoughts near simultaneously. The first was an onion article of ten years ago ( http://www.theonion.com/articles/fun-toy-banned-because-of-t... ). The second being someone I know who recently had emergency surgery after deciding that they would be an excellent thing to sound with. While protecting kids is important, at the same time, kids can and will do stupid things, and a few people swallowing them a year does not seem to rise to the level of requiring a ban.
Though this did bring up two thoughts near simultaneously. The first was an onion article of ten years ago ( http://www.theonion.com/articles/fun-toy-banned-because-of-t... ). The second being someone I know who recently had emergency surgery after deciding that they would be an excellent thing to sound with. While protecting kids is important, at the same time, kids can and will do stupid things, and a few people swallowing them a year does not seem to rise to the level of requiring a ban.
This is a nonsense suit. The first time we bought a box of these, one of the first things we noticed was the warning about the dangers of strong magnets and the risks of swallowing them in particular.
After reading the complaint ( http://i.usatoday.net/money/_pdfs/cpsc-complaint-buckyballs.... ) I'm doubling down on that. This is one of the most asinine things I've ever read. Per paragraph 36, the CPSC complains that the product warnings are ineffective because parents and caregivers don't appreciate the hazard and will continue giving the magnets to children.
So adults fail to keep the product say from children, despite the clear warnings (which have already been upgraded by the distributor in response to a previous warning from the CPSC), but the CPSC thinks that amounts to a product defect. Also (pp 41-44) the magnets are too attractive and interesting to children, for whom it is 'developmentally appropriate' (p 17) to stick things in their mouth below the age of 14 or to make fake piercings as adolescents.
What. The. Fuck. On this basis we can go on to outlaw nails, screws, buts, bolts, and coins. We have about 15 sets of these things and don't want our money back. We're well aware of the hazard and don't allow children to play with them.
So adults fail to keep the product say from children, despite the clear warnings (which have already been upgraded by the distributor in response to a previous warning from the CPSC), but the CPSC thinks that amounts to a product defect. Also (pp 41-44) the magnets are too attractive and interesting to children, for whom it is 'developmentally appropriate' (p 17) to stick things in their mouth below the age of 14 or to make fake piercings as adolescents.
What. The. Fuck. On this basis we can go on to outlaw nails, screws, buts, bolts, and coins. We have about 15 sets of these things and don't want our money back. We're well aware of the hazard and don't allow children to play with them.
nails, screws, buts, bolts, and coins
It's interesting, and important, that you read right over the part of the complaint where it is explained that tiny high-powered magnets are qualitiatively different and more dangerous than the other metal objects that children might typically ingest.
Why? Because the completely nonintuitive nature of the danger is itself part of the danger. People think these things are less harmful than, say, tiny screws. After all, they're smooth and round and clean-looking. They'll just pass right through, yes? It's not as if humans have metal parts inside for things to stick to, right? You didn't realize the danger. I, until ten minutes ago, didn't realize the danger.
But the danger is there. From paragraph 18:
If two or more of the magnets are ingested [at slightly different times - ed] and the magnetic forces of the magnets pull them together, the magnets can pinch or trap the intestinal walls or other digestive tissue between them, resulting in acute and long-term health consequences. Magnets that attract through the walls of the intestines result in progressive tissue injury, beginning with local inflammation and ulceration, progressing to tissue death, then perforation or fistula formation. Such condition can lead to infection, sepsis, and death.
I love my buckyballs and I wish I didn't find this argument compelling. But I do. I've dissected intestines (in mice); they have very thin membranes. I've had too many magnets pinch me. I've tried to separate buckyballs on purpose with my fingers; they don't separate by accident. If they capture a piece of tissue between them they aren't coming apart until the tissue dies and a hole forms. If that hole spans your intestinal wall you have a very big problem.
Meanwhile, this is apparently not just speculation. There are data. This has actually happened. Presumably it can be made to happen again in laboratory rats if necessary, though I frankly doubt this complaint will get to that point.
It's interesting, and important, that you read right over the part of the complaint where it is explained that tiny high-powered magnets are qualitiatively different and more dangerous than the other metal objects that children might typically ingest.
Why? Because the completely nonintuitive nature of the danger is itself part of the danger. People think these things are less harmful than, say, tiny screws. After all, they're smooth and round and clean-looking. They'll just pass right through, yes? It's not as if humans have metal parts inside for things to stick to, right? You didn't realize the danger. I, until ten minutes ago, didn't realize the danger.
But the danger is there. From paragraph 18:
If two or more of the magnets are ingested [at slightly different times - ed] and the magnetic forces of the magnets pull them together, the magnets can pinch or trap the intestinal walls or other digestive tissue between them, resulting in acute and long-term health consequences. Magnets that attract through the walls of the intestines result in progressive tissue injury, beginning with local inflammation and ulceration, progressing to tissue death, then perforation or fistula formation. Such condition can lead to infection, sepsis, and death.
I love my buckyballs and I wish I didn't find this argument compelling. But I do. I've dissected intestines (in mice); they have very thin membranes. I've had too many magnets pinch me. I've tried to separate buckyballs on purpose with my fingers; they don't separate by accident. If they capture a piece of tissue between them they aren't coming apart until the tissue dies and a hole forms. If that hole spans your intestinal wall you have a very big problem.
Meanwhile, this is apparently not just speculation. There are data. This has actually happened. Presumably it can be made to happen again in laboratory rats if necessary, though I frankly doubt this complaint will get to that point.
No, I did not skip over that at all. I acknowledged it in the grandparent comment, because it was spelt out to me very clearly in the instructions with the first set of buckyballs I purchased. After trying two of the magnets on the membrane between my fingers and noting how powerful they were, it was obvious to me why having them exercising their magnetic attraction for each other in your intestines would be an incredibly bad thing. I did, in fact, realize the danger perfectly well.
This is why I don't put them in my mouth or nose or ear, or let children play with them. Now, while this particular mode of operation is unique to magnets, do you really think that sharp screws or small nails are going to be kind to your intestine?
This is why I don't put them in my mouth or nose or ear, or let children play with them. Now, while this particular mode of operation is unique to magnets, do you really think that sharp screws or small nails are going to be kind to your intestine?
I think you might be surprised. The internal perforation rate of ingested foreign objects with sharp points is low. People who swallow nails are routinely told to go home, watch for the nail to pass, and contact their doctor if they develop symptoms. The mortality rate for all ingested objects is extremely low.
It is possible that even when compared with nails, magnets are uniquely dangerous.
It is possible that even when compared with nails, magnets are uniquely dangerous.
Another issue is that they're about the same size and shape as Sixlets (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixlets).
It was actually mentioned in the Reuters story that one 4yo thought the BuckyBalls looked like chocolates. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/25/us-usa-buckyballs-...)
It was actually mentioned in the Reuters story that one 4yo thought the BuckyBalls looked like chocolates. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/25/us-usa-buckyballs-...)
Even more than that, they look exactly like silver dragees.
Seems like nonsense to me also. Obviously tiny round things can be swallowed easily. Now I understand the laws don't quite work that way, but still, it's not like this product could be manufactured in anyway to make it safer. And I don't think more warnings plastered over everything would help Buckyballs or consumers in general. We're polluted with warnings - just look at the roads in the US.
I think the issue is that no parent can reasonably stop their kid from swallowing these if the kid wants to; do you disagree with that? Note that every McDonalds toy that is actually perfectly safe for young kids has a swallowing/choking hazard, so it's pretty much guaranteed that people can't know that they have to take those seriously in this case.
I personally do - just keep them out of reach / away from a child until they are old enough to know better. I don't disagree that swallowing these could be awful, but everyone knows you don't give small children things they can swallow, these are no different.
The packaging tells you very clearly (before you open it) what can happen if swallowed, and why. It also says that it's not suitable for children under 14. And I do disagree that you can keep small kids from swallowing: do not allow them to play with it. I'm infuriated by the idea that nobody can be allowed to buy these things because some parents are too stupid/irresponsible.
There are any number of hazardous items around the home this could extend to. It's like saying that "No parent can reasonably stop their kid from swallowing drain cleaner if the kid wants to."
No parent can reasonably stop their kid from drinking bleach or Drāno if the kid wants to. Should we ban those too?
One wonders how many children swallow, say, thumb tacks and whether this makes a prima facie case for the government to sue the manufacturers of all small pointy things.
Sure enough, if one Googles [swallowed thumb tack]...
Sure enough, if one Googles [swallowed thumb tack]...
On investigation, and somewhat surprisingly to me, it seems that medical experts legitimately believe that swallowing these particular small metal objects are worse than swallowing garden-variety small metal objects because if you swallow e.g. 5 BB pellets then you'll pass 5 BB pellets but if you swallow 5 high-powered magnets you now have one single clump o' metal which is large/heavy/sharp enough to damage your intestinal tract.
I probably still wouldn't ban them but, hey, worth noting.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/story/2012-0...
I probably still wouldn't ban them but, hey, worth noting.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/story/2012-0...
A single clump early would actually dodge the worst outcome: where two separate magnets, one ahead of the other around an intestinal curve, attach to each other through the intestinal wall.
I think the big difference is that thumb tacks are not a toy. These are a toy. They're marketed as a toy. They're given to children as a toy.
Also, children are - rather obviously - more likely to put a smooth object in their mouths than a sharp pointy one, and also more likely to swallow it.
I own a set of these. They are not given to children young enough to put them in their mouth. Parents who do so are irresponsible.
I have a set too, and they are cool. I let my six-year-old play with them, because I trust her. She knows not to let her friends play with them. In the light of this suit, I'll have to reconsider that.
They are really easy to lose, and if lost, they can be picked up and swallowed by a kid, and their parent would never know. The particular danger of strong, tiny magnets is quite non-obvious (inspecting the comments here makes that clear), even spooky.
They are commonly sold at science centers, near children's toys, another indication that the marketing was done to kids, and not as just a desk toy.
I've been dreading the day one of the ones I've lost gets sucked into the vacuum...no telling how much damage it could do if it sticks onto a gear.
I'm not surprised about the suit.
They are really easy to lose, and if lost, they can be picked up and swallowed by a kid, and their parent would never know. The particular danger of strong, tiny magnets is quite non-obvious (inspecting the comments here makes that clear), even spooky.
They are commonly sold at science centers, near children's toys, another indication that the marketing was done to kids, and not as just a desk toy.
I've been dreading the day one of the ones I've lost gets sucked into the vacuum...no telling how much damage it could do if it sticks onto a gear.
I'm not surprised about the suit.
> I have a set too, and they are cool. I let my six-year-old play with them, because I trust her.
kids are random. much more so than adults. I strongly recommend you never let her access those things again. there's only downside, and the upside (fun, diversion, learning about magnets) can be had from alternate things, or at some future date when her judgment is better. plus give something to a kid, and it could easily end up in the hands/mouth of other kids. kids are random. they/we start life in fact with our heads full of all sorts of irrational/mythical beliefs, and a blurry line between imagination and reality. For example, the classic kid thought meme: if something looks like candy, it probably tastes like candy, it probably is candy.
kids are random. much more so than adults. I strongly recommend you never let her access those things again. there's only downside, and the upside (fun, diversion, learning about magnets) can be had from alternate things, or at some future date when her judgment is better. plus give something to a kid, and it could easily end up in the hands/mouth of other kids. kids are random. they/we start life in fact with our heads full of all sorts of irrational/mythical beliefs, and a blurry line between imagination and reality. For example, the classic kid thought meme: if something looks like candy, it probably tastes like candy, it probably is candy.
Is there no way we can say "They're a toy but not a children's toy"?
Even if they aren't given to children I don't think they set off the "hey this is really dangerous" alarm for a lot of people. Ideally an adult would play with these then count them all to make sure none are missing and store them out of reach of a child -- every single time with no mistakes or exceptions. Requiring that level of care kind of moves these out of the "toy" category in my mind.
Clumping (or more dangerous: aligning in a single rigid pole) is not the only danger. Multiple magnets, or magnets and other ferromagnetic objects can attract while in different portions of the bowel -- pinching two walls together. This will eventually cause the pinched wall between the magnets to die, forming a hole.
One of the other risks with magnets is that they'll be swallowed at slightly different times and be in the intestines slightly location (=time) shifted. Perforation and doom.
To be fair, swallowing magnets (multiple) is far more of a health risk than other small things babies tend to swallow (coins and detritus). I believe this is because the can stick together in a way that causes intestinal blockage makes holes in the intestines.
The same high risk comes in watch and hearing aid batteries - it's not the size, but in this case the chemistry in the gut.
I don't know the right solution. I love playing with Buckyballs, but am wary and hide them away when my 1 year old niece is around. I think an unfortunate problem is that toy stores are treated by many parents as "all of this is for children", even when labels say 3+ or adults only or whatever.
The same high risk comes in watch and hearing aid batteries - it's not the size, but in this case the chemistry in the gut.
I don't know the right solution. I love playing with Buckyballs, but am wary and hide them away when my 1 year old niece is around. I think an unfortunate problem is that toy stores are treated by many parents as "all of this is for children", even when labels say 3+ or adults only or whatever.
[deleted]
I most certainly read this as OP swallowing a thumb tack.
Tell you what. Wrap some gun powder around them, call them bucky bullets, sell em over the internet, you'll be untouchable in America.
I was scared for a moment! I thought the headline referred to the C-60 fullerene supplement I've been taking for a few weeks. Carbon buckeyballs in an olive oil suspension dramatically increase mouse lifespan in a single recent study.
Whew...
Whew...
Well, it isn't looking good for C-60: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16709433 it has been six years and I have yet to hear any news about the bass. In all seriousness, would organ binding from within be an aspect of "toxicity"?
Children will do the craziest things if left unwatched for even a second. This year alone I've heard about kids drowning in backyard pools, a kid dancing on an air conditioner on a window sill (was caught by a passerby) and a kid dying because a soccer net fell on her.
Agreed. If my youngest makes it to adulthood it will be a miracle - she's very active and even more impulsive. I love her like crazy, but every day she survives is a combination of luck and (I like to think) good parenting.
Last week I was talking to her while I was grilling and when I turned around she was standing on the railing of our deck (15 feet above a concrete patio).
Last week I was talking to her while I was grilling and when I turned around she was standing on the railing of our deck (15 feet above a concrete patio).
If parents don't understand why a small magnetic ball bearing would be bad for their children to play with, then they're --- hate to be rude --- stupid. And their stupidity should not be used to punish private companies who make a perfectly safe product when used correctly by its intended audience.
They already have warning label, why isn't that enough?
With the economy hurting like it is, I can't figure out why the US government would be doing something as stupid as this. They're threatening the livelihood of a private business.
It just makes no sense to me. I miss personal accountability and responsibility.
They already have warning label, why isn't that enough?
With the economy hurting like it is, I can't figure out why the US government would be doing something as stupid as this. They're threatening the livelihood of a private business.
It just makes no sense to me. I miss personal accountability and responsibility.
> With the economy hurting like it is, I can't figure out why the US government would be doing something as stupid as this.
Because agency funding is dependent on the agency's relevance. If government actually worked as advertised, every solved problem would result in it shrinking. In reality, it identifies new "problems" to perpetuate its existence.
Because agency funding is dependent on the agency's relevance. If government actually worked as advertised, every solved problem would result in it shrinking. In reality, it identifies new "problems" to perpetuate its existence.
My box had a very visible anti-ingestion warning label. However, nobody mentioned anything about the top layer of chrome wearing out. I stopped using them when I kept getting small shards of metal embedded in my fingers.
That's right - Punish the company, not the parents who can't supervise their children.
Why is swallowing them so dangerous? Don't kids swallow pennies and what not? Then it leaves the body through normal bodily function?
Hmm... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXmmkH2Y7M0 it turns out its when you swallow 2 or more they pinch and squeeze the intestines.
Because they're strong magnets. They stick to each other, even through tissue, like the folds of your intestines.
Supposedly some types are strong enough to stick together through intestine walls an can cause damage or blockages [1].
Still, a ban and lawsuit seems a little over the top.
http://www.usrecallnews.com/2007/01/swallowed-magnets-stick-...
Still, a ban and lawsuit seems a little over the top.
http://www.usrecallnews.com/2007/01/swallowed-magnets-stick-...
I found a dime when I was a child and swallowed it - maybe my parents should have sued the US Mint.
Won't someone think of the children?
I think we should ban knives, and hot surfaces - to protect children of course.
This is a totally ridiculous comparison. I'm not in favor of the ban, but comparing a knife (something dangerous that no sane parent would let their kid play with) to this (something less dangerous that is explicitly a toy that most parents would have no problem letting their kids play with) is ridiculous.
So if 12 parents let their children play with knives (and the children were harmed) like the 12 instances for Buckyballs, we should ban all knives?
It seems like parents ignoring warning labels on an item not marketed towards children is the main issue (I wouldn't necessarily say the magnets were less dangerous either).
It seems like parents ignoring warning labels on an item not marketed towards children is the main issue (I wouldn't necessarily say the magnets were less dangerous either).
The difference is solely intent of the product. If bleach was being sold as a toy then it would be banned; it's only allowed because its not a toy. Lawn darts are less dangerous than knives and they were banned because they are being sold as a toy.
There is a certain threshold of danger that we accept for useful products like knives and bleach; if handled properly then there is no problem. Young children aren't expected to handle them properly. Buckyballs have no practical use and are toys that are expected to be given to children, so a similar level of danger is unacceptable.
There is a certain threshold of danger that we accept for useful products like knives and bleach; if handled properly then there is no problem. Young children aren't expected to handle them properly. Buckyballs have no practical use and are toys that are expected to be given to children, so a similar level of danger is unacceptable.
The danger from knives is obvious to most children, and a cut probably isn't going to seriously injure them. Knives are not marketed as toys, and have a use other than being played with. If a child is injured by a knife, you will know it quickly, and understand the extent of the problem. Half of the people in this thread are comparing it to swallowing a penny, which is so harmless that you could make it a hobby.
This is not health & safety gone mad.
This is not health & safety gone mad.
It says not for children on the box and if you have a 13 year old who's swallowing magnets, well, then you have a problem.
I can't believe they waited this long. I'd be surprised if a lot of adults haven't swallowed these, too. Everybody knows that BBs and pennies pass easily, so why wouldn't you think that about magnets? It isn't like the warnings are printed on every ball, and there's nothing intuitive about their danger.
Tiny, strong BB magnets can have no place in a house that ever has kids in it. It's not safe to have them in or on daddy's desk, or anywhere else. Maybe in the gun safe.
Also, I always assumed that the Fuller estate got a cut of this. Pretty rotten all around.
edit: swallowing small strong magnets is a fairly unique, well known, and long standing danger. When I was a kid, a lot of plastic items were made magnetic by gluing in tiny (maybe 3/4 cm diameter) disks. After a lot of resectioning of the necrotic bowels of a lot of children, and a lot of death amongst both children and animals, this ended. Good riddance. It's safer to let your kid play with a bag of broken glass.
Tiny, strong BB magnets can have no place in a house that ever has kids in it. It's not safe to have them in or on daddy's desk, or anywhere else. Maybe in the gun safe.
Also, I always assumed that the Fuller estate got a cut of this. Pretty rotten all around.
edit: swallowing small strong magnets is a fairly unique, well known, and long standing danger. When I was a kid, a lot of plastic items were made magnetic by gluing in tiny (maybe 3/4 cm diameter) disks. After a lot of resectioning of the necrotic bowels of a lot of children, and a lot of death amongst both children and animals, this ended. Good riddance. It's safer to let your kid play with a bag of broken glass.
They're also both an educational and creative toy that can introduce kids to the counterintuitive ways that magnets interact, while teaching them to build things within unusual constraints. Yes, they are dangerous if swallowed, just like a lot of other things that we have around our houses all the time. Keep them out of reach of young children, sure, but this is a tiny risk that has been blown out of proportion by the media. Last year, over 1,600 kids under 6 were poisoned by household cleaners... just in Washington DC.
As for "why would you assume that you can't swallow it?", I just don't even what to say. Don't just assume that you can safely swallow shit?
As for "why would you assume that you can't swallow it?", I just don't even what to say. Don't just assume that you can safely swallow shit?
Magformers are a safe and interesting magnetic toy that offers that magnet magic you mention. I think the point is that some designs are inherently unsafe. They need to go back to the drawing board.
But it's marginally unsafe, and the risk is clearly labeled. As long as people are being informed of the moderate danger (and they are), it is nuts for the government to come in and try to take these off the market. The world is full of dangerous crap, and if you step back and try to keep a little perspective, this desk toy shouldn't even show up on your radar.
>As for "why would you assume that you can't swallow it?", I just don't even what to say. Don't just assume that you can safely swallow shit?
Because you can safely swallow things that look identical to them in every way, maybe? Would you rush your child to the emergency room because you found out they swallowed a ball bearing?
Because you can safely swallow things that look identical to them in every way, maybe? Would you rush your child to the emergency room because you found out they swallowed a ball bearing?
Fine, but you said that in the context of adults swallowing them, which is what I was addressing.
Sorry, they were successive statements. I wasn't actually trying to plead on the behalf of slow adults, but I probably wasn't being clear.
Don't 5 gallon buckets kill more people than magnets?
In the UK, this is called the Nanny State. I though the USA was immune to this rubbish.
I know this is going to sound harsh, but maybe if your kid choked to death on a magnetic toy, he or she just wasn't of sturdy enough stock to begin with. In the brains department.
I wish the Feds would go after actual problems with the same fervor they tackle this kind of crap.
I wish the Feds would go after actual problems with the same fervor they tackle this kind of crap.
Clearly you don't have any children!
So as many wild accusations folks want to level at the government over this there is a medical rational for their action.
See: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57390647-10391704/3-y...
(and sure you can claim this is just bad parenting, but look how many folks in this thread don't understand that this could be a threat)