The Environmental Working Group (EWG), which has been studying the contents of bottled water for the past two years, reportedly notified a national retailer that it intends to bring a lawsuit under California’s Proposition 65 for the company’s failure to inform consumers that some brands of bottled water contain chlorine-based contaminants that are known to the state to cause cancer. Numerous media outlets announced the release of EWG’s study results, which purportedly show that leading brands contain many of the same contaminants as tap water, such as bacteria, caffeine, acetaminophen, fertilizer, solvents, plastic-making chemicals, and the radioactive element strontium. Researchers opined that some of the substances, detected below federal health standards, come from the tap water that some companies use in their bottled products and others apparently leach from the plastic bottles. Environmental engineer Jane Houlihan, who coauthored the study, was quoted as saying, “In some cases, it appears bottled…
Tag Archives Prop. 65
After a two-month trial, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Robert Dondero late last week ruled that California cannot require the manufacturers of Chicken of the Sea, StarKist and Bumble Bee tuna to warn consumers that their products contain mercury and mercury compounds. California Attorney General Bill Lockyer filed the lawsuit in June 2004 under the state antitoxics law Proposition 65, which requires businesses to warn the public about exposure to chemicals “known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.” The law does not apply to chemicals that occur naturally in food. Press reports indicate the court ruled that (i) Prop. 65 is preempted by a March 2004 Food and Drug Administration joint consumer advisory on methylmercury in fish and shellfish; (ii) low levels of mercury contained in tuna products do not merit warnings; and (iii) tuna is exempt from Prop. 65 requirements because mercury in fish is naturally occurring.…
Since May 2002 California plaintiffs have reportedly brought enforcement actions against a number of food manufacturers and fast food restaurants claiming that because carcinogens or reproductive toxicants are contained in their products, they are required to provide public warnings under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act. This law, also known as Proposition 65 (Prop.65), was approved by state voters in November 1986. It requires the governor to publish a list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harms. Companies selling products in California must provide warnings if such substances are contained in their products. Private citizens are empowered under the Act to sue alleged violators to enjoin future violations and obtain civil penalties for past violations. Plaintiffs in American Environmental Safety Institute v. Mars, Inc., No. BC273433 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed May 8, 2002), allege that chocolate contains the…
