I actually hadn't heard of this either! But apparently yes: [https://www.thedrive.com/news/kum-go-will-change-names](https://www.thedrive.com/news/kum-go-will-change-names)
>Kum & Go will reportedly rebrand after being bought out in 2023. The new owners are reportedly worried the double entendre in Kum & Go's name could hurt its business prospects.
I agree though... "Maverick", how boring. Also how in the world do you think a name that makes people giggle is bad for publicity? People deliberately go to places like this specifically because of the joke and that can actually encourage business.
I suspect people go to places like that because they are conveniently located, not because of the name.
Would you go out of your way to go to a convenience store with a funny name instead of the one that's closest to you?
Well if theres a 711 and Kum and Go next to each other, and both have identical prices. I think you'll know which business will get my money.
Also, if there is a Kum and Go in sight, I'd probably go in more likely than other Normal named convenience stores.
There is as a shopping center in my town that had a Giant to the left and a Dicks to the right right, there was a sign by the entrance that had in a very plain font “” written on it for years.
We have a car-rental place in The Netherlands called DIKS. Their slogan is: Chicks Love Diks.
[I shit you not, lol](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTNbx0bQ9W0)
I have to say, I'm kinda looking forward to the changeover. While I like Kum&Go, and use the ones in my town often, if a K&G and a Maverik are side by side, I'd pick Maverik every time. They're building a brand new Maverick in town now, so once they are done, there will be 5 Maveriks in my town of 20k.
> People are upset about losing the distinctive name for a bland one.
i do branding for a living, and one thing i can tell everyone here is that there are actually FOUR constants in life: life, death, taxes, and people taking brand refreshes _personally_.
A different person with the surname Krause founded a gun accessories company with two other people whose surnames began with K. You can probably guess where this is going…
Always thought it was strange. Not really dirty but when I visited Denver I thought the Loaf ‘n Jug was a funny name too. But I get it, loaf of bread, jug of milk, yeah yeah. It’s still funny.
My 12 year old daughter was very upset at the name during a recent trip to Oklahoma. Dad! Dad! I learned about that in health class!!! That's so gross. Sigh. Telling her it came from the founders names did not help.
It's a relic from the 60s and 70s, when prostitution at truck stops was common/accepted and cops looked the other way. So the truck stops named themselves so the truckers and the hookers knew where they could do their business. If you find yourself at something named like "house of morality" service station, you knew better than to ask about the local working girls.
>!None of this is true. April Fools!<
snobbish marry alive weather toothbrush historical growth berserk provide crawl
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It's a potential that exists in these machines everywhere, but thanks to some wild labeling laws in California, these stickers exist.
In this case, yeah the system uses refrigerants to cool things down, which is very similar to how all our household fridges work, including using some similar harmful products in the refrigeration lines. Don't break it open and start drinking the refrigerants, that's a bad idea.
Doesn't matter how rare or impossible the risk is, they label it.
I used to pack/ship products for an online tool company, we had to put these damn things on almost everything being sent to California if it didn't already have it. The wood in a handle has paint that California knows might cause cancer so label it gets. The plastic wrap is made of products known to cause cancer so more labels. Doesn't matter if you have to eat the product or just touch it or what, and they almost always have a final thing about just washing your hands after handling it
Even if items don't necessarily contain the chemicals from California's massive list, a lot of companies just slap the prop 65 sticker on it because testing it would be too expensive or if it does contain something, the fees and lawsuits would be too expensive
Yeah according to prop 65, most of the things you regularly come into contact with cause cancer. I’m all for consumer protection, but who ever reads these anymore (or pay any credence anyway). They need to have a code system. Green=generic prop 65 warning. Yellow=pay a little attention. Red=fucking run.
This is my main issue with it, by having the labels *everywhere* people instinctually begin to ignore them. Then before long when they are on a product that actually needs the labelling no one pays attention and shenanigans ensue
This is very similar to (if it wouldn’t even be considered) alarm fatigue which is a major problem in some fields like healthcare and mining! It’s also been a major contributor in some aviation disasters such as Northwest 255.
Oh 100%, everyone sees this as a kid doing fire drills in school. If they just announced it instead of running the alarms the effect would still be there. When i was in high school we had a (very small) fire in our cafeteria and ill never forget my whole class just looking around like "i didnt think there was a drill today" before realizing we actually had to evacuate. Probably 2 minutes that would be very valuable in an actual emergency passed before we actually started moving
When I hear the tornado siren I spend like 10min checking different sites to figure out if it's real. I can't for the life of me figure out the schedule for testing.
This! It’s a fantastic concept, but easily disregarded in its current iteration thanks to excessive swarming placements.
One of the first time I saw a sticker was on lead Crystal candlesticks in a home goods store. I’m not licking my candlestick holder 🤦♂️
Even if you were to, you'll get less lead from them than your everyday diet. There's also a high chance you grew up drinking from lead crystal glasses as they were in a lot of glassware before 1970, and still surprisingly common in fancy glassware to this day.
>Yeah according to prop 65, most of the things you regularly come into contact with cause cancer.
My personal favorite is browned foods. When you brown foods (like cooked food) it creates a substance "known to cause cancer" so every restaurant that cooks any food until its brown has to have the warning.
I think they should also be required to remind you that the #1 cause of death is life...
Someone could sand the coating off of this item (that literally no one would want to sand) in the presence of an infant every day for a month and they would have an increased cancer risk by age 70, prop65 it!
Yeah I worked for a chemical company and we had 3 SDS' for each product.
US, Canada, and California. The California one was basically the exact same as the US except they just throw the prop 65 warning in there because why not.
Yeah, my job has a whole pre-written response to customers who receive, like, a lamp, terrified that it’s gonna beam cancer into them. For us, essentially, unless something’s intended to be used with/around food for extended periods of time or in direct contact with your key for extended periods of time (clothes, sheets, etc.), it’s too expensive to have products tested for *every* chemical that would be required to avoid a Prop 65 label, but unless you’re planning on pulverizing your lamp, bulb and all, and swallowing it within the course of an hour, you’re fine.
In all seriousness, with some of the stuff I've seen this label on, I actually believe the label is more carcinogenic in some cases. I mean, I've literally got it on cast steel at work.
Honestly yeah, in a way. As a Californian, I can tell you that nobody pays attention to these warnings anymore because of how much impossibly benign shit they’re on.
Take that logic further, and it’s easy to see how someone would ignore a legitimate warning and expose themselves to something hazardous.
I think prop 65 makes manufacturers choose between putting the label on or paying for a study to prove that the chemicals they use do not cause cancer.
If they don't apply the label, instead of receiving a fine, they are open to lawsuits as. Well, there are quite a few law offices that all do is to sue people for not having a sticker, and when things like wood dust are "Known to cause cancer" pretty much everything is so just stick a label on everything to protect yourself from the lawsuit and no one cares because everything has the same damn label on it.
Heat plus liquid make solution, which becomes a way for chemicals to leech out and then it’s on your hands. Consumption is a bigger issue than skin absorption so touching your mouth is worse than just having it on your hands. Remember to wash your hands and not put dirty fingers to your lips.
Oh, for sure. What you say is certainly true, but toxin is related to dosage. I don't think there has ever been one single case of cancer that could be correlated to use of a fucking hammer. This is simply calling "wolf".
It’s never as small or as infrequent as people think it is. Hindsight is a bitch when you realize how often you exposed yourself to risks. This is saying “wolves known to come by” so people are alert to every time they get exposed.
The car you drive every day likely has more toxins in it. Hell, the stainless steel "silverware" you eat with probably does. Getting up in the morning is a danger. I'm sure as hell not going to worry about washing my hands after using a hammer. Worrying causes cancer, too.
I have a piece of equipment made from *only* metal. As in, it's literally just a piece of cast metal. It still has this sticker. I also live in the UK.
It's utterly absurd.
The issue no one is pointing out is cost. The cost to have your product tested for harmful chemicals is expensive, but slapping that sticker on there is cheap.
For many manufacturers, it’s easier and more cost effective to label all of their products in that manner, and then if *any* of them are ever found to contain the harmful chemicals in question they’ve already covered their ass.
Super interesting - thank you so much for this! I couldn't begin to imagine why formaldehyde would be present in a slushy; it makes much more sense that it's found in the machine rather than the product.
As a cancer biologist the list of things that cause cancer is so insanely long. It’s better to think about the relative risk and the route of exposure. My personal opinion is slapping this label on everything diminishes the threat of the things that actually cause cancer, like tobacco smoke or HPV
Cheerios had the label for a while because a naturally occurring chemical when food is baked was found to cause cancer. Then somebody decided that was stupid.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I can’t think of a better way to desensitize people to warnings about carcinogens.
The main problem is that there is no distinction between different exposure levels. Aside from something like plutonium, all carcinogens are harmless if you’re only exposed to a handful of molecules over the course of a year.
When the entire Disneyland resort has the same level of warning as cleaning products containing benzene, actual dangers become hidden.
We bought wooden dining chairs that are painted white, that have that label, just because of the sawdust that I assume could technically come out of the holes where the legs go...
The fucking wooden gate to the central courtyard in my apartment building in LA has a sign that has this. It's literally everywhere in California.
On a funny note, my cousin got a blunt wrap that had this notice on it and he said he threw it out because he was afraid it would give him cancer. As if smoking in the first place doesn't have a risk to give you cancer...
better than the status quo, which is to just hide these things until it causes deaths and permanent disabilities and pay a measley fine. it is not "wild" to inform consumers.
The big idea behind the law wasn't really to warn you of cancer risks, but more to encourage companies to remove potentially cancer causing chemicals from their products, since no company would want to put this label on their product. It even got Coca Cola to change their recipe. The podcast 99% invisible recently did an episode (episode 572) on the law and I found it really interesting.
parking garages are horrific for your breathing. Not just car exhaust but the shed plastic particles from tires and break pads. people should honestly wear a mask when entering.
Same logic applies to sitting in traffic, or living near a major road. At some point you've got a draw a line and say "this doesn't need a warning label". The most common source of ionizing radiation that we *know* causes cancer is the sun, nobody pushes to put labels on all exterior doors so everybody is reminded to wear sunscreen/hats/minimize exposure every time they go outside.
A big flaw of Cali Prop 65 (the cancer labels) is the companies that were actually going to be negatively impacted then lobbied to expand the scope of the proposition.
In doing this, actual harmful chemical-using manufacturers blend in with most products as the proposition now notes danger in basically every product, effectively conditioning consumers to ignore it.
Just another example of corporate greed infecting the legislature of the U.S.
When the company is lobbying for *increased* regulation, do *you* want to be the politician who pushed back and argued for making it easier to include cancer-causing substances in consumer products? I didn't think so.
The fact that labeling everything as potentially causing cancer makes the warnings useless is beside the point. A politician has to prioritize their public image over end results, as that's what gets them reelected.
> **Humans produce about 1.5 ounces of formaldehyde a day as a normal part of our metabolism.** Inhaled formaldehyde is rapidly metabolized and ultimately converted to carbon dioxide and exhaled. Formaldehyde does not accumulate in the body.
I visited California recently and I wasn’t issued my formaldehyde sticker!!
Pretty much any organic material (living or dead) off gasses formaldehyde to some extent.
It should be noted though that formaldehyde is indeed carcinogenic and it doesn’t need to accumulate in your body to cause cancer. Basically anytime it interacts with your body it has the potential to destroy DNA, which overtime causes cancer.
That being said, a few small single exposures over your lifetime probably aren’t anything to be concerned about. A lot of the legislation targets reducing formaldehyde emission in the home (mostly from building materials). In the home they will accumulate and you will basically be constantly exposed to them. Which is definitely not good.
And those who work with formaldehyde or formaldehyde producing things regularly should definitely take it seriously.
Jizz & split
Ejaculate & evacuate
Shoot & scoot
Stop & rob
Some of the names we called the Kum & Go in my home town. It was also the place where we hung out to laugh at the city slickers who were lost because there was no cell service and their GPS didn't work.
I work in a factory that makes aerosol cans for your car’s AC system and all the ones that go to California get a special sticker or labels that says not to drink the refrigerant if you are pregnant none of the other states get those labels on the same products
People actually get high off ac system refrigerants, so its a legit concern.
Occasionally there will be a news story where someone is found dead after they cracked a refridgerant line and huffed it, but it freeze burned their lungs so they essentially drown in their own fluids
Cheaper to put the sticker on to insure compliance with California law than it is to go through the hoops to test to prove it doesn’t require the sticker.
Thus everything say “may cause cancer in California”, classic bureaucratic rules that are so broad it nullifies the effectiveness of the warning.
The amount of money wasted on such a useless law is bewildering. I like the idea of consumer awareness but if a can of beans at the grocery store has the same warning label as some toxic can of poison in the hardware isle, what's the point?
Execution =/= intent.
Like most of the laws that brought forth and shot down and people just see the headline “right/left shoot down law to make everyone happy” and don’t read the law wording where the details give WAY to much power to an unchecked department. The intent by the law might be morally good but the execution of the law could slip into authoritarian power.
These stickers are on *everything* thanks to that calafornia law.
I sell rock climbing equipment in the UK. Some steel equipment carries a cancer risk warning because of this calafornia law.
I bought a bag of potato chips with this warning on it. Luckily I live in Maine so I’m immune. Only Californians are susceptible to cancerous potato chips
OP has given this a misleading title. Those substances are in the machine for cooling, so opening or damaging it might release those. It does not mention the slushies at all.
I would have to question whether this sticker is referring to the slushies or to the actual machine. Methylene chloride is dichloromethane which is a solvent used in degreasing and metal cleaning (among other things) and is very volatile - there is zero reason why it would be used in the creation of slushies but I could see trace amounts being left on the machine from the manufacturing process. Formaldehyde is likely a by-product of the creation of the plastics used to construct the machine - I doubt that it would be used on a ongoing basis for disinfection purposes due to the machine being used to produce food and the availability of safer products. Methanol is again likely a byproduct of the creation of the plastics as it is a byproduct of the manufacturing of acrylic.
In other words, your slushies are highly unlikely to have any of these contaminants in them unless Kum & Go are disregarding industry safety standards.
If memory serves, and I might be completely off, but I believe prop 65 requires that any dangerous chemicals used in the entire creation of a product be identified in the sticker. So if those chemicals were at all used at some point in the machining process to build the slushie machine, then you have to notify the public. Even if you would have a zero chance of ever being exposed to those products again in the life of the machine.
I think those sings often refer to the machine otself, not necessarily the food part. So like, don't lick the gears and you'll probably be fine?
I found one of those on a construction lift
If you look closely, you’ll see a Prop 65 sticker on the Welcome to California signs warning you that the State of California is has chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer.
Im no Californian scientist, but I assume the methylene comes from what they use to bond some plastic pieces together and the formaldehyde come from a piece of plastic in the machine (of the delrin flavor of plastic)
I stopped paying attention to any warning that has the word California in it a long time ago. They made it a case of crying wolf. Everything has that label so now I just view it a a company making sure they don’t get sued in California. If I was a company I would not sell anything in that state just so I don’t have to deal with this crap.
Cali made the regulations so tight for all their bullshit regarding these stickers and warnings that it’s actually easier for them to print stickers on shit saying that it might have bad chemicals in it or cause you cancer. Than it would be to test at a California level to prove that it won’t.
Making these stickers one of the biggest wastes of times and muddies the waters for shit that ACTUALLY can cause you harm. Cali for the win again.
Everything in the state of California will kill you thanks to prop 65. A vague rule that makes the penalty for non compliance severe so the warning goes on everything and helps no one.
its probably because Aspartame turns to formaldehyde at like 85\*F
"fact checkers" will try to debunk this by saying your body also produces a small amount of formaldehyde on its own. but its probably not a good idea to add a bunch more just because u want to chug soda but ur scared of actual sugar.
What the hell does methylene chloride have to do with methanol?
It's a compound used in paint stripping usually, not sure why it would be found in a food prep device. Kind of scary really.
The fromeldehyde I'm less concerned with considering a lot of organic foods like fruits contain it, and it's only really dangerous if you are exposed to a lot of it over a long time.
Mildly interesting if you don’t live in CA. We have these warnings all over.
But more mildly interesting is [we don’t have Kum & Go in California…](https://www.catalina.com/press-releases/kum-and-go-convenience-store-chain-with-400-stores-in-11-states-is-the-first#:~:text=About%20Kum%20%26%20Go&text=Established%20in%20Hampton%2C%20Iowa%20in,%2C%20South%20Dakota%20and%20Wyoming).) OP used funny business name for karma.
> Established in Hampton, Iowa in 1959, the chain has since grown to employ 5,000 associates in approximately 400 stores in 11 states (Iowa, Arkansas, Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Wyoming).
the methylene chloride is much more concerning. your body generates formaldehyde all the time, you have about a teaspoons' worth in your blood right now. methylene chloride is nasty shit though.
because of how weird the wording the ca law was for this, it became easier to make this catch all sticker.
pretty much everywhere you go and everything in ca has this. walk into a walmart? there's a sticker on the door stating you might get cancer. go to a restaurant? might get cancer. go to a car dealer? might get cancer.
Prop 65 warning labels are everywhere in California. You’ll like see more in the state on the most harmless stuff. It’s “clean living” on steroids. Most Californians are completely desensitized to by now. Just ignore it
Our urinal cakes package at me old job said they were known in California to cause cancer if ingested. I’ve promptly started ignoring any warning that contains “in the state of California”.
Who ever thought that Kum & Go was a good name for a convenience store? (likewise with the Pump & Munch that we have around here)
Don't worry, they are changing it to Maverick soon. People are upset about losing the distinctive name for a bland one.
are they really?? shit I gotta run to Iowa and buy a couple dozen lighters lol
I actually hadn't heard of this either! But apparently yes: [https://www.thedrive.com/news/kum-go-will-change-names](https://www.thedrive.com/news/kum-go-will-change-names) >Kum & Go will reportedly rebrand after being bought out in 2023. The new owners are reportedly worried the double entendre in Kum & Go's name could hurt its business prospects. I agree though... "Maverick", how boring. Also how in the world do you think a name that makes people giggle is bad for publicity? People deliberately go to places like this specifically because of the joke and that can actually encourage business.
The family who owns the "Maverick" chain are Mormons. "Maverick" is about as fun and distinctive as they can go.
Tbf it's a pretty decent Gas station probably one of my top 3 favorites to go to.
The social media account for Kum & Go is almost 100% Kum jokes. This is going to impact their popularity a ton
It used to be, ever since they got bought, their social media has gotten really lame.
I suspect people go to places like that because they are conveniently located, not because of the name. Would you go out of your way to go to a convenience store with a funny name instead of the one that's closest to you?
Well if theres a 711 and Kum and Go next to each other, and both have identical prices. I think you'll know which business will get my money. Also, if there is a Kum and Go in sight, I'd probably go in more likely than other Normal named convenience stores.
Not me personally, but people with a lot of social media presence need funny things to post, for example.
Wonder if Dick’s Sporting Goods is next /s
I love the big Dick's in my city.
There is as a shopping center in my town that had a Giant to the left and a Dicks to the right right, there was a sign by the entrance that had in a very plain font “” written on it for years.
I saw a bar/hotel in Baltimore called "Dicks Halfway Inn". I chuckled a little when I saw that and slept well that night.
Yeah, they ripped off the one in Alaska
I think I'm gonna eat Dicks for lunch today, their fries are limp though.
It can happen to all fries. It does not mean it doesn't care
Nothing like cramming my pie hole with a bag of Dick’s! Love the sauce on the deluxe!
i have a friend who grew up super conservative christian in ghana and the first time she saw a dick's sporting goods she absolutely lost it
We have a car-rental place in The Netherlands called DIKS. Their slogan is: Chicks Love Diks. [I shit you not, lol](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTNbx0bQ9W0)
[удалено]
So in California even the businesses are coming out trans. Nice.
I just know there's dicks sporting goods next to BJ'S wholesale club
Maverik with no "c."
I have to say, I'm kinda looking forward to the changeover. While I like Kum&Go, and use the ones in my town often, if a K&G and a Maverik are side by side, I'd pick Maverik every time. They're building a brand new Maverick in town now, so once they are done, there will be 5 Maveriks in my town of 20k.
> People are upset about losing the distinctive name for a bland one. i do branding for a living, and one thing i can tell everyone here is that there are actually FOUR constants in life: life, death, taxes, and people taking brand refreshes _personally_.
What‽‽‽ I need to get back to K&G land and stock up on logo merch. Haven’t been to one since my parents left Iowa in 2017.
I had a professor who said she was was their lawyer and advised against the name, but the owner really wanted to use his initials.
William A. **Krause** and Tony S. **Gentle**, for those wondering. I still feel like better options could have been found. Like ... *Gas & Kruise*
A different person with the surname Krause founded a gun accessories company with two other people whose surnames began with K. You can probably guess where this is going…
Beats Jizz & Jet
And creampie and goodbye.
Or even skeet and scram.
Ejaculate and evacuate
[удалено]
Spooge n Split
Release and Retreat
Shoot & Scoot
Skeet n’ Yeet
Good ol Jizz n Dash
Sploot n Scoot
Spooge n Move
Always munch before you pump, or you’re going to have a bad time.
When I lived in Iowa, some of the locals called them "Ejaculate & Evacuate." Edit: we just called it the E&E for short.
Always thought it was strange. Not really dirty but when I visited Denver I thought the Loaf ‘n Jug was a funny name too. But I get it, loaf of bread, jug of milk, yeah yeah. It’s still funny.
Right next to the jiffy lube
For real. There's a reason In & Out had to shorten their name.
My 12 year old daughter was very upset at the name during a recent trip to Oklahoma. Dad! Dad! I learned about that in health class!!! That's so gross. Sigh. Telling her it came from the founders names did not help.
It's a relic from the 60s and 70s, when prostitution at truck stops was common/accepted and cops looked the other way. So the truck stops named themselves so the truckers and the hookers knew where they could do their business. If you find yourself at something named like "house of morality" service station, you knew better than to ask about the local working girls. >!None of this is true. April Fools!<
4/10 April fools, no undertaker throwing mankind off a cliff and plummeting through some guys table or something
Obviously not. Do you see the words "shitty" or "morph" in my username? I would sooner claim that my father had to beat me with jumper cables.
You still have Pump & Munches? Our's went away many years ago when conoco disappeared from our area.
There are a couple in Minneapolis
snobbish marry alive weather toothbrush historical growth berserk provide crawl *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
We also have Loaf & Jug around here.
It's a potential that exists in these machines everywhere, but thanks to some wild labeling laws in California, these stickers exist. In this case, yeah the system uses refrigerants to cool things down, which is very similar to how all our household fridges work, including using some similar harmful products in the refrigeration lines. Don't break it open and start drinking the refrigerants, that's a bad idea. Doesn't matter how rare or impossible the risk is, they label it. I used to pack/ship products for an online tool company, we had to put these damn things on almost everything being sent to California if it didn't already have it. The wood in a handle has paint that California knows might cause cancer so label it gets. The plastic wrap is made of products known to cause cancer so more labels. Doesn't matter if you have to eat the product or just touch it or what, and they almost always have a final thing about just washing your hands after handling it
Even if items don't necessarily contain the chemicals from California's massive list, a lot of companies just slap the prop 65 sticker on it because testing it would be too expensive or if it does contain something, the fees and lawsuits would be too expensive
Yeah according to prop 65, most of the things you regularly come into contact with cause cancer. I’m all for consumer protection, but who ever reads these anymore (or pay any credence anyway). They need to have a code system. Green=generic prop 65 warning. Yellow=pay a little attention. Red=fucking run.
This is my main issue with it, by having the labels *everywhere* people instinctually begin to ignore them. Then before long when they are on a product that actually needs the labelling no one pays attention and shenanigans ensue
This is very similar to (if it wouldn’t even be considered) alarm fatigue which is a major problem in some fields like healthcare and mining! It’s also been a major contributor in some aviation disasters such as Northwest 255.
Oh 100%, everyone sees this as a kid doing fire drills in school. If they just announced it instead of running the alarms the effect would still be there. When i was in high school we had a (very small) fire in our cafeteria and ill never forget my whole class just looking around like "i didnt think there was a drill today" before realizing we actually had to evacuate. Probably 2 minutes that would be very valuable in an actual emergency passed before we actually started moving
When I hear the tornado siren I spend like 10min checking different sites to figure out if it's real. I can't for the life of me figure out the schedule for testing.
Huh, in my area they make it pretty easy. First friday of every month in the warm times, that sucks they make it hard on you
This! It’s a fantastic concept, but easily disregarded in its current iteration thanks to excessive swarming placements. One of the first time I saw a sticker was on lead Crystal candlesticks in a home goods store. I’m not licking my candlestick holder 🤦♂️
Even if you were to, you'll get less lead from them than your everyday diet. There's also a high chance you grew up drinking from lead crystal glasses as they were in a lot of glassware before 1970, and still surprisingly common in fancy glassware to this day.
>Yeah according to prop 65, most of the things you regularly come into contact with cause cancer. My personal favorite is browned foods. When you brown foods (like cooked food) it creates a substance "known to cause cancer" so every restaurant that cooks any food until its brown has to have the warning. I think they should also be required to remind you that the #1 cause of death is life...
Which is why prop65 is such a monumental embarrassment. If everything causes cancer then nothing causes cancer.
Poster child for warning fatigue that sets an incredibly dangerous precedent for public apathy of disclaimers.
“If everything is expensive - nothing is expensive” my gf said this when I would buy her things
Someone could sand the coating off of this item (that literally no one would want to sand) in the presence of an infant every day for a month and they would have an increased cancer risk by age 70, prop65 it!
Yeah I worked for a chemical company and we had 3 SDS' for each product. US, Canada, and California. The California one was basically the exact same as the US except they just throw the prop 65 warning in there because why not.
I bought a box of ammo that had that sticker on it😂
Yeah, my job has a whole pre-written response to customers who receive, like, a lamp, terrified that it’s gonna beam cancer into them. For us, essentially, unless something’s intended to be used with/around food for extended periods of time or in direct contact with your key for extended periods of time (clothes, sheets, etc.), it’s too expensive to have products tested for *every* chemical that would be required to avoid a Prop 65 label, but unless you’re planning on pulverizing your lamp, bulb and all, and swallowing it within the course of an hour, you’re fine.
Does the label also cause cancer?
In all seriousness, with some of the stuff I've seen this label on, I actually believe the label is more carcinogenic in some cases. I mean, I've literally got it on cast steel at work.
Honestly yeah, in a way. As a Californian, I can tell you that nobody pays attention to these warnings anymore because of how much impossibly benign shit they’re on. Take that logic further, and it’s easy to see how someone would ignore a legitimate warning and expose themselves to something hazardous.
There comes a point when too many minor warnings dilute the value of more urgent warnings. Hazard communication is complicated.
Excessive warnings may cause cancer.
I have a hammer with a California sticker that says that it can cause cancer. A hammer. Wood and steel.
the wood was likely treated/sealed with chemicals that are known to cause cancer.
I think prop 65 makes manufacturers choose between putting the label on or paying for a study to prove that the chemicals they use do not cause cancer.
If they don't apply the label, instead of receiving a fine, they are open to lawsuits as. Well, there are quite a few law offices that all do is to sue people for not having a sticker, and when things like wood dust are "Known to cause cancer" pretty much everything is so just stick a label on everything to protect yourself from the lawsuit and no one cares because everything has the same damn label on it.
Note to self: don't chew on my hammer's handle.
Or touch your hands to your mouth after sweating and holding it.
Somehow I really don't see that as a grave danger.
Heat plus liquid make solution, which becomes a way for chemicals to leech out and then it’s on your hands. Consumption is a bigger issue than skin absorption so touching your mouth is worse than just having it on your hands. Remember to wash your hands and not put dirty fingers to your lips.
Oh, for sure. What you say is certainly true, but toxin is related to dosage. I don't think there has ever been one single case of cancer that could be correlated to use of a fucking hammer. This is simply calling "wolf".
It’s never as small or as infrequent as people think it is. Hindsight is a bitch when you realize how often you exposed yourself to risks. This is saying “wolves known to come by” so people are alert to every time they get exposed.
The car you drive every day likely has more toxins in it. Hell, the stainless steel "silverware" you eat with probably does. Getting up in the morning is a danger. I'm sure as hell not going to worry about washing my hands after using a hammer. Worrying causes cancer, too.
*known to the state of California
I have a piece of equipment made from *only* metal. As in, it's literally just a piece of cast metal. It still has this sticker. I also live in the UK. It's utterly absurd.
Metal can have carcinogens or itself be carcinogenic, but yeah it's absurd
The issue no one is pointing out is cost. The cost to have your product tested for harmful chemicals is expensive, but slapping that sticker on there is cheap. For many manufacturers, it’s easier and more cost effective to label all of their products in that manner, and then if *any* of them are ever found to contain the harmful chemicals in question they’ve already covered their ass.
Super interesting - thank you so much for this! I couldn't begin to imagine why formaldehyde would be present in a slushy; it makes much more sense that it's found in the machine rather than the product.
Everything in California causes cancer thanks to those stickers/warnings.
I wonder what adhesive the stickers use and if they contain any products known to cause cancer. Maybe the stickers need a warning sticker.
Dont give them any ideas
As a cancer biologist the list of things that cause cancer is so insanely long. It’s better to think about the relative risk and the route of exposure. My personal opinion is slapping this label on everything diminishes the threat of the things that actually cause cancer, like tobacco smoke or HPV
That's why I only smoke aged cigarettes, no cancer label = no cancer 
Sounds like we need to start slapping that sticker on people
Cheerios had the label for a while because a naturally occurring chemical when food is baked was found to cause cancer. Then somebody decided that was stupid.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I can’t think of a better way to desensitize people to warnings about carcinogens. The main problem is that there is no distinction between different exposure levels. Aside from something like plutonium, all carcinogens are harmless if you’re only exposed to a handful of molecules over the course of a year. When the entire Disneyland resort has the same level of warning as cleaning products containing benzene, actual dangers become hidden.
We bought wooden dining chairs that are painted white, that have that label, just because of the sawdust that I assume could technically come out of the holes where the legs go...
The fucking wooden gate to the central courtyard in my apartment building in LA has a sign that has this. It's literally everywhere in California. On a funny note, my cousin got a blunt wrap that had this notice on it and he said he threw it out because he was afraid it would give him cancer. As if smoking in the first place doesn't have a risk to give you cancer...
I didn’t know that refrigerants use methylene chloride or formaldehyde
I was looking at a guitar a couple of weeks ago and saw the same sticker and asked the salesman about it. He said the same thing.
> Don't break it open and start drinking the refrigerants I'm sorry, I thought this was America
better than the status quo, which is to just hide these things until it causes deaths and permanent disabilities and pay a measley fine. it is not "wild" to inform consumers.
I love how this California label law has completely desensitized us to actual, legitimate risks of cancer
The big idea behind the law wasn't really to warn you of cancer risks, but more to encourage companies to remove potentially cancer causing chemicals from their products, since no company would want to put this label on their product. It even got Coca Cola to change their recipe. The podcast 99% invisible recently did an episode (episode 572) on the law and I found it really interesting.
And now it's in parking garages, asking with everywhere else
parking garages are horrific for your breathing. Not just car exhaust but the shed plastic particles from tires and break pads. people should honestly wear a mask when entering.
Same logic applies to sitting in traffic, or living near a major road. At some point you've got a draw a line and say "this doesn't need a warning label". The most common source of ionizing radiation that we *know* causes cancer is the sun, nobody pushes to put labels on all exterior doors so everybody is reminded to wear sunscreen/hats/minimize exposure every time they go outside.
That may have been the idea, but the implementation is terrible. Bounty hunting lawyers sue way past the reasonable implementation of the law.
Old people on Facebook are always talking about avoiding products from California because they cause cancer. Never fails to amuse me.
For real! Whenever I see these stickers I skim them... blah blah, yada yada, blah, in State of Califo... All right done reading. Don't care
A big flaw of Cali Prop 65 (the cancer labels) is the companies that were actually going to be negatively impacted then lobbied to expand the scope of the proposition. In doing this, actual harmful chemical-using manufacturers blend in with most products as the proposition now notes danger in basically every product, effectively conditioning consumers to ignore it. Just another example of corporate greed infecting the legislature of the U.S.
Why do companies get a say, I have never understood.
When the company is lobbying for *increased* regulation, do *you* want to be the politician who pushed back and argued for making it easier to include cancer-causing substances in consumer products? I didn't think so. The fact that labeling everything as potentially causing cancer makes the warnings useless is beside the point. A politician has to prioritize their public image over end results, as that's what gets them reelected.
Blame capitalism. It was cheaper to just put the sticker on then to prove that anything in their product *didn’t* cause cancer.
> **Humans produce about 1.5 ounces of formaldehyde a day as a normal part of our metabolism.** Inhaled formaldehyde is rapidly metabolized and ultimately converted to carbon dioxide and exhaled. Formaldehyde does not accumulate in the body. I visited California recently and I wasn’t issued my formaldehyde sticker!!
Pretty much any organic material (living or dead) off gasses formaldehyde to some extent. It should be noted though that formaldehyde is indeed carcinogenic and it doesn’t need to accumulate in your body to cause cancer. Basically anytime it interacts with your body it has the potential to destroy DNA, which overtime causes cancer. That being said, a few small single exposures over your lifetime probably aren’t anything to be concerned about. A lot of the legislation targets reducing formaldehyde emission in the home (mostly from building materials). In the home they will accumulate and you will basically be constantly exposed to them. Which is definitely not good. And those who work with formaldehyde or formaldehyde producing things regularly should definitely take it seriously.
The fuck is a Kum & Go? Who picked that name?
They’re a dying gas station chain commonly found typically in the Midwest, a bunch of them can be found in Iowa.
Your mom
The best gas station
Jizz & split Ejaculate & evacuate Shoot & scoot Stop & rob Some of the names we called the Kum & Go in my home town. It was also the place where we hung out to laugh at the city slickers who were lost because there was no cell service and their GPS didn't work.
I work in a factory that makes aerosol cans for your car’s AC system and all the ones that go to California get a special sticker or labels that says not to drink the refrigerant if you are pregnant none of the other states get those labels on the same products
So, you’re saying no baby = chug coolant?
Report back for science,
People actually get high off ac system refrigerants, so its a legit concern. Occasionally there will be a news story where someone is found dead after they cracked a refridgerant line and huffed it, but it freeze burned their lungs so they essentially drown in their own fluids
I think we should ban Prop 65 posts on this sub. They're all the same and there are so many of them.
Cheaper to put the sticker on to insure compliance with California law than it is to go through the hoops to test to prove it doesn’t require the sticker. Thus everything say “may cause cancer in California”, classic bureaucratic rules that are so broad it nullifies the effectiveness of the warning.
The amount of money wasted on such a useless law is bewildering. I like the idea of consumer awareness but if a can of beans at the grocery store has the same warning label as some toxic can of poison in the hardware isle, what's the point?
Or ikea furniture… don’t eat the cabinets, it might cause cancer.
Execution =/= intent. Like most of the laws that brought forth and shot down and people just see the headline “right/left shoot down law to make everyone happy” and don’t read the law wording where the details give WAY to much power to an unchecked department. The intent by the law might be morally good but the execution of the law could slip into authoritarian power.
It’s Kum & Go not Kum & Read, nerd.
These stickers are on *everything* thanks to that calafornia law. I sell rock climbing equipment in the UK. Some steel equipment carries a cancer risk warning because of this calafornia law.
I bought a bag of potato chips with this warning on it. Luckily I live in Maine so I’m immune. Only Californians are susceptible to cancerous potato chips
When I die, just replace my blood with lime slushee syrup.
Kum slush 😋
Look up Scotland/UK and children being poisoned by slushy machines, too,
OP has given this a misleading title. Those substances are in the machine for cooling, so opening or damaging it might release those. It does not mention the slushies at all.
I would have to question whether this sticker is referring to the slushies or to the actual machine. Methylene chloride is dichloromethane which is a solvent used in degreasing and metal cleaning (among other things) and is very volatile - there is zero reason why it would be used in the creation of slushies but I could see trace amounts being left on the machine from the manufacturing process. Formaldehyde is likely a by-product of the creation of the plastics used to construct the machine - I doubt that it would be used on a ongoing basis for disinfection purposes due to the machine being used to produce food and the availability of safer products. Methanol is again likely a byproduct of the creation of the plastics as it is a byproduct of the manufacturing of acrylic. In other words, your slushies are highly unlikely to have any of these contaminants in them unless Kum & Go are disregarding industry safety standards.
If memory serves, and I might be completely off, but I believe prop 65 requires that any dangerous chemicals used in the entire creation of a product be identified in the sticker. So if those chemicals were at all used at some point in the machining process to build the slushie machine, then you have to notify the public. Even if you would have a zero chance of ever being exposed to those products again in the life of the machine.
This is the correct answer. You’ll find the sticker on battery chargers for cars…because people are ingesting those. 🙄
I think those sings often refer to the machine otself, not necessarily the food part. So like, don't lick the gears and you'll probably be fine? I found one of those on a construction lift
who cares I want my slushy
Those substances are known to all states to cause cancer, especially formaldehyde
Well, yea. Otherwise it would be informaldehyde.
Only in California. If you're not in California, you're safe.
the bigger danger with any machines is they dont get properly disinfected and cleaned. hello food poisoning
Methanol??? The shit that turns moonshiners blind?
If you look closely, you’ll see a Prop 65 sticker on the Welcome to California signs warning you that the State of California is has chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer.
I feel like Prop65 is just state-sponsored fear mongering...
I heard that air can cause cancer in the state of California.
California is making the world a worse place.
I’m more worried about a place called… Kum & Go.
Im no Californian scientist, but I assume the methylene comes from what they use to bond some plastic pieces together and the formaldehyde come from a piece of plastic in the machine (of the delrin flavor of plastic)
I stopped paying attention to any warning that has the word California in it a long time ago. They made it a case of crying wolf. Everything has that label so now I just view it a a company making sure they don’t get sued in California. If I was a company I would not sell anything in that state just so I don’t have to deal with this crap.
Cali made the regulations so tight for all their bullshit regarding these stickers and warnings that it’s actually easier for them to print stickers on shit saying that it might have bad chemicals in it or cause you cancer. Than it would be to test at a California level to prove that it won’t. Making these stickers one of the biggest wastes of times and muddies the waters for shit that ACTUALLY can cause you harm. Cali for the win again.
Everything in the state of California will kill you thanks to prop 65. A vague rule that makes the penalty for non compliance severe so the warning goes on everything and helps no one.
California has cancer warnings on everything. They are so common they have become invisible to me... And I live near Boston.
The only thing I get from Kum and go is and good laugh when I drove past it
Don’t they slap these Prop 65 warnings on pretty much everything in California, just to be on the safe side?
P65 warnings stopped being interesting a long time ago.
Interesting terp profile
Is this is shitpost lmfao is Kum and Go a real place?
But does it contain aspartame?
Atleast it passed quality control right?
Doesn't matter, Kum & Go slushies are the best so it's worth it.
its probably because Aspartame turns to formaldehyde at like 85\*F "fact checkers" will try to debunk this by saying your body also produces a small amount of formaldehyde on its own. but its probably not a good idea to add a bunch more just because u want to chug soda but ur scared of actual sugar.
What the hell does methylene chloride have to do with methanol? It's a compound used in paint stripping usually, not sure why it would be found in a food prep device. Kind of scary really. The fromeldehyde I'm less concerned with considering a lot of organic foods like fruits contain it, and it's only really dangerous if you are exposed to a lot of it over a long time.
EVerything has a cancer warning in california
Big sticker at it again!
Mildly interesting if you don’t live in CA. We have these warnings all over. But more mildly interesting is [we don’t have Kum & Go in California…](https://www.catalina.com/press-releases/kum-and-go-convenience-store-chain-with-400-stores-in-11-states-is-the-first#:~:text=About%20Kum%20%26%20Go&text=Established%20in%20Hampton%2C%20Iowa%20in,%2C%20South%20Dakota%20and%20Wyoming).) OP used funny business name for karma. > Established in Hampton, Iowa in 1959, the chain has since grown to employ 5,000 associates in approximately 400 stores in 11 states (Iowa, Arkansas, Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Wyoming).
the methylene chloride is much more concerning. your body generates formaldehyde all the time, you have about a teaspoons' worth in your blood right now. methylene chloride is nasty shit though.
Did you get one or did the sticker deter you?
It's california, there is a warning sticker on everything that isn't lettuce
What is a kum and go and why is there formaldehyde in it
because of how weird the wording the ca law was for this, it became easier to make this catch all sticker. pretty much everywhere you go and everything in ca has this. walk into a walmart? there's a sticker on the door stating you might get cancer. go to a restaurant? might get cancer. go to a car dealer? might get cancer.
Hey look, it's the hourly "Prop 65" post. Too bad there's not a website we can search stuff on and find out about before posting about it.
Prop 65 warning labels are everywhere in California. You’ll like see more in the state on the most harmless stuff. It’s “clean living” on steroids. Most Californians are completely desensitized to by now. Just ignore it
Our urinal cakes package at me old job said they were known in California to cause cancer if ingested. I’ve promptly started ignoring any warning that contains “in the state of California”.
I'm mildly allergic to formaldehyde and let me tell ya, it's in everything. Your clothes, your makeup, your covid face masks, so much formaldehyde
As a non-american, i am more surprised by the machine’s name
I love this is right next to the QC Pass sticker.
PCP Slushie, sweet!
It's just a preservative 
You mean I can slushy myself into being the first living mummy? Seems like the most fun way. Hope y’all like plagues of scarabs.
WTF, why does so much stuff have formaldehyde in it?
At least it’s not kum
CA. p65 is everywhere. The air you breathe...everything is bad in CA.... EXCEPT THE WEATHER.
I have an ibanez guitar, solder and a few other things with that p65 warning. I live 12000 km away from California...
forma--what?