Subject:
|
Re: Weren't we all expecting this??
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:03:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4208 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Brian Pilati wrote:
| |
In someways I knew this would happen and I have been expecting this day.
Hopefully, it means the downfall of MegaBloks forever!
LINK
|
Thanks for the link--product safety is of great concern to fans of the brand,
especially those of us who have small children!
I think that this part is relevant:
Health Canada, a government department, said that the preliminary results
of tests on a random sample of the blocks last week showed “no quantifiable
total lead content in the plastic.” Mega Brands, which unsuccessfully sought
a court injunction against the nonprofit magazine this week, also vigorously
denied that its products exceeded regulatory lead limits.
If true, then the governmental standards are at fault, rather than Mega
Bloks.
|
Maybe neither the governmental standards or Mega Bloks are at fault but rather
the “non-profit” magazine which stated that ;
“When the results were returned by a lab, which Mr. Clerk said he could not
identify because of a confidentiality agreement, a yellow Maxi block was the
only toy that exceeded the 600-parts-per-million limit for lead set by Canada
and the United States. Blue and red Maxi blocks showed no lead at all.”
They did not exceed the limit for lead set by Canada because the limit set was
based on one standard test and the magazine decided to do a completely different
test. So that statement is from what I read patently false. All limits imposed
on contaminants also include a Standard Method of testing attached to that
limit. The limit that would be set by Canada or US using the test the unknown
laboratory used--and what kind of confidentiality should be needed for the
lab-very well might be completely different than the limit based on the
methodology of Health Canada.
And why, for example is the magazine new standard more realistic than that of
Health Canada. This is a classic case of testing for apple and using an orange
test Tommy Armstrong
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Weren't we all expecting this??
|
| (...) Excellent points, Tommy! The need for transparency in a situation like this is great, especially when the burden of proof is upon the party making the accusation. In this case, the magazine must support its claim in a verifiable way. Instead, (...) (17 years ago, 19-Oct-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Weren't we all expecting this??
|
| (...) Thanks for the link--product safety is of great concern to fans of the brand, especially those of us who have small children! I think that this part is relevant: Health Canada, a government department, said that the preliminary results of (...) (17 years ago, 19-Oct-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
15 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
