Slashdot Mirror


US, Aussie Officials Yank GHB-Producing Toys

theodp writes "Questioned about concerns over China-made toys, Toys 'R' Us CEO Jerry Storch predicted 'this will be the safest holiday season ever.' Oops. On the same day Storch's interview ran in Fortune, Toys 'R' Us joined other North American and Australian retailers to pull millions of Chinese-made toy bead sets from shelves after scientists found they contain a chemical that when ingested metabolizes into GHB, the date-rape drug gamma hydroxy butyrate. Two children in the US and three in Australia were hospitalized after swallowing the beads."

343 comments

  1. So... by Arthur+B. · · Score: 5, Funny

    Where can we buy the beads ?

    --
    \u262D = \u5350
    1. Re:So... by wattrlz · · Score: 1

      Toys 'R' US. Maybe you can still find some stacked up in the back waiting to get shipped out.

    2. Re:So... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's why there is a 99-cents store that sells Chinese toys right next to the downtown bars around here!

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:So... by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Beads? You don't need the beads. Just see Ginger. Ginger and the Mickey part 1 gives a first person account of a non-sexual use for these drugs, and the sequel, Am I too picky? chronicles the karma payback.

      Of course, since those diaries were written in 2003 Ginger's probably either dead or in prison by now.

      -mcgrew

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    4. Re:So... by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

      Heh, you want real date-rape related trauma, go to a bar called Legends in the valley of NS. There are apparently 3 women who go there to pick people up to medicate and gang rape. Men, women, doesn't matter.

      Who knows, maybe you'll become a movie star. Only justification for it I can see.

      Creepy shit GHB.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    5. Re:So... by sm62704 · · Score: 5, Funny
      I'm pretty sure all she was after was money. But there is an even more insidious way these girls get your money.

      POLICE WARNING:

      Police are warning all men who frequent clubs, parties and local pubs to be alert and stay cautious when offered a drink from any woman. Many females use a date rape drug on the market called ..."Beer". The drug is found in liquid form and available anywhere. It comes in bottles, cans, from taps and in large "kegs".

      "Beer" is used by female sexual predators at parties and bars to persuade their male victims to go home and have sex with them. A woman needs only to get a guy to consume a few units of "Beer" and then simply ask him home for no strings attached sex. Men are rendered helpless against this approach.

      After several "Beers", men will often succumb to the desires to perform sexual acts on horrific looking women whom they would never normally be attracted.

      After drinking "Beer", men often awaken with only hazy memories of exactly what happened to them the night before, often with just a vague feeling that "something bad" occurred.

      At other times these unfortunate men are swindled out of their life's savings, in a familiar scam known as a "relationship". In extreme cases, the female may even be shrewd enough to entrap the unsuspecting male into a longer term form of servitude and punishment referred to as "marriage". Men are much more susceptible to this scam after "Beer" is administered and sex is offered by the predatory females. Please! Forward this warning to every male you know.

      If you fall victim to this "beer" and the women administering it..... There are male support groups where you can discuss the details of your shocking encounter with similarly affected like-minded guys. For the support group nearest you, just look up "Golf Courses" in the phone book.

      -mcgrew
      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    6. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I could give you more than a handful of first-person stories involving GHB. When taken at the correct dose, and in the absence of other depressants like alcohol or pills, GHB is a good time -- almost like being drunk, but a little bit more druggy-feeling.

      Mix with alcohol, and you're out like a light for about 3-6 hours (or more, with higher doses). This earned GHB its reputation as a date-rape drug.

      Though none of the articles seem to say, I am guessing the chemical on the beads was GBL, or gammabutyrolactone, most often seen as a floor cleaner and MUCH less safe to ingest than GHB itself.

    7. Re:So... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      and, ummm....is the effect stronger if you grind them up and inject them? Just curious

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    8. Re:So... by xeromist · · Score: 1

      Hilarious!

      --
      This sig is exactly seventy characters long and a real waste of space!
    9. Re:So... by Znarl · · Score: 4, Funny

      I love the product review on that website:

      "Pros: Ever since we received our aqua dots super studio our 5 year old hasn't stopped playing with it. He has created dozens of unique shapes and designs. Now he's decorating the house with Halloween creations that he made with his aqua dots.

      Cons: I keep having to purchase more beads."

    10. Re:So... by StarvingSE · · Score: 4, Funny

      Drugged up beads? Mardi Gras is going to be so awsome this year...

      --
      I got nothin'
    11. Re:So... by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      Not to take away from the dangers of the GHB drug, but I for one hope that 'Merkuns stop production of GHB-like offspring who become presidents. The presence or prevalence of harmful, street-level drugs depends on the fecklessness or recklessness of a given administration, down to local police action. But, since nobody wants to be bombed for messing with the drug trade, only seasonal, PR, or token busts seem to be made. Any SERIOUS incursions into drug trade and profits will come at a high price -- to the users as well as any administration and all law enforcement involved.

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    12. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one hope that 'Merkuns stop production of GHB-like offspring who become presidents.

      Too late!

      We recently received a huge shipment of Aqua Dots products. They were so irresistable, even our President got into the spirit of making creative designs with dots. Take a look at some of his unique Aqua Dot creations.
      That explains everything...
    13. Re:So... by krog · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wrong about the GBL part. The chemical was actually 1,4-butanediol, used commercially in plastics processing. 1,4-B is converted to GHB in the body, but again has more toxic effects than GHB alone. Apparently the factory was supposed to use 1,5-pentanediol instead but the almighty yuan triumphed (again).

    14. Re:So... by l8f57 · · Score: 5, Funny

      See Also this Warning:

      HOME DEPOT SCAM!!! PLEASE READ!

      A "heads up" for those men who may be regular Home Depot customers.

      Over the last month I became a victim of a clever scam while out shopping. Simply going out to get supplies has turned out to be quite traumatic. Don't be naive enough to think it couldn't happen to you or your friends. Here's how the scam works:

      Two seriously good-looking 20-21 year-old girls come over to your car as you are packing your shopping into the trunk. They both start wiping your windshield with a rag and Windex, with their breasts almost falling out of their skimpy T-shirts. It is impossible not to look.

      When you thank them and offer them a tip, they say "No" and instead ask you for a ride to another Home Depot or Staples. You agree and they get in the back seat.

      On the way, they start undressing. Then one of them climbs over into the front seat and starts crawling all over you, while the other one steals your wallet.

      I had my wallet stolen October 4th, 9th, 10th, twice on the 15th, 17th, 20th, & 24th. Also November 1st, 3rd, three times just yesterday and very likely again this coming weekend.

      So tell your friends to be careful.

    15. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I am guessing the chemical on the beads was GBL, or gammabutyrolactone
      According to Wikipedia (but unreferenced) the beads contain 1,4-butanediol which is also used as a recreational drug ("One Comma Four", "One Four Bee" or "One Four B-D-O"). They were supposed to contain 1,5-pentanediol, so maybe something went wrong during production. Either that, or the Yellow Menace is trying to zombify the next generation of Americans.
    16. Re:So... by iocat · · Score: 2
      You know what? That's awesome, and I fully support your recreational drug use. But, uh, I really don't want my sex-year-old kid injesting *any* drugs, even ones that work great recreationally for young adults. And especially unintentionally, resulting in overdose and coma.

      But thanks a million, China and the FTC, for watching out for me!

      As I told my son this morning (Aquabeads were actually high on his Christams list -- its a pretty cool toy), "expect a lot of toys from Lego and Playmobil this Christmas." (99% of Lego and Playmobil are still made in Europe, not China.)

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    17. Re:So... by operagost · · Score: 3, Funny

      "But, uh, I really don't want my sex-year-old kid injesting *any* drugs, even ones that work great recreationally for young adults."
      Freudian slip?

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    18. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not Freudian if he left his sex-year-old son Junior wondering how he passed out while watching Sesame Street and waking up with dried spunk on his face.

      I can see my house from here, indeed.

    19. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have been avertising these things on television for months. I just wonder how many of these things need to be ingested to produce desired effect. This could be a cheap alternative.

      The site seems to be slashdoted, so I cannot read the story, but there is part of me that is wondering if the kids really ingested AquaBalls, or if some relative really feed the kids GHB for incest reasons, then when the kids did not wake from the comma, paniced.

    20. Re:So... by EMCEngineer · · Score: 3, Informative

      And the story I read stated that according to a Chinese website listing chemical prices, there is a significant difference between the two. Someone along the ling of $2800 per metric ton for the 1,4-butanediol, and $9800 a metric ton for the 1,5-pentanediol.

      Oh here we go - blatantly stolen from AP.

      Both chemicals are manufactured in China and elsewhere, including by major multinational companies, and are also marketed over the Internet.

      It's not clear why 1,4-butanediol was substituted. However, there is a significant difference in price between the two chemicals. The Chinese online trading platform ChemNet China lists the price of 1,4 butanediol at between about $1,350-$2,800 per metric ton, while the price for 1,5-pentanediol is about $9,700 per metric ton.



      http://apnews.excite.com/article/20071108/D8SPHKFO4.html

    21. Re:So... by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 0, Troll

      Too bad Bush let New Orleans drown in 2005.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    22. Re:So... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      At your local frat house. They give them away, especially if you lift up your shirt.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    23. Re:So... by Excen · · Score: 0

      Aha! So you're the guy that stuck the funny stamps to the Hoe Depot Eleventeen DVD!

      --
      "No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad
    24. Re:So... by NMerriam · · Score: 3, Funny

      "But, uh, I really don't want my sex-year-old kid injesting *any* drugs, even ones that work great recreationally for young adults."
      Freudian slip?


      He's German, you insensitive clod!
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    25. Re:So... by packeteer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not to take away from the dangers of the GHB drug

      GHB can actually be quite safe. For one it is a naturally occuring chemical that exists in every cell of your body RIGHT NOW. It can be used as an intoxicant but the words "date rape drug" are not fair. There are so many potential date rape drugs out there, alcohol being #1.

      GHB is used as a sleep aid and to treat alcoholism. Also when small amounts of GHB are taken it increases growth hormones and has been used by bodybuilders. Of course it can be dangerous but calling it simply a "date rape drug" and nothing else is unfair.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    26. Re:So... by toriver · · Score: 1

      He would have to be Swedish (sex = six) not German (sechs = six).

    27. Re:So... by glittalogik · · Score: 1

      I love how they say "It's not clear..." immediately before making it crystal-clear.

    28. Re:So... by vranash · · Score: 1

      Mardi Gras 2005:
      Go for a dive in '05! :)

    29. Re:So... by jc42 · · Score: 1

      At other times these unfortunate men are swindled out of their life's savings, in a familiar scam known as a "relationship". In extreme cases, the female may even be shrewd enough to entrap the unsuspecting male into a longer term form of servitude and punishment referred to as "marriage".

      Sounds a lot like the Sex-For-Security Scam reported by The Onion about a decade ago. This one has been with us a long time. Yet the police do nothing about it.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    30. Re:So... by RockModeNick · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many kids who ate only a couple and just got a nice buzz and now have the dots tucked away to eat them now and again as recreational drugs.

    31. Re:So... by adona1 · · Score: 1

      I have some that I was going to give as a Christmas present.

      Now I'm torn between getting a refund, and having a big Friday night ;)

      --
      Between the falling angel and the rising ape
    32. Re:So... by vandan · · Score: 1

      Well said. It's a pity that the so-called 'war on drugs' turns into a war on truth, war on the poor, war on civil liberties, etc. The 'date rape drug' bit is especially distasteful, and as others have pointed out, the biggest date rape drug by far is alcohol, but no-ones trying to ban that, are they? Of course orweillian terminology is rampant in our society, eg:

        - the war on drugs
        - the war on terror
        - the liberation of Iraq
        - the pacification of Afghanistan
        - the free market

      All of these terms, of course, mean the exact opposite of what they would appear to on face value. Incidentally, all of them are fabulously profitable as well.

    33. Re:So... by GafferFish · · Score: 1

      Or a New Zealander.

    34. Re:So... by rtb61 · · Score: 1
      Although this clearly points out the corrupt corporate manufacturing polices of profits first. The other big issue is of course the safety of all products coming from China and those products being manufactured in such a heavily polluted environment.

      While repeated chemical poisonings they kill and maim people are occurring upon a regular basis, these products are eventually withdrawn. The real worry over the long term will be the cancer causing trace pollutants that are not discovered and that will cause long term health issues, like the ones the workers in China are already suffering, producing those products in such heavily polluted environments.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    35. Re:So... by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      I wonder how long it will be before the US decides that Musharraf is no longer a friend of the US and decides to "regime change" him in the name of "fair and free and democratic elections". Bhutto wants him to retire as commander of the military if he is going to certify his presidency, but Musharraf put her under 30-day house arrest, with potential for release in oh about 3 days. If she behaves i suppose.

      GHB might make an interesting weapon to the DOD, assuming that "blowback" or traceback could be eliminated in advance. Imagine the local mayhem and lethargy if no one could trust their water supply or food chain. The various "wars" the governments wage will have long-standing repercussions if these cretins never grow up, if they perpetually aim to rule the whirled.

      I didn't know GHB in part of our cell structure. Didn't know athletes were doping with it, either.

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  2. WTO by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    Isn't it wonderful that we got China into the WTO in the 90s, so we could buy all their cheap goods?

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:WTO by begbiezen · · Score: 0

      Yeah the WTO is just soo awesome.

    2. Re:WTO by Barny · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah the WTO is just soo awesome.


      Ok, what the hell are you on? Oh right, the beads...
      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    3. Re:WTO by conc_dumper · · Score: 1

      always remember the law of supply and demand. the situation nowadays is partly because our own companies loved to take advantages of foreign cheap labor and cheap goods. just take a look and see many us companies outsources to foreign countries and the good old quality service has virtually vanished? without the incentive of high demand, I doubt the chinese want to produce stupid toys.

    4. Re:WTO by InsaneProcessor · · Score: 1

      This is why my family avoids buying anything made in China as much as possible. If it has a "made in China" label, we usaully don't buy it. We can't avoid it all together as you can't always know but, when we have a choice, we make it wisely. I have always questioned the widsom of the U.S. buying so many products from China. Since this country's government is anti democracy, anything coming from that country is in question. They are still our enemy.

      --

      Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
    5. Re:WTO by servognome · · Score: 1

      always remember the law of supply and demand. the situation nowadays is partly because our own companies loved to take advantages of foreign cheap labor and cheap goods.
      And US consumers love to take advantage of cheap foreign made goods.

      just take a look and see many us companies outsources to foreign countries and the good old quality service has virtually vanished? without the incentive of high demand, I doubt the chinese want to produce stupid toys.
      The Chinese don't just produce toys and wait for somebody to buy them. US companies contract Chinese companies to make goods we designed.
      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
  3. The Problem With Date Rape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    The problem with date rape is that first you have to get a girl to go out on a date with you.

    sigh. sometimes it sucks to be a nerd.

    1. Re:The Problem With Date Rape by fredrated · · Score: 1

      No shit, so I will save the beads until I get to the date part. Unfortunately, like the condoms I bought, they probably have a shelf life and will be useless by the time, if ever, I get on this 'date' thing.

    2. Re:The Problem With Date Rape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just hold the beads in your hand for a while. Your sweaty palms should handle the metabolizing, your palm will absorb the GHB, and your 'date' can begin.

    3. Re:The Problem With Date Rape by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 2, Funny

      Remember to take the seed out, they can be painful.

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    4. Re:The Problem With Date Rape by megaditto · · Score: 1

      Should be easy to snag one with these shiny beads at your local playground.

      (I am going to hell for that one, ain't I?)

      --
      Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
    5. Re:The Problem With Date Rape by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      And, if you recall:

      http://feminist.org/news/newsbyte/uswirestory.asp?id=6327

      I can suck to be an altar boy or in the company of unscrupulous priests, lay people and just about any adult, usually male, if they can't mate/date with their own age groups, or at least anyone older than a minor, is not an invalid, and is not in a shotgun wedding.

      Anyway, Bindeez are being banned:

      http://www.bigpond.com/news/topstories/content/20071106/2082480.asp

      Well, hell, just read this google search string:

      http://www.google.com/search?q=priest+ghb+boys&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    6. Re:The Problem With Date Rape by PsychosisBoy · · Score: 3, Funny

      I can suck to be an altar boy

      Too much info! Too much info!

    7. Re:The Problem With Date Rape by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      SHITE! Mistakenly left off the "t".

      I was not an altar boy, and resisted becoming one. I'd "hear things", nothing I can nor would want to put my finger on. But, after receiving the uniform and doing a dry-run practice at the altar after school, I turned in my uniform and told my mom, grandmother, and teacher I didn't want to become one. Not for any REAL sexual misconduct fears (some/many who've attended Catholic schools can attest to rumors of or actual perversions, but I can't), but because it just didn't resonate or feel right for ME to become an altar boy and become that closely connected to the religion.

      Sorry about the false "TMI". But, that WAS funny, and you should've been scored funny. I would if I had the mod rights, but as I've already commented on this thread/topic I cannot.

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  4. Too bad... by Otter · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'd never heard of these things before yesterday, but it looks like a fantastic toy. Except for, y'know, the coma part. Hopefully they'll reformulate them/

    1. Re:Too bad... by MarkGriz · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Hopefully they'll reformulate them"

      Surely they will. No doubt with something much safer... lead perhaps.

      --
      Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
    2. Re:Too bad... by Thyamine · · Score: 1

      According to a news report I saw this morning, the toys originally used a glue that was then replaced by the Chinese manufacturing company at some point with the current GHB creating chemical.

      --
      I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
    3. Re:Too bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, CNN said specifically that 1,5-pentanediol was replaced at the manufacturing site by 1,4-butanediol. Co-incidentally, the butanediol costs around 80% less.

      I feel bad for the parents, but the statement of the parents of the 20 month old made me shake my head (emphasis added):

      "I thought that the Aqua Dots had to have done something, but I wasn't sure because I didn't think they were toxic. There was no warning on the box that said they were toxic. It just said that they were a choking hazard," the child's mother said.

  5. Why pull them off the shelves completely? by burtosis · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just a bit of repackaging for the 'Adult' market and I wouldn't bat an eyebrow at seeing these in my spam filter.

    1. Re:Why pull them off the shelves completely? by ODiV · · Score: 5, Funny

      "bat an eyebrow"

      This sounds like a technique worth learning.

    2. Re:Why pull them off the shelves completely? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, we are talking about the geek market here...At least it's near his eyelashes...He could be batting ear hair or something.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    3. Re:Why pull them off the shelves completely? by Xaoswolf · · Score: 3, Funny
      Maybe he only has one eyebrow, and it goes the whole way across...

      Since it's so large, he may think that he can attract more by batting it?

    4. Re:Why pull them off the shelves completely? by bensode · · Score: 1

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AI-MEP672xg

      How about batting a skater instead???

      --
      "Keep at least 3-6 full bottles of hard alcohol on hand, a 2 week resignation notice,..." - Poetmatt
    5. Re:Why pull them off the shelves completely? by Skater · · Score: 1

      Don't bat me!

    6. Re:Why pull them off the shelves completely? by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1


      No, he meant plat - he plats his eyebrow.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    7. Re:Why pull them off the shelves completely? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      I used to know a guy who only had one eyebrow, and by contorting his face he could undulate it in such a way as to resemble a furry wave going back and forth on his forehead.

      A strange world we live in.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    8. Re:Why pull them off the shelves completely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >No, he meant plat - he plats his eyebrow.

      The word is "plait".

      HTH. HAND.

  6. Tasty by cthulu_mt · · Score: 0

    I like that some of the examples you can make are an Ice Cream Sundae and other food.

    NO, I'm not going to link it; I could feel the site being slashdotted so that would be pointless.

    --
    Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
  7. Why couldn't they turn into something fun? by Spazntwich · · Score: 4, Funny

    Like LSD. It would have been great to see countless kids tripping out with those multicolored beads.

    "Wow, Tommy really likes those beads. And that tie-died shirt. Where did he get a Phish CD?!"

    1. Re:Why couldn't they turn into something fun? by Hatta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Kids are already tripping 24/7.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:Why couldn't they turn into something fun? by Spazntwich · · Score: 1

      Somehow I missed out on this part of my childhood.

      Is it too late to demand my parents begin farming cows?

    3. Re:Why couldn't they turn into something fun? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 4, Funny

      "I had a 50 bead a day habit by the time I was 5."

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    4. Re:Why couldn't they turn into something fun? by flitty · · Score: 1

      To which I mis-quote Calvin - "If you don't have grass stains on your knees by the end of the day, you should reevaluate your life".

      --
      Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
  8. Chinese are officially fucking with us by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

    What next, will hypodermic needles come pre-loaded with AIDS-tainted blood? Are RoboSapiens going to rape our pets? MSG in our food? Hey, wait a sec...

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    1. Re:Chinese are officially fucking with us by steveo777 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'll take good old metal Transformer toys that pinch your fingers and rip the skin off. I miss the 80's.

      --
      This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
    2. Re:Chinese are officially fucking with us by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      I'll take good old metal Transformer toys that pinch your fingers and rip the skin off. I miss the 80's.
      [ While I'm not comicbook guy and don't obsess over the toys of my youth, I have to say that the Autobot Jetfire (based on the Valkyrie from Robotech/Macross) is one of the greatest toys ever made. Solid, durable, lots of metal parts, great transformation sequence, solid feel, etc. I also really liked the design and feel of the 80's-era GI Joes. Toys seemed to go to crap right about the time I was growing out of them. The stuff I see out there today, I don't think I would have been interested if I saw them as a kid.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    3. Re:Chinese are officially fucking with us by stoolpigeon · · Score: 1

      I've got 3 kids at home that would disagree with you. Just sayin'

      --
      It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    4. Re:Chinese are officially fucking with us by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      I've got 3 kids at home that would disagree with you. Just sayin' And in fifteen years they'll be posting on slashdot complaining about how the toys these days all suck, I know that's how it goes. :)
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    5. Re:Chinese are officially fucking with us by stoolpigeon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is funny though - they see stuff on tv and tell me they want it. I explain that the commercials basically lie to get them to spend their money. Last year at Christmas time they bought some Floam and it was complete crap. And they learned. We saw an ad for aquadots a while back and my 4 year old says "I want that" and I asked his sisters - "What do you guys think?" and they said, "It's not like they show. They just want our money." Turns out to have come in extra handy this go round.

      --
      It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    6. Re:Chinese are officially fucking with us by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Yea. kids need to eventually learn that stuff is never as good as they show it on TV.

      Quality toys were never very popular, at least not that I am aware of. Maybe Legos, although I'm talking about the real Legos not the plastic robots that can only be put together one way.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    7. Re:Chinese are officially fucking with us by iocat · · Score: 1

      Learning the hard way that stuff on TV isn't as good as the commercials say is a really good life lesson. I'm still both bitter and thankful towards the Stomper 4x4 Danger Mountain -- the danger was that it was made out of lame brown styrofoam. I still remember lifting the package on Christmas monrning and being like "oh my, this isn't good" as I realized how light it was... (note the actual name may have been slightly different).

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    8. Re:Chinese are officially fucking with us by Deagol · · Score: 1
      That's because kids don't know any better, as they rarely even encounter quality toys these days.

      My kids inherited my G1 Transformers collection. My son got a new one last holiday season, and while he loved just getting a new toy (I mean, what kid doesn't?), both he and his sister both commented about how "crappy" the new ones are as compared to the originals. The new ones may be "cooler" (he's been wanting a Bumble Bee ever since seeing the movie), but they recognize quality (or lack thereof) in construction.

    9. Re:Chinese are officially fucking with us by OrangeTide · · Score: 1
      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  9. the emphasis by conc_dumper · · Score: 0, Troll

    why everytime china goofs, they have to emphasize on the "china" or "chinese" part? it is not like our own companies never goofed (e.g. Dole used pesticide that sterilized its workers, and Gap used child labors etc.). After all, isn't it our own toy designers that came up with this "woo, if you pour water on the date-rape drug, they stick together" idea and the poor chinese factories are merely following the instructions? or am I missing something?

    1. Re:the emphasis by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Same reason that we got the "Walmart's Wii Ripoff" story on Slashdot.
      There does seem to be a problem with Chinese companies making unsafe products and with their government inspection system. Things like the lead paint on toys. This one may be a case of "We never knew that would happen!".
      So yes I have to agree that this may be unfairly being lumped into the China is evil category.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    2. Re:the emphasis by wattrlz · · Score: 2, Informative

      This link from TFA http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/11/07/business/toys.php seems to indicate the GHB precursor was an unapproved last-minute substitution in the bead formula. It's not necessary, it's not beneficial, and it was probably done to cut costs.

    3. Re:the emphasis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the Chinese factories are not following the instructions of the designers. For example, China is heavily using lead paint even though non-toxic paint was specified. The reason they do this is to reduce costs while satisfying the durability SLA's of the agreements. Lead paint is very durable.
      However, the people in charge of ordering the product are responsible as well because they are supposed to be monitoring the manufacturers.

    4. Re:the emphasis by audubon · · Score: 5, Informative

      or am I missing something?
      You're missing the fact that the Chinese factory changed the original, safe glue formula to the toxic one. According to this article,

      "The toys were supposed to use 1,5-pentanediol, a nontoxic compound found in glue, but instead contained the harmful 1,4-butanediol, which is widely used in cleaners and plastics."
    5. Re:the emphasis by faloi · · Score: 1

      I think you might be missing something. At least according to one source they're supposed to have a non-toxic glue. Unless information comes forward saying they were actually designed for this drug, it leaves the door open to the possibility that a contaminant got into the toys or a factory swapped to the chemicals as a cost saving measure. Unless people from the supplier start getting arrested, the story seems to lend itself to something happening factory side.

      I will agree, however, that there's a pretty quick rush to throw "Chinese" into everything on this one, especially lacking some info that'd clear the whole thing up.

      --
      "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
    6. Re:the emphasis by wattrlz · · Score: 1
      mod parent +1 informative

      Thank you!!!

      Hi-ho, Hi-ho, it's to the singles bar I go! XD

    7. Re:the emphasis by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 2, Informative

      After all, isn't it our own toy designers that came up with this "woo, if you pour water on the date-rape drug, they stick together" idea and the poor chinese factories are merely following the instructions? or am I missing something?

      I'll give you two guesses.

      They were supposed to use 1,5 pentanediol which is a common ingredient used to keep glues from getting sticky before they get wet. Instead they cut costs and used 1,4 butanediol (gamma-butyrolactone) which is a prodrug enzymatically metabolized into GHB.

    8. Re:the emphasis by LrdDimwit · · Score: 1

      There's almost no way this particular compound was approved for use in toddler's toys. If they're young enough, the first rule is that if they can get hold of it, they'll try to eat it. Or some will. Enough you have to plan for it. As such toys for really young kids are pretty much required to be nontoxic.

      http://www.chicagoartistsresource.org/?q=node/14948

      This doesn't address toxicity specifically, but I can't imagine anything that puts kids in comas would fly. Let alone the fact that if it's a precursor to GHB, it's probably illegal just for that alone, as a controlled substance.

    9. Re:the emphasis by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Well it doesn't like at all like a toddler toy to me. It seems like the beads are way to small to start with.
      Sure it should be taken off the market. I just wonder if it being made in China has ANYTHING to do with it.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    10. Re:the emphasis by AMindLost · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The company I work for buys metal goods from China. Every item is specified to the last detail and it should simply be case of "make me those". Unfortunately, many Chinese companies have a taste of our money and want more of it, so they will do anything to shave the cost without telling the customer. The items we buy are safety critical and we have to test the hell out of them because we catch the suppliers time after time using sub-standard steel because they can get it cheaper. China is probably becoming wealthy faster than any country in the world ever has and many companies and individuals there are a little too greedy for more.

    11. Re:the emphasis by provigilman · · Score: 1
      Check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma-Hydroxybutyric_acid#Mode_of_action/

      The chemical in the top left of the graphic is 1,4-butanediol, the toxic glue compound they switched to. That chemical is part of the bodies normal metabolic pathway for producing GHB, which your body does use in very small amounts. Once the children ingest it though, their body would take that and being using it for the production of additional GHB.

      They should have known about this reaction, but didn't do their research.

      --
      "Life's short and hard, like a body building elf." -- The Bloodhound Gang
    12. Re:the emphasis by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      Sssshhhh... we are trying to pressure the Chinese government right about time with the olympics. Yes we designed it. wink wink. But who needs to know.

    13. Re:the emphasis by provigilman · · Score: 1
      The chemical that they used is part of the body's standard metabolic pathway for producing natural GHB. Had they bothered to look it up and do the proper research, they would've known that. Quite simply, they were just asleep at the wheel when it came to Quality Control.

      Based on the past lead paint incidents, this appears to be a pattern of behavior that's not likely to correct itself anytime soon without severe actions being undertaken by the Chinese government and their worldwide buyers.

      --
      "Life's short and hard, like a body building elf." -- The Bloodhound Gang
    14. Re:the emphasis by kcelery · · Score: 1

      That's the lowest bidder syndrome.

    15. Re:the emphasis by djh101010 · · Score: 1

      I will agree, however, that there's a pretty quick rush to throw "Chinese" into everything on this one, especially lacking some info that'd clear the whole thing up. OK, flogging my own site here but it's free and informative. Go to productrecallwatch.com and check out the items being recalled. 9 or 10 just yesterday. Note how many are from China. Note how many of those are for lead paint and now for _this_. I've only had the site up for a month or two, but the items being recalled are BY FAR from China, and BY FAR mostly about lead paint. It's not like this is something rare. They're putting toxic crap in products made for export to the US. I mean, who the hell would use lead paint in a _cake decoration_? How could they possibly not know that that would be (a) illegal here, and (b) a bad idea? If it's not ignorance, then it's either apathy our outright hostility causing them to do it.

      If it was a couple items a month, yeah, OK, don't be so quick to judge. But when it's dozens a WEEK? I think we're past the "Whoa now, let's not be too hasty..." point.
    16. Re:the emphasis by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      Well it doesn't like at all like a toddler toy to me. It seems like the beads are way to small to start with.

      It isn't a toddler toy. Nonetheless, children in the target ages often have siblings, and some of the those siblings are younger. Thus, there are some moderate expectations of marginal safety, such as "won't put you in a coma" or "doesn't contain explosives". This is an egregious safety violation of extraordinary negligence.

      I just wonder if it being made in China has ANYTHING to do with it.

      China has everything to do with it -- Chinese business took capitalism and embraced it with a zeal seldom seen in the worst heyday in the West -- if they can get away with it, they do. There seems to be zero business morals.

      It's bad here in North America, but not remotely as bad as China.
    17. Re:the emphasis by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be cheaper to eliminate some of the testing and find a supplier you can trust? Maybe even one in your own country?

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    18. Re:the emphasis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China has everything to do with it -- Chinese business took capitalism and embraced it...
      You have no idea what you are talking about.
    19. Re:the emphasis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have no idea what you are talking about.

      SNAP! You got him there!

    20. Re:the emphasis by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      This begs the question, what would 1,5 pentanediol metabolize into and is THAT even safe?

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    21. Re:the emphasis by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Obviously not, or they would. Most businesses are not going to go with MORE expensive toxic toys made in China if they could get them here cheaper.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    22. Re:the emphasis by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

      In the case of cheap plastic crap for which quality isn't top priority (like most toys) I absolutely understand that.

      But the grandparent post to which I was replying talked about a safety-critical metal part that they had to "test the hell out of" because they're buying it from a supplier in China, a supplier they can't trust to use the specified type of steel.

      In such a case, I'd pick up the appropriate industrial directory and start calling more local metal fabricators for quotes. And after I got their quotes, I'd subtract off about 75% of the cost of testing I was doing, and see how they matched up against the Chinese supplier.

      But even in the case of the plastic crap - what has the cost to the reputation of Mattel, Playskool, Fisher-Price, and now this Moose company been? I won't be surprised if it drives the Moose company out of business.

      When it came time to find a gift for our infant nephew, we paid careful attention to the toy we selected, and did our best to get something from a company that seemed likely to have safe toys. Even then we weren't sure, but let me tell you - it wasn't a brand I had ever heard of, because we didn't feel like any of them can be trusted.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    23. Re:the emphasis by AMindLost · · Score: 1

      Our company designed and developed the products we sell in the 70's and used to fly the "Made in in Britain" flag as a mark of the quality and engineering standards of our product. Competitors opened up selling alternative versions of our products and gradually during the late 90's started to import their goods, first from India and then from China. We were the very last company in our market to switch to importing from China and we hung on until 2005 when we were almost out of business. Now we buy from China.

      To give you an idea of the cost difference, our main product when we made it in the UK in 2005 was costing us £1.27 each to make. By that time our competitors were selling imports at £0.90. Their products were all stamped up with the relevant standard compliances but the tests we did showed that they were sub-standard by a long way.

      We found the best quality suppliers in China to maintain our quality lead and only a few could cope with the volumes we buy, but we cannot trust them to maintain our standards without our continuous input and testing. Making products in our own country was ruled out years ago. Manufacturing in any western country is pointless unless you are in a niche, high-margin, low-volume business. The competition will simply put you out of business.

    24. Re:the emphasis by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

      I'm trying to think what a) has a safety-critical metal component and b) sells for around £1 (which my American brain is translating to around $2) and c) would have been designed and developed 30 years ago and I'm just not coming up with anything.

      What the heck do you sell?

      In my comment I was assuming that the component itself was costing a few dollars at least. I can certainly see the financial issue if you're talking a few cents cost on a component that goes into an item that sells for a couple dollars total.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
  10. Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by blind+biker · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Forget the chemical they were coated with for a second. But how on earth does a toy for children, that has parts easily removed and very easily swallowed, get bought for children? (and notice how carefully I tried to word this, not trying to imply that the manufacturer approved the use of such toys for children (they may or may not have), but allowing for the possibility that the towy were marketed for a more adult demographic (8-12) and it was the parents' bad call to buy them for toddlers) Somebody is crazy here.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They said it was marketed for 4 year olds, which seems a little young. The ones who ate them and got sick were 2, which is definately too young for this toy. It is possible though, that they were bought for an older sibling, and got ahold of them when their parents weren't watching.

    2. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by plopez · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Note one youngster was 10 that was hospitalized. Look at the ages of the people using them on the website, looks like an 8-12 range to me. Kids. No adults present.

      Also, how do you know they were bought for toddlers? They could have been bought for big sister who carelessly left them out (after all, kids sometimes do those sorts of things).

      Your arguments hold no water.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    3. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Otter · · Score: 2, Informative

      The beads look like candy, and aren't a choking hazard. I can easily see them getting bought for older kids, and a toddler scarfing down (or getting fed) a handful of them. It doesn't seem like something you'd buy for a toddler.

    4. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Random+Walk · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      Did you ever notice that (a) about 100 per cent of playgrounds are rated for children aged 3+ only, and that (b) about 100 per cent of toys are rated for children aged 3+ only? It's all about CYA, and since your children need to play someplace and with something, of course you have to ignore this bullshit and buy your children what you think is appropriate.

      The stupid thing is, since practically nothing is 'officially' rated suitable for children below kindergarten age, you have no guidance at all for buying toys (and you get into the habit of ignoring age ratings). Those few things that are rated for toddlers are usually incredibly boring, and will keep a toddler busy for about 5min maximum.

    5. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by TigerNut · · Score: 3, Insightful
      You don't have kids, do you? Kids put stuff in their mouths. Even when you tell them not to. And the second time... and the next. Because they're kids. And if you have multiple kids you sometimes end up with toys in the house that are intended for older kids, and the little ones still end up playing with them because kids get into stuff.

      That's not to say that parents aren't responsible for what's in the house and within reach of kids, but there's a basic expectation that children's toys such as beads and cars aren't going to be poisonous or otherwise chemically hazardous. Chemistry sets are a different matter... but even there you wouldn't expect radioactive compounds or highly toxic materials in a children's set.

      --

      Less is more.

    6. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by metlin · · Score: 1

      See, first, you need to raise cats (and maybe dogs).

      Once you've given up on those, you should consider having kids and raising those.

      If *that* works out, you'll probably have an idea about *why* they put things in their mouth.

    7. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by nexuspal · · Score: 1

      "Also, how do you know they were bought for toddlers? They could have been bought for big sister who carelessly left them out (after all, kids sometimes do those sorts of things)."

      He knows they were bought for toddlers because a toddler went into a coma.story

      --
      I've read Slashdot for the last 5 years, and now I start posting... Go figure :-P
    8. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by pez4realz · · Score: 0

      "Chemistry sets are a different matter... but even there you wouldn't expect radioactive compounds or highly toxic materials in a children's set." you'd think that (http://www.radarmagazine.com/features/2006/12/gilbert_u238_atomic_energy_lab.php), wouldn't you. Now, if i can only find a how-to forum on thermonuclear devices...

      --
      Have you payed your dues jack? Yes sir, the check is in the mail.
    9. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by orgelspieler · · Score: 4, Funny

      There are plenty of 12 mo toys that are interesting enough to keep my 9 mo son entertained and engaged for more than five minutes. Of course, he's just as happy smacking around a can of soup or chewing on the sofa. So maybe his standards are a little low.

    10. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let me chime in a parent that appears to have a very different attitude towards raising children, and who wouldn't think twice about giving their 3 year old a toy with a bunch of small beads. In fact my kid does have a tub of beads that he uses for a toy.

      It really is not hard for a small child to be safely allowed to play with small toys. It just requires the parent to pay attention to their child. Paying attention to your child is unfortunately a very unpopular activity amongst parents these days, so toy manufacturers must label their toys as if the child will be using them unsupervised, and has had a neglected childhood. At 3, I don't worry that my child will swallow toys because he has been taught that you don't put thing in your mouth that are not food. Of course the only way that he could learn this is by being exposed to small toys while being supervised.

      The current trend is to not expose kids to things until they are already experienced with those things. This leads to kids being retarded. People learn by experimenting, and depriving children of small objects will have a negative impact on their learning. In fact, I would have to ask, how bad a parent must be to have a 7 year old that cannot be trusted to play with beads without eating them.

    11. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      I completely agree with you. That's why I was wondering why would someone buy such toys for kids. For some reason, someone thought I was flaming? I just think exactly like you do, just expressed myself differently.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    12. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by ihaddsl · · Score: 1

      He knows they were bought for toddlers because a toddler went into a coma.story
      you are assuming facts not in evidence, just because a toddler got a hold of them doesn't mean they were bought for the toddler, more likely they were for an older sibling, and got left lying around or something as a parent of 3 children, the younger kids invariably get their hands on toys meant for older kids. If you have multiple children you'd recognize this.
    13. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by nomadic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You don't have kids, do you? Kids put stuff in their mouths.

      This is slashdot, where most people are childless yet still feel privileged to weigh in on the issue, and where the predominant theory is that anytime any kid at any age does anything wrong, it's automatically a sign of horrible parenting.

      Of course the hilarious part is, whenever someone advocates doing something to prevent their kids from doing something wrong, they're immediately attacked as uptight, overprotective parents who are unwilling to let their children learn from their mistakes.

      There's a technical term for people who advocate two mutually exclusive viewpoints. They're called "idiots."

    14. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by nexuspal · · Score: 1

      Thank God I don't have multiple children! But yes, I do see your point.

      --
      I've read Slashdot for the last 5 years, and now I start posting... Go figure :-P
    15. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by TigerNut · · Score: 1
      There are many toys that we've bought for our kids where the 'suggested age' is higher than the age they were at that time. However, when doing that, we're still making the assumption that the risks associated with those toys are ones that we're familiar with. As an example of the beads, anyone playing with them would be exposed to GHB if they swallowed them. We know enough to stop our kids from doing that, and to tell them not to. However, kids' hands are often in their mouths, and they're susceptible to ingestion of the bead coating just by touching the beads with wet fingers and then putting their hands in their mouths. Would you recognize that as a dangerous situation if you hadn't ever heard of this story? Last year our oldest lost four baby teeth, and he was in there wiggling teeth for about nine months straight. Couple that with a situation where the surface of the toys he's playing with is toxic, and he'd be a prime candidate for long term physiological damage.

      Whatever your personal involvement with your kids' playing, you're always making a basic assumption that you understand the risks involved. Consequently, when the manufacturer screws up and creates a toy that has an unexpected failure mode, you and your child are at risk. Nothing you can do about that unless you make your own toys using parts and finish materials where you know EXACTLY what is in it, or (for litigious bastards) if you think that extracting a couple of million from $(TOYMAKER) is a reasonable exchange for you and your child's future. Accordingly, we all take risks. We just hope we know what they are.

      --

      Less is more.

    16. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by coolGuyZak · · Score: 1

      What determines a flame, troll, or insightful mod is twofold. Sometimes the mods are on crack--they don't like what you're saying, and mod you down. Other times, the manner of speech is provocative--it is "mean" sounding, or seems to be needlessly sensational or otherwise. Your comment fit the latter criterion.

    17. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just because a toddler got a hold of them doesn't mean they were bought for the toddler, more likely they were for an older sibling, and got left lying around or something as a parent of 3 children, the younger kids invariably get their hands on toys meant for older kids. If you have multiple children you'd recognize this.


      That still doesn't necessarily mean it's the Toy Company's fault to begin with. The blame for the Toy Company should be since GHB is present when it's metabolized.
    18. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

      The most important detail that shold be pointed out is that our mouth is a very sensitive tactile organ,
      for small children even moreso than adults. Our mouth is used to feel the things that we put into our mouth
      (so we don't chew on the bad ones, probably), and like using our hands, some things just feel good to put
      into your mouth. I can distinctly remember being taught to not put small things in my mouth / ear / etc.
      And I can also distinctly remember putting 5 or 6 marbles in my mouth to see what it would feel like. (It felt good! cool and glassy and smooth and round, and they clacked together when I swished)
      I didn't want to swallow or chew them, but I was definitely interested in what a marble felt like in my mouth.
      It was not a smart thing to do. I didn't care one bit.

      --
      music lover since 1969
    19. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      I was responding to the previous poster that said the chemical make up was not important, and that young kids shouldn't have small toys. I disagree with that poster, and I agree with you entirely.

      The chemical make up is the important part because kids put their hands in their mouths. I would go even farther, and say it is just as import for adults, as adults are often eating in situation where hand washing, while a good idea, is impractical. As adults, we make the same assumptions about risk for ourselves. If we just changed the antifreeze in our car, and spilled it all over our hands, we might choose to skip eating those potato ships, while if we have been sitting in meetings all day, and someone offers us a mint, we might be inclined to pick it up with our unwashed hands and pop it in our mouth.

      You are also correct in the statement that this toy is a particularly big problem in that it is designed to dissolve, thus transferring the chemicals to the child's (Or Adults) hands.
      This is a toy that my wife had actually considered getting for our son, so all I can say is:

      Procrastination Saves The Day Again!

    20. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget about kids swallowing them, how do I get a 20 year old to swallow them.

    21. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No matter how you slice it, it is the fault of the parents. Whether or not they were bought for a toddler it is still the responsibility of the parents to make sure toddlers don't get a hold of toys that could be dangerous to them.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    22. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by ihaddsl · · Score: 1

      First off, my original post I wasn't making a statement re fault, but just the pointing out that there was no evidence that a parent bought these toys for toddlers (which are indended for older children). however, to answer your response, I'd say fault is not absolute. Certainly there is a share to be had by the parents, However, being a parent of multiple children, it's impossible for me to be on top of them and what they are or are not playing with all the time. So I can't accept that the parent has primary or sole responsibility. If the parents turned out to be negligent, by making no or little attempt to control/monitor their kids, then that's another matter. In this case I think this was handled appropriately so far, toys with this kind of potential do not belong on the market when there are readily available substitutes for the substance in question

    23. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by hawthorne · · Score: 1

      This toy was marketed in the UK for kids aged 4 and up (and yes, the 2.5" bags packaging the components came with a printed warning that they may be dangerous and were not toys).

      My 4-year-old loves them, and I spent a while yesterday rounding up all the various bits of the kit and completed models before she got home from school (I was working from home that day), just in case there is an issue with the kits sold here too.

      Have you ever seen a toy with a 'small parts' warning that applies at anything over 36 months? Kids at that age still put stuff in their mouths, but I don't want to ban them from playing with all the 'interesting' stuff - they just need supervision.

    24. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      That is why it is important to TEACH the children not to put things that are not food in their mouths. Left to their own devices, they will put all sorts of dangerous things there.

      Honestly the best way I have found to keep my child safe is to first have taught him what 'dangerous' means. This requires pointing out to him when he does something dangerous, and gets hurt, that he got hurt from doing dangerous things. Then let him make choices on whether to dangerous things or not. Every child is going to dangerous things. When our child wants to do something dangerous, we evaluate just how dangerous, and if it is only going to hurt, and not permanently injure him, we will explain that it is dangerous and he might get hurt. We then let him decide if he wants to risk it. When he does get hurt, after proper comforting, we talk about it, and ask him if it was worth it. You might be amazed at how good he has become at making good decisions on risk. For example, he is fully aware that he risks falling down and getting hurt while playing tag, but has always said that it is worth it after an injury. He has decided that jumping from the back of the couch to the floor is not worth the risk, but that that doing the same thing with our tri-fold foam mats put out makes the risk worthwhile again.

      The other piece is to teach them how to asses and mitigate the risks involved in an activity. Many parents do this, but most focus too finely on the specific task at hand. E.g. They make their kids where helmets while bike riding, or look both ways before crossing the street. A better plan is to talk about risk in general, and use the specific task as an example. This way the child learns how to lessen risk with new activities while your not around, and when to just walk away. So, if your kid REALLY wants to see what marbles in his mouth feels like, don't just tell them no. Tell them that it is dangerous, and come up with a plan on how to perform the experiment with as little risk as possible. For example, have them do it with adult supervision. Don't let them run around while they do it. Be prepared to tip them upside down and dig the marbles out if necessary. And if you are really paranoid, do it in the car outside of a hospital. Don't make the kid go hide somewhere to try out the experiment where they won't be found until it is too late. Of course all of this is good advice for adults as well, but is often not done for their own safety either.

      This works well for things that are really messy too. When my son wants to know what will happen if he blows into the straw for his apple juice, I'm not going to tell him no. I'm going to take him outside and let him try it, because one way or the other his is going to do the experiment. He would rather do it with my encouragement than have me reprimanding him.

    25. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      And I am saying it doesn't matter who they were bought for originally. If they wind up in a toddler's mouth, there should have been more parental control. How hard is it to say to a 10 year old who the the toy was bought for "Don't leave these laying around where little Johnny can find them." And if the 10 year old is too stupid to understand or doesn't care, then the toy should never have been bought in the first place. Sorry, but YOUR kids are YOUR responsibility. Bringing dangerous items into your house means diligence is REQUIRED by the parents. Period.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    26. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by ihaddsl · · Score: 1

      I don't disagree that parents have a responsibility to their kids, but you are taking this to an unworkable extreme. No parent can be absolutely controlling of their children, part of the reason we need to raise kids with parental oversight is that they are not capable of making sound decisions like if this toy is safe to leave around the house or not all the time even when they are 10.

      The older they get the more self sufficient / guided they can and should be but you my friend are taking the parental responsibility to an extreme standard no parent could ever attain.

    27. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Funny, and you are the one with children, and I have none. And this argument is precisely the reason I will never have children.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    28. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by o2sd · · Score: 1

      And this argument is precisely the reason I will never have children.

      The Gene Pool recognises and thanks you for your efforts towards improving it.

      --
      - Nothing to see hear.
    29. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure you're not thinking of the term "different people"?

    30. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sad that the responsible sane people are not breeding, and the ones least qualified to reproduce are doing so in record numbers.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    31. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by snoogans126 · · Score: 1
      And this argument is precisely the reason I will never have children.

      I think you've made a wise decision. You obviously grossly underestimate what's involved with being a parent.

    32. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      No, I haven't and that is why I am not having children. It is people that DO have kids and grossly underestimate what's involved with being a parent that you should be concerned with.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    33. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by illtud · · Score: 1

      Funny, and you are the one with children, and I have none.

      No! really? I would never have guessed.

    34. Re:Wait: swallowing the beads???!! by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Yeah, what gave it away? My youthful good looks, non-balding head, or all the toys, hobbies, free time, and extra disposable income I have?

      Boy do I wish something would come along and change all of that...

      Joke if you want, but at least I am responsible enough to NOT have kids.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
  11. Well that explains Mardi Gras by Stavr0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Never understood the correlation between beads and flashing breasts until now ...

    1. Re:Well that explains Mardi Gras by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "Never understood the correlation between beads and flashing breasts until now ..."

      Look, there are some things in life, that you simply do not question!!

      Women exposing themselves for cheap plastic beads, are a good thing, and should be encouraged and enjoyed, but, NEVER, questioned!!

      Hehehe..that being said, Mardi Gras is early this year....c'mon down for a visit and a party to our city!!

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  12. GHB doesn't work. by imuffin · · Score: 5, Funny

    I used to take it all the time and I never got raped once.

    1. Re:GHB doesn't work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That you remember! Thanks for the camping trip :)

    2. Re:GHB doesn't work. by TheMeuge · · Score: 4, Funny

      I used to take it all the time and I never got raped once.
      You just don't remember. You were in a coma when you were violated by most of the party. And yes, it was posted to youtube.
    3. Re:GHB doesn't work. by Foofoobar · · Score: 1

      I used to take it all the time and I never got raped once.

      yeah... not that you'd remember, slut.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
  13. Now it makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    I finally get the whole rosary beads thing with Catholic Priests.

  14. That'll teach by 42Penguins · · Score: 0

    the little punks to eat toys.

    Really, I read a few weeks ago about a toy being recalled because a girl ate 2 magnets separately and they tore apart her intestines. That's not a toy problem, that's a watch-your-kid-ripping-magnets-off-toys-and-eating-them problem.

    1. Re:That'll teach by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know, I had a nice reply, but hen I read some of your other posts here on slashdot, and a few post elsewhere, I'll just sum up:
      You have a 'no-fucking-clue' problem

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:That'll teach by 42Penguins · · Score: 1

      Probably, but I never ate a single Lego.

  15. "look mom by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Funny

    i made a colorful portrait of river phoenix in colored beads"

    (thump)

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:"look mom by Barny · · Score: 1

      "I saw his body thrashing 'round
      I saw his pulse going down
      I saw him in convulsive throws
      I said, "I'll have one of those!"

      I'm on the drug... that killed River Phoenix."

      This is serious, mum :P

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
  16. Jerry Storch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For a second there I thought Toys-backwards-R-Us was being run by this guy.

  17. Chemical Replacement by Pearlswine · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_Dots/ "The toy was supposed to contain the non-toxic chemical 1,5-pentanediol, but instead contains 1,4-butanediol, which is metabolised into the drug gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB)." It looks like it's not a design mistake, but the manufacturer replacing one substance with a cheaper version

    1. Re:Chemical Replacement by MarkGriz · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
    2. Re:Chemical Replacement by bluesangria · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mod up please. This is why the Chinese manufacturers are getting in trouble. They are substituting cheaper, UNSAFE alternatives into commonly produced goods and then sending them off. The sad part is, the number of injuries and deaths we see in the U.S. and other countries, is *nothing* compared to the the number injuries and death suffered by the Chinese consumer. Their quality assurance for manufacturing is just NOT THERE! http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/08/world/asia/08china.html?fta=y

    3. Re:Chemical Replacement by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a brilliant move to me. Instead of getting worldwide criticism for the way they handle the overpopulation problem, the chinese government has figured out a way to accomplish the same objective while letting private businesses take the flak instead.

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    4. Re:Chemical Replacement by TopShelf · · Score: 1

      Well done - I was wondering if the "made in China" issue was traceable to the design of these products, which presumably was done by American companies. That's one of the inherent risks of outsourcing your manufacturing (domestically or internationally), making sure that quality standards are still met. At a previous job I encountered a similar incident with a Mexican manufacturing facility substituting the wrong material for a given product, when they ran out of the proper stuff, just in order to keep their production numbers up.

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    5. Re:Chemical Replacement by smellsofbikes · · Score: 3, Informative

      In case anyone was wondering -- or just so I can use my chemistry degree for like the second time since graduation ten years ago -- 1,4-butanediol is an industrial chemical synthesized in *enormous* quantities because it's the precursor to a whole slew of useful materials, mostly rubber polymers. BUNA rubber gets the first half its name from butanediol. It was developed during WWII by both German and American/Canadian chemists because of a worldwide rubber shortage, since submarines kept sinking all the cargo ships. The stuff is derived from grain alcohol, easily and cheaply, and some bacteria can be coerced into producing it through large-scale fermentation.

      In contrast, 1,5-pentanediol is significantly more difficult to make and doesn't have anywhere nearly the demand or volume production, hence its higher expense and the temptation to substitute the cheaper, more readily available material that's almost just the same (except for the metabolites.)

      This is also why I don't trust herbal remedies that come out of China. That one carbon makes only a little difference in this case, but there are others where it'd be the difference between as effective as herbal remedies ever are and *dead*, and who are your surviving relatives going to pursue when it's a Chinese company that made the stuff?

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    6. Re:Chemical Replacement by cdjaco · · Score: 1

      We actually purchased these for my kids -- last weekend, no less. I heard about the recall on the radio during my commute home last night, and the first thing I did once I got inside the house was to take it away from them.

      The toy itself *is* clever, it is just unfortunate that (what is apparently) typical lackluster Chinese quality control led to several children in the U.S. and Australia becoming violently sick and hospitalized. Fortunately none have died.

      I read yesterday that the manufacturer's solution to this is to add a bitter-tasting chemical to the dots so kids are dissuaded from eating them. As if it were the dot's sublime taste that led to this problem, and not the bright candy colors.

      I'm now waiting for the story about Chinese toys that explode; surely this can't be that far away.

    7. Re:Chemical Replacement by treeves · · Score: 1
      I think BUNA gets its name from butadiene, not butanediol. Many polymers are based on monomers like butadiene that have C-C double bonds. Butanediol does not. Both are made in large quantities but butadiene is more used than butanediol. ABS, for example, is acrylonitrile/butadiene/styrene copolymer. Lots of things are made of ABS. Like car parts. And pipes.

      The company I work for has had some difficulty finding a good US domestic source of butenediol (butanediol minus 2 H atoms), but I think China has an abundant supply.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    8. Re:Chemical Replacement by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      Oh, geez, you're right. I was thinking the stuff in the glue *was* butadiene. Sigh. Yeah, alternating single/double bonds makes for a great polymer starting material, whereas terminal hydroxy groups don't do much of anything but blind you if you drink too much of them.

      Gyah. No wonder I'm not in chemistry anymore. SO totally wrong.

      Butenediol would be interesting: I'm assuming it's 2-butene, not 1-. 1-butenediol would have the start for a resonant structure down there at the end, with the pi orbitals of the oxygen and the pi orbitals of the double bond lined up, so it should be somewhat willing to polymerize.
      and blah blah blah.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    9. Re:Chemical Replacement by rastoboy29 · · Score: 1

      Yeah.  I think it's worth noting that as much as we trash our overly litigious society, there are some upsides.  No American company would dare do something so stupid...not without even thinking it through a bit.

    10. Re:Chemical Replacement by treeves · · Score: 1

      I suppose butenediol could polymerize under the right conditions, but we don't want it to. We're using it more like an antioxidant - another thing molecules with lots of hydroxyl groups are good for.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  18. what kind of nerds are you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from the page footer: ""I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid" -- the artificial person, from _Aliens_"

    The artificial person? His name was Bishop. What nerd doesn't know this?

  19. And in related news... by R2.0 · · Score: 1

    Stocks of the toy fly off the shelves and pedophiles and would be rapists scramble to secure the balance of store inventory.

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    1. Re:And in related news... by AcidLacedPenguiN · · Score: 1

      I'm doing my part!

      --
      disclaimer: I've been known to store numbers in my ass for which to dig out when quantities are required.
  20. maybe it really is the safest toy season by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

    It really makes me wonder what all I was exposed to as a kid, assuming we are just now catching all these things that were happening all along with imported toys and such.

    --
    stuff |
    1. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny

      It really makes me wonder what all I was exposed to as a kid I can count on one hand the dozen times unsafe toys made me sick. Thinking that it could have been easily prevented really brings tears to most of my eyes.
    2. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by Ferzerp · · Score: 2, Funny

      you have 12 fingers on one of your hands?

    3. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      * <------ joke

      ???
      .O <------ your head
      /|\
      / \

    4. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you have 12 fingers on one of your hands?
      Whoosh!

      [joke]
      [your head]
      :-)

    5. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing gets by you! Well, except the 'tears to most of my eyes' part...

    6. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by Orange+Crush · · Score: 1

      whoosh!

    7. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by Xenkar · · Score: 1

      You can count up to 31 on one hand if you use binary. That number goes up to 1023 if you use two hands. You can get up to 4095 if you have an additional finger on each hand.

      People with two extra fingers on each hand can get it OVER 9000!

    8. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by ultramk · · Score: 1

      You must be really fun at parties.

      --
      You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
    9. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, it's a feature that evolved after several years of one handed "web surfing".

    10. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      > People with two extra fingers on each hand can get it OVER 9000!

      Yeah, I guess 16383 is over 9000.

      You could actually get up to 4095 with 10 fingers, though, you just have use the front/back of each hand as a bit. Hey, and if you use upsidedown/right side up as a bit, that gets you to 16383. And, if you use bent vs. straight fingers, that gets you all the way to 65535.

      But you'd look like a dancing retard if you counted really fast.

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    11. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by OrangeTimer · · Score: 1

      I can count to 63 in binary with one hand...

      *sigh*

    12. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by The+-e**(i*pi) · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but I start counting at 1, and theres 32 combinations on one hand, you do the math.

      anyways I usually reserve the first bit for the sign, and count in either 1, or 2 's compliment depending on my mood.

    13. Re:maybe it really is the safest toy season by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Well, only if you use unsigned binary signing.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  21. Hmmm... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Crackdown on unsafe toys, crackdown on "do not call" violators. Federal agencies are suddenly interested in doing their jobs after nearly seven years of sucking up to the very people they're supposed to be regulating?

    Is some kind of election coming up next year, or something?

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *grin*

      My thoughts exactly.

  22. Disposal? by hellergood · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How will they dispose of these beads? Throw them in the dump and let the chemical seep into the groundwater?

    I have this vision of an entire town of amnesiacs.

    1. Re:Disposal? by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      I have this vision of an entire town of amnesiacs.

      What were we talking about?

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    2. Re:Disposal? by Eternauta3k · · Score: 1

      I have this vision of an entire town of amnesiacs.
      The amnesia comes after the insomnia :) (I assume you're making a reference to "100 años de soledad")
      --
      Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
    3. Re:Disposal? by sethstorm · · Score: 1

      How will they dispose of these beads? Throw them in the dump and let the chemical seep into the groundwater? Use them in Guantanamo Bay on the detainees?

      I have this vision of an entire nation of amnesiacs. Fixed.
      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    4. Re:Disposal? by toriver · · Score: 1

      You are thinking of Washington, D.C.

      "I am sorry, dear voter, I cannot recall that campaign promise."

    5. Re:Disposal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have this vision of an entire town of amnesiacs.

      It will be like the The Big O, only without the giant robots!
  23. You're missing something... by nunyadambinness · · Score: 1

    "The toy was supposed to contain the non-toxic chemical 1,5-pentanediol, but instead contains 1,4-butanediol, which is metabolised into the drug gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB)."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bindeez

    It looks like it wasn't a design problem, but a manufacturing problem. So yes, you were missing something.

  24. Date-rape is an offensive term by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am opposed to the term "date-rape drug" as I consider it to be offensive. I demand that you use a more neutral term and propose "date-romance drug" as an alternative.

    1. Re:Date-rape is an offensive term by Nimey · · Score: 1

      How about "date-enhancing drug"?

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    2. Re:Date-rape is an offensive term by Barny · · Score: 1

      What about "Date Surprise-Sex drug"?

      It puts the sensual back in non-consensual.

      Too much explosm :P

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
  25. Date Rape Drug? Sure - But So Is Alcohol! by illectro · · Score: 4, Informative

    I mean all the news stories refer to GHB as a date rape drug, which is just stupid journalistic sensationalism, GHB is far more commonly used as a 'rave drug', and there are more date rape accusations resulting from plain old alcohol induced leglessness. Not to mention that GHB is so salty and dangerous to mix with alcohol that you couldn't spike a drink with it. But the way the news continues to label it as a 'date rape' drug largely serves to perpetuate the idea and endanger people who end up taking too many hints from the news media. Even when people know what they're doing it's bad news waiting to happen, and giving it to other people is irresposible. Putting it into kids toys to save a bit of money in manufacturing is just pure evil.

    1. Re:Date Rape Drug? Sure - But So Is Alcohol! by raddan · · Score: 1

      One of GHB's earliest and still very common uses is by bodybuilders to elevate human growth hormone levels. Don't remember where I learned this although I do recall an acquaintance of mine in college who recreationally used GHB and ketamine, among other things. Wonder if he's still alive...

  26. swallowing beads?! by spacemky · · Score: 1

    "Two children in the US and three in Australia were hospitalized after swallowing the beads."

    ummm... shouldn't children be hospitalized for swallowing any beads, toxic or not?

    --
    640YB ought to be enough for anybody.
  27. Date Rape Drug? by bigbadunix · · Score: 5, Informative

    GHB isn't *the* date rape drug. It's use, actually is primarily recreational (and, *no*, date rape is *not* recreation). Loss of conciousness is actually a rarity.

    I heard this on the news last night and thought "Oh, they're tainted with rohypnol". When I read this article this morning, I saw that it was GHB.

    Again, the media demonizing and misclassifying drugs. I'm not saying that GHB is good. Don't get me wrong at all. But the whole misclassification of things confuses parents, makes kids crave the stuff more, and generally, in it's lowest form, is misinformation.

    And we know how slashdot folks hate sensationalized misinformation, right?

    --

    The older I get, the less I like everyone else.
    1. Re:Date Rape Drug? by arsheive · · Score: 1

      I _will_ say that GHB is good. That is... it is fun. However, the fact that the effects are close to those of alcohol means that lots of kids got confused and mixed the two or just plain took way too much GHB. It was then labeled as a "date rape drug" in order to get it banned.

      Man, it was great though when you could just buy like 40 doses of that stuff online for like $20, and one dose basically made you a really fun kind of drunk for like 3 hours.

      --
      @AlexSheive
      :wq
    2. Re:Date Rape Drug? by JayPee · · Score: 1

      What irritates me is that this sensationalism interferes with real research. GHB had been showing some promise as an antidepressant, but research into that is now almost impossible.

    3. Re:Date Rape Drug? by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      GHB: Illegal, more druggy than being drunk, unpredictable, a dose that your friend took today or you took yesterday will kill you dead today, easy to hide the taste (date rape risk)
      Alcohol: Legal in most countries, more fun than GHB, and safer, hard to hide the taste; it also reduces heart disease and diabetes.

      Losing GHB is no big loss.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    4. Re:Date Rape Drug? by arsheive · · Score: 1

      Arguing that it's 'illegal' begs the question, as 'losing it' only happened when it was made illegal, and that was what I was lamenting.

      The website I bought it from produced a consistant-strength product, so dosing was not unpredictable.

      As far as date-rape goes: GHB doesn't have the memory loss effects of, say rohypnol, and only certain varieties have a taste that it would be possible to hide. So those could be banned. Regardless, it's a fun drug with no big companies behind it so it was bound to be made illegal eventually, I was just bitching because _I_ liked it... as I would if some TV show I liked were to be canceled.

      --
      @AlexSheive
      :wq
    5. Re:Date Rape Drug? by INowRegretThesePosts · · Score: 1

      According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_rape_drug ,

      GHB is one of the drugs that can be called "date rape drug".

    6. Re:Date Rape Drug? by Johann+Public · · Score: 1

      GHB is endogenous. That is, it is found in your brain as a product of normal neural functioning.

      Drinking Ethanol (Alcohol) is the number one date rape drug, in popularity and "success" rate.

      GHB is likely rarely used much, if ever, for the purpose of "date" rape.
      It is instead demonized by the DEA and other groups as such, making it easier to persecute users of such substances.
      Anyone who would be a creep enough to actively seek to rape another individual, much less waste a wonderful substance as GHB on such a pursuit, is clearly "DOING IT WRONG", as the "kids" may be wont to say these days.

  28. This just in! by davevr · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "Child seriously ill after drinking Chinese-made drain cleaner!"

    Seriously, what kind of kid eats non-edible beads when they are 10 years old? This seems like a case of Darwinism at work... Are people just supposed to be able to be as dumb as they want, do anything, disregard all common sense, and still somehow make it through life? Geez...

    And yes, I have kids. My three year old is smart enough to not eat his older sister's toy beads. He is even smart enough to keep them away from a baby. I guess now that qualifies as "super genius".

    1. Re:This just in! by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      It does qualify. Your baby doesn't know, yet, right?

      My daughter, at 16 months, is already learning about what is edible and not. At 14 months she was still putting inedible things in her mouth because she didn't know they were inedible.

      Your kid just knows better.

    2. Re:This just in! by Bob-taro · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Seriously, what kind of kid eats non-edible beads when they are 10 years old?

      Although the article uses the word "ingested", I wonder if putting a bead in your mouth would do the same thing. It's not the entire bead, but the "glue" coating that has the chemical. Still sounds like a silly thing to do, but kids are often silly. Maybe the beads taste good - didn't I just see a post where someone said GHB tastes salty?

      --
      Prov 9:8 Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you.
    3. Re:This just in! by Dhalka226 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously, what kind of kid eats non-edible beads when they are 10 years old?

      Many of them.

      I'm glad that your child is acting safely in this particular example--though I'm perfectly sure he's doing any number of unsafe things in other areas; he is three after all--but here's the fact: The risk-management and decision-making centers of the brain are not fully developed until into the 20s. If you need sources, here is one from 10 seconds of Googling: http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071014/NEWS/710140303/1001/DWEK01. You can find any number of others if you keep looking.

      Obviously, some people will mature at faster rates than others, "not fully developed" does not necessarily mean they will do every dangerous thing known to man, and good parenting is strongly in play. Still, it's important to realize that a child doing stupid things is not necessarily a function of them being stupid.

      On an semi-related note, I find it abhorrent that an adult would be judging a 10-year-old child he knows nothing about other than he got sick because of a toxic bead. Part of me is tempted to wish some harm befalls your own child to see if you still think of it as Darwinian evolution at work, but then I realize: I'm not that sort of a bastard monster.

      These are children. I'm not one of those "somebody think of the children!" types, but you really are despicable. Personally I don't think it's the child who ate the bead who needs to grow up.

    4. Re:This just in! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your kids do the right thing. A lot of kids don't. Your superior parenting abilities have instilled in them the judgment necessary to avoid death beads. Or was it just luck?

    5. Re:This just in! by rmerry72 · · Score: 1

      Seriously, what kind of kid eats non-edible beads when they are 10 years old? This seems like a case of Darwinism at work... Are people just supposed to be able to be as dumb as they want, do anything, disregard all common sense, and still somehow make it through life? Geez...

      Children make mistakes often potentially fatal ones and often obvious ones. Parents are supposed to reduce the possible consequences of children making those mistakes, so that mistakenly swallowing a few of beads does not send the kid to hospital. Swallowing all the beads he wants should at worst lead to really bad indegestion and a blocked up intestine which after a few days will pass. It should not lead to a fatal overdose of GHB! Swallowing drain cleaner can be fatal so I don't let my kids play with drain cleaner. Just like playing with a gun.

      I'd let your kids play with drain cleaner though.

      --
      We do not inherit the Earth from our parents. We borrow it from our children.
    6. Re:This just in! by davevr · · Score: 1

      An 18 month old will eat thumbtacks if you leave them out. Would you suggest banning them as well?

      Wow, you know I always sort of thought of myself as an average parent. I never baby-proofed the house or played Mozart in the womb. My parenting duties consist mostly of reading Dr. Seuss books, playing pen&paper RPGs, and laying down the law. But after reading a few comments it seems that the bar has sunk so low that this now qualifies me as SuperDad or something. It is like we are living in a live-action version of the movie Idiocracy!

      This is not rocket science. Kids have stages:

      From birth to 6 months, they need to always in physical contact with another human.

      From 6-12, they are either being held or in some baby-safe "sandbox" - a crib, playpen, etc.

      1-3 or 4 are the danger years - they can wander around and get into everything. Here you really have to keep an eye on them and make sure they aren't eating your WarHammer 40k figures, drain cleaner, date-rape beads, etc. If they do - guess whose fault that is? (hint: not the maker of the drain cleaner)

      Older than that, they can speak and reason and have increasing self-control. You give them opportunities, set expectations, see if they are responsible, and adjust permissions accordingly. This continues right up until they leave for college.

      If I buy a toy that says "Safe for 3 year olds" and then it turns out to have lead paint, etc., then by all means we should be going after the manufacturer. But there are an infinite number of dangerous objects being made - where do you draw the line? There has to be some base expectation placed on humans - parents AND children - if they want to be members of a functioning society.

      When I was a kid, I had a friend who glued his lips together with SuperGlue "just to see what would happen." And you know what? That kid was a moron, and probably still is one (assuming he didn't die in a college binge-drinking "accident"). If that happened today, people would probably be demanding that superglue be banned... geez!

      Thanks for reading, and please enjoy a handjob from Starbuck's on your way out...

  29. Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by BcNexus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No matter what the product, Chinese manufacturers will always cut every corner they can.
    Toothpaste: Substituting poisonous glycol (anti-freeze) for other sugary chemicals
    Cough syrup: Ditto
    Paint: Using lead
    Painted toys: lead
    Capacitors: Using stolen formulas and producing incomplete electrolytes taht cause the capacitors to fail, leak or explode.
    Toys: substituting cheaper butanediol (which turns into the date-rape drug GHB) for more expensive pentanediol

    1. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by Greyfox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What blows my mind about it is that they frequently end up killing themselves when they get caught, probably because they know the government will do that (or worse) if they hang around. I wouldn't think it'd be a huge leap to think "Gee, if I don't use the lead-tainted paint on this product I won't have to kill myself later on..."

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    2. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by dave420 · · Score: 1

      They're just doing the same thing every other developed country did when they were churning out goods for others. The UK did it, the US did it, France did it, Germany did it. Everyone did it. Now, it's China's turn.

    3. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by belg4mit · · Score: 1

      What's the point of development if you're not going to learn from the mistakes of those who came before?

      --
      Were that I say, pancakes?
    4. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by foobsr · · Score: 1

      No matter what the product, Chinese manufacturers will always cut every corner they can.

      Related mentions of exerted pressure, quote: "Everybody is pushing, pushing, pushing for lower and lower prices. The vendors are squeezed to the point where they aren't making a profit anymore. So they are looking to cut corners," said Peter Dean, a former U.S. toy company executive who now teaches at Hong Kong Polytechnic University." have been debunked as communist counterpropaganda.

      The business ethics of Wal-Mart and others is beyond any doubt.

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    5. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by BcNexus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I choose not to shop at Walmart so as to not directly and indirectly encourage manufacturers to cut corners.

    6. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by naturaverl · · Score: 1

      I suppose if we actually manufactured as many things in the US as are in China, we'd have the same frequency of incidents.

    7. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by sanctimonius+hypocrt · · Score: 1

      I see two solutions:

      1. US consumers stop buying stuff made in China;
      2. Congress changes the law to allow stuff made in China to be labeled "Made in USA."

      Actually, I guess I only see one solution.

    8. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by nunyadambinness · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "They're just doing the same thing every other developed country did when they were churning out goods for others"

      And that makes it ok how?

      And what exactly, is your point? Do you think that acting like this happens everywhere (which is horseshit) matters in any way whatsoever? It's happening right now in China, your attempts at cultural relativism have no place in this discussion.

    9. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by Menkhaf · · Score: 1

      Toothpaste: Substituting poisonous glycol (anti-freeze) for other sugary chemicals Yeah, they definitely should have used the not poisonous glycol...
      --
      A proud member of the Onion-in-Hand alliance
    10. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not seen as a mistake.

    11. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by Yahweh+Doesn't+Exist · · Score: 1, Insightful

      that's not a very popular argument when people point out how the current activities of developed nations are damaging our environment - then Americans (and others) are all "but we need this to support our economy". it works both ways.

      it's also easy for developed countries to criticise others now that they already have the benefits. but if you're not going to tear down and rebuild everything that came from slavery etc. then you're not talking about "learning from mistakes", you're talking about "ignoring or getting away with mistakes".

    12. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by blank+axolotl · · Score: 1

      As I understand, it was not the chinese factories producing the toothpaste and cough syrup. They were producing glycerin, which they sold to south american companies who produced toothpase/syrup. These companies did not check their glycerin before mixing it in. Turns out the chinese factory had shipped antifreeze instead of glycerin (they're similar).

      Also, note that the head of China's Food and Drug Administration was *executed* for this. They really took it seriously.

    13. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by idontgno · · Score: 1

      A critical weakness of human psychology is the "can't happen to me" problem.

      "The lessons of the past don't apply to me because I'm {smarter | cooler | tougher | the chosen people of $DIETY | not like them | ... }!"

      Self-deception is very powerful. People who get caught, no matter how inevitably, are quite often shocked and amazed.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    14. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by Mad+Leper · · Score: 1

      Way ahead of you, in Canada our Government has already chosen option 2.. http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/product_of_canada_eh/

    15. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by djh101010 · · Score: 1

      What blows my mind about it is that they frequently end up killing themselves when they get caught, probably because they know the government will do that (or worse) if they hang around. I wouldn't think it'd be a huge leap to think "Gee, if I don't use the lead-tainted paint on this product I won't have to kill myself later on..." Yup. The thing is, we can't rely on Chinese manufacturers or certainly their government to stop this. This stuff was brought into this country by an importer, and has someone's brand name on it. THAT company has a US presence. They need to be held fully responsible (not just some token fine and "Whoops, we got caught again"). If the fines shut 'em down, well, good. Test your products and this won't be a problem. It's time to start making this really hurt the companies who are bringing this crap into the country.

      By all means, I'm in favor of the Chinese factory bosses offing themselves when they get caught but, lets make it hurt the people selling the stuff here too.
    16. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by goga_russian · · Score: 1

      i hope this list you made expands to thousands of pages in near futire...
      or less than a year if all of you smarten up

      --
      Dont Judge The situation by the Misfortunate. Goga.
    17. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      The reason is that they are gambling on NOT getting caught doing this crap.

      More often than not, they don't get caught.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    18. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by Vitamin+J · · Score: 1

      Welcome to the unregulated free market.

      That's a bit trite, but there are indirect costs to cheap goods, most likely in the form of decreased QA/QC standards, corruption and dodgy practices to keep prices low. Which is not to say that the free market won't correct itself - it will - but there is always the potential for avoidable suffering along the way.

    19. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by servognome · · Score: 1

      I suppose if we actually manufactured as many things in the US as are in China, we'd have the same frequency of incidents.
      China is going through the same growing pains the US did when it industrialized... Poor worker conditions, unsafe products, deceptive practices, shooting protesters
      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    20. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by dave420 · · Score: 1

      They are learning. But as they're not in the 1700s-1900s, they don't have anyone to learn from. I doubt US manufacturers, say, in the early 1900s had to worry about childrens toys containing GHB.

    21. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by dave420 · · Score: 1

      I fear you have misunderstood my point. I'm not saying it's OK. Far from it - I'm very interested in consumer safety laws, regulations, and indeed the general safety of people all over the world. I'm trying to bring this back from a pseudo-racist rant against the Chinese, by illustrating that the Chinese have not cornered the market with regard to flagrant disregard for safety. I'm simply highlighting the fact that it's an undesired, dangerous facet of development in industrial nations, regardless of which nation you want to look at. I bring this up because all this talk about China making shoddy goods is becoming ammunition to many racists who blow it out of all proportion. It also is a tool used by non-Chinese manufacturers to bring more customers to them, by overstating the dangers of Chinese goods. And it's not horseshit, by the way.

    22. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      DECADES before it was known how it operated. Once known, within a decade, it was stopped. The sad part is that it took a decade. I guess that is the downfall of democracy.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    23. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by nunyadambinness · · Score: 1

      "I'm not saying it's OK."

      No, you were looking for a convenient excuse to wedge your personal politics into a discussion where they don't belong.

    24. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by belg4mit · · Score: 1

      You're taking too narrow a view. It doesn't matter which toxic susbtance it is, it's been clear for sometime that
      kids ingest everything; Pb painted party favors included. Therefore, one ought to be careful in what one uses in
      products for wee ones. Granted, this has yet to stop anyone from using bisphenol-A, but some would argue the jury
      is still out on that one.

      --
      Were that I say, pancakes?
    25. Re:Chinese manufacturers always cut corners by belg4mit · · Score: 1

      How this got marked inisightful is beyond me; you've conflated many things. Not using toxics (Pb, etc.) in
      consumer products (for kids!) has nothing to do with slavery. Simply because we still conduct some/many
      practices detrimental to the environment, does not mean that our experiences and rationale against others
      is null and void.

      The only reasonable crticism one can make are complaints by a developed nation about poor practices by a
      developing nation when the former still does the same. One might feel that it's hypocritical to say China ought
      not burn its coal to develop because we've discovered its bad, even though we're still doing it. On the other
      hand, we do not rely solely on it, and some might argue it is not unreasonable for us to warn them off paths
      that are difficult to shift from when there are other alternatives available. Yet it is certainly reasonable
      for us to point out the futility in deforesting a nation for fuel wood; see England, Rapa Nui.

      --
      Were that I say, pancakes?
  30. Canada by elzurawka · · Score: 1
    I heard on the radio this morning that they are being recalled in Canada and that the distributor will be offering toys of equal value to customers. At least they were cooperating...

    Kinda scary that this kinda stuff can get through.

    --
    -EL
  31. GHB not useful by Knara · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If I wasn't at work I'd look up the citation, but apparently double-blind studies have pretty conclusively shown that ruffies aren't really useful as a "date rape" drug, seeing as they're not a magical knockout potion.

    Now, getting trashed out of your mind, that'll give yer frat boy an opening. Doesn't need a magical additive for that, though.

    1. Re:GHB not useful by mink · · Score: 1

      Gamma Hydroxy Butyrate(GHB)!=Flunitrazepam(Rohypnol).

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  32. "rocked by rape " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not directly related but http://jwz.livejournal.com/ has a mix tape (.m3u) you can stream that starts with a ponient track "good evening" but the third one, "rocked by rape" really gets into "what the f**k is wrong with the world" thing. "http://cerebrum.dnalounge.com/mixtapes/

  33. The chemical is a glue on the surface by Animats · · Score: 1

    These beads are supposed to stick together, and so they have a water-activated glue on the surface. The toy concept is that kids build something in a supporting tray, spray it with water, and then can remove the whole design in one piece. There's no excuse for having anything even remotely toxic in a material intended for use like that.

    The previous popular toy with little stick-together spheres was Magnetix, from Rose Art. That one was recalled after one death and 27 emergency surgeries for ingesting the conveniently candy-sized cobalt-neodymium magnets.

    Get the kids Legos. That company has a clue about how to get parts to attach.

    1. Re:The chemical is a glue on the surface by Jerf · · Score: 1

      That one was recalled after one death and 27 emergency surgeries for ingesting the conveniently candy-sized cobalt-neodymium magnets.
      They're back on the market. Visibly they are the same, too, though maybe they've done something to further secure the magnets where we can't see (glue or something).
  34. Toddlers eat things by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Informative

    Responsible parenting is one thing, but kids will stick anything in their mouth, and nose.

    A childerens enviroment should therefore not contain things that A are small enough to swallow or B are harmfull if done so. Toys therefore have to be made in such a way that even with rough handling parts do not come off and are non-toxic. Thats the law. It really ain't even that hard. The original toy in this case WAS non-toxic. The chinese replaced the original glue with another, why? The chinese for some reason seem unable to follow specifications. All the recalls I seen from China are because they changed a part of the design for no good reason.

    I am all for responsible parenting, but when a company creates a safe product and a chinese company replaces a harmless glue with a KNOWN dangerous one, what is a parent to do. The product HAD been tested before. Should you put everything through your own lab before giving it to your child?

    Frankly it is about time the chinese start to act upon this. Launch a police investigation and find out why this glue was replaced.

    But yes parents should also inspect the toys themselves, before you give a toddler a teddybear, try and see if you can pull it apart. but parents can't be expected to do chemical tests.

    Frankly I think we need to thighten the rules, NO product is released without it first passing rigid and mandatory safety checks that test EVERYTHING. Release a product that proves harmfull and you are charged with attempted manslaughter. Why did this company not TEST their products one they arrived from china?

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Toddlers eat things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Don't put marbles in your nose, put them in there, do not put them in there!)

    2. Re:Toddlers eat things by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Testing on introduction is not enough.

      The problem is you design the product, it passes the safety checks and you put it on the market.

      Some time later someone at a contract manufacturer in the third world makes a substitution that makes the product dangerous without telling you.

      So really it is required to have testing after the product is introduced to check that the contract manufacuteres are still building to spec. Things get even more complex when multiple contract manufacuters are involved as you have to make sure you get samples from every manufacturers output.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    3. Re:Toddlers eat things by theelectron · · Score: 1

      All the recalls I seen from China are because they changed a part of the design for no good reason.
      I can think of one 'good' (depends on your definition of good) reason: the replacement materials are cheaper.
    4. Re:Toddlers eat things by p0tat03 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More difficult than it sounds, and it would all be SO much simpler if China actually had a justice system worth a damn. As it is right now a company has a VERY hard time getting sued - every judge gets bribed, and there's more loyalty from them towards domestic businesses than seemingly hostile foreign influences. Their whole judiciary is a gigantic joke, the concept of rule of law does not apply in that country, except when the ruling party wants to apply it towards their own ends.

      Even if a company is successfully sued, the way their system works allows the same group of people to simply close up shop, move a few blocks down, and continue from where they left off. It's practically impossible for any PERSONAL responsibility to be exacted unless the situation erupts into a full-scale international debacle (like this one), where the government will actually step in.

      And if you think we have it bad, imagine the Chinese consumer. They don't just get to deal with shady manufacturers, but shady designs in the first place! Few people fully realize the intricacy and importance of proper engineering until it bites them in the ass like this. Welcome America, to the Wal Mart future you created for yourself by being a bunch of damn cheap bastards who would rather buy cheap shit than pay for quality and durability.

    5. Re:Toddlers eat things by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The chinese replaced the original glue with another, why? The chinese for some reason seem unable to follow specifications. All the recalls I seen from China are because they changed a part of the design for no good reason.

      It's funny; back around the 1900s or so when the US was just getting ramped up with lots of production and exports and world trade, there were all sorts of abominations just like this - well, really, fewer polymers, and more sawdust-in-your-flour, fingers-in-your-sausage, and stuff like that.

      Then manufacturers sprung up who could make a profit off their reputation for quality, and Industry generally cleaned up their act quite a bit.

      This stuff is typical of developing economies.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    6. Re:Toddlers eat things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Responsible parenting is one thing, but kids will stick anything in their mouth, and nose.

      Kids who are how old? My cousins stopped putting things in their mouths when they were 2 or 3 years old.

      Then again, their parents actually did their jobs as, y'know, parents.

    7. Re:Toddlers eat things by bmo · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Responsible parenting is one thing, but kids will stick anything in their mouth, and nose."

      And anywhere else, for that matter. A Gummi Bear is just the right size to be shoved straight into an ethernet jack.

      --
      BMO

    8. Re:Toddlers eat things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frankly it is about time the Chinese start to act upon this. Launch a police investigation and find out why this glue was replaced. We already know the reason why the glue was replaced -- a desire to increase profits. The good news is that the Chinese will investigate and punish the factory's manager (or supplier) with death. Sooner or later China will run out of greedy people and all our toys will be safe! Oh wait...
    9. Re:Toddlers eat things by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      >The chinese replaced the original glue with another, why?

      They replaced an expensive chemical with a cheap one.
      That's called the free market in action.
      If your goal is profit, well, let's hear it for the free market. If your goal is having children live to a reasonable age, still able to count to ten with bifocal vision, if you know what I mean, then yeah, regulation starts to look a lot more attractive.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    10. Re:Toddlers eat things by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Their whole judiciary is a gigantic joke, the concept of rule of law does not apply in that country, except when the ruling party wants to apply it towards their own ends.

      There's actually a fairly easy way to solve this problem.

      A boycott big enough to dent their exports to the USA. That'll get the attention of the ruling party and they'll crack down to fix the problem.

      Personally, I'm not buying any food/clothing related product produced in China. It's been a pain in the butt so far, but I figure I'm safer and get better products even if I have to pay more.

      So far they've lost out on the sale of a coat(Walmart, Target, Sears, and Menards), all of theirs I was interested were made in china, ended up getting it at a tractor supply store, better quality ~50% more in cost, food processor(haven't found one I like yet that's not made in China. Sears, Target, and Walmart checked), and hunting knife, Walmart lost out, found a US made knife in Scheels, cost ~ double the cost of chinese ones, but better quality.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    11. Re:Toddlers eat things by R2.0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Welcome America, to the Wal Mart future you created for yourself by being a bunch of damn cheap bastards who would rather buy cheap shit than pay for some fatass union worker to collect $20/hour for making crap."
      Fixed that for ya'.

      Obviously you weren't around during the 70's and 80's. American companies couldn't manufacture their way out of a paper bag. The bulk of american products were crap, with some really high quality stuff thrown in. The chinese just replaced the shitty end of the market. The high quality end either still exists, or was driven out when they couldn't cut costs to something folks could remotely afford.

      I was just looking for a floor jack. I can get one made in China for $50, or the USA for $250. How could I justify the extra $200? I could buy 5 chinese jacks for the 1 american, and I doubt someone could convince me that the American one would last 5x as long. If it was $100 vs. $50, I would have bit the bullet, but 5x?!

      Yes, american quality has improved greatly; but there is an entire generation that Detroit et al. lost in terms of "Buy American". If someone has been conditioned that a car made in Japan or Europe is inherently better, why would there be a stigma against China?

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    12. Re:Toddlers eat things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that all those toxic toys are only for other countries right? I don't see why everybody is upset. They're basically stepping on top of everybody else to get themselves ahead. I thought that was the example that the USA wanted everybody to follow, or it's only good for USA'rs?

    13. Re:Toddlers eat things by p0tat03 · · Score: 1

      I was just looking for a floor jack. I can get one made in China for $50, or the USA for $250. How could I justify the extra $200?

      That's the entire problem with that train of thought that has brought us to this very issue. People assume they understand all there is to know about manufacturing, engineering, and design in general - and equate two similar looking products. Will the American jack last longer? Probably not by 5x. But that's not the only factor with regards to the quality of a product. The following isn't always true, but tends to be - the American jack will fail at some point, but the failure will not be catastrophic and send a stray bolt into your eye. The American jack will also be made of superior materials, and is probably rated to a higher specification. Even if the box reads the same specification, you can bet your ass that the American jack has left a lot more of a margin, and won't collapse when overloaded by 10%.

      I've worked in manufacturing, I've seen this first hand. You *absolutely* get what you pay for. People repeat the mantra of TANSTAAFL but somehow everybody thinks they're exempt from it.

    14. Re:Toddlers eat things by R2.0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hey, guess what - I have a degree in Mechanical Engineering. I studied manufacturing techniques, too. And part of your assertions about American quality are semantic sleight-of-hand.

      "The American jack will also be made of superior materials, and is probably rated to a higher specification."

      Not really. A rating is a rating. If the grade of steel is A36, that's what it is. True, the Chinese have been purposely substituting lesser materials an passing them off as better - it's called counterfeiting and fraud, and has nothing to do with "manufacturing" quality.

      "Even if the box reads the same specification, you can bet your ass that the American jack has left a lot more of a margin, and won't collapse when overloaded by 10%."

      Ahh, here's the subtle part. You see, one of the reasons that american stuff is so expensive, especially in the low-tech area, is that US manufacturer's of these items STILL have not learned the lessons of Deming and the Japanese. Their manufacturing operations still have just as shitty manufacturing controls as in the 70's. So how does the end product end up with "a lot more of a margin"? Because, in order to compensate for the bad process control, US manufacturer's have higher reject rates and overdesign the parts to compensate for the likelihood that they will be flawed. They siply shift the quality bell curve up, not narrow the standard deviation. The Chinese don't bother.

      So, if I buy an American floor jack rated at 3 tons, it's actualls designed for 5 tons, but the factory QA is so bad that, statistically, they can only be sure of a 3 ton rating. Whereas the Chinese are designing for 3 ton, and selling at that rating.

      "AHA!" you say, "Proof that American is better quality!"

      "But", I reply, "I only WANT a 3 ton rated jack. I don't want to pay for a possibly defective 5 ton jack. Oh, I'll probably (statistically speaking) get lucky and get a jack with a real 5 ton load rating, but I don't NEED it - I'm jacking up VW's, not F350's. And I'm not getting a 5 ton jack for a 3 ton price - I'm getting a 5 ton jack for a 5 ton price, but the factory isn't confident enough to call it that!

      I just want to buy simple stuff at a reasonable price. And that price should not include
      1) Subsidizing some guy who barely graduated high school expecting to be paid premium wages just because he is in a union and/or an American.
      2) Insane labor and environmental regulations which only enrich lawyers and don't do dick-all for the folks they purport to protect.
      3) government bailouts to protect failed businesses, who are free to keep screwing up for the next 30 years (I'm looking at you, Iacocca)

      I'm willing to have it include:
      a) Fair wages for the LOCAL wage market in which the item is produced.
      b) Reasonable regulations
      c) reasonable legal overhead for protection agains real legal problems, and not just a wealth transfer to JD's

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    15. Re:Toddlers eat things by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

      I think you've a bit too much trust in engineering and manufacturing done in the US.

      At a job interview at Ford, I learned that they didn't seem to think it was a big deal if the bumper was within 5% variance in length. WTF???? I wonder what tolerance they had for other parts of the car.

      Working as an engineer at an aerospace outfit on a military contract, they decided to release firmware on a plane fighting in Iraq today with 200+ known fatal errors. Decision to delay release was overridden on the basis of cost and time.

      So there's really no way to tell the quality of a product without having other people try them out first.

      --
      There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    16. Re:Toddlers eat things by El_Oscuro · · Score: 1

      I already do it. Something as simple as a hose reel. I have been through a lot of Chinese made ones from Home Depot. The last one had a water powered hose winder which didn't work well, reduced the water pressure, leaked like a sieve, and broke the first year. It cost about $100. For the same price, I ordered an American made one from Nothern Tool. Mine was made in Lincoln, Nebraska. I couldn't believe what a difference the quality made in a hose reel. Brass bushings and couplings, ball bearing reel. I once filled a 2000 gallon pool without a single drip. I even backed into it with a car and bent one of the axles. A little straighting with a hammer and it was as good as new.

      I try to buy American every time I can and am almost always rewarded for it. My truck is a Chevy, almost trouble free for 8 years now. All of my outdoor equipment is American made (Echo, John Deere, Ariens).

      Whether or they know it or not, Fisher Price, Mattel, Walmart, and China have borked themselves good this time around. My kids already know "toys made in china" == "lead paint, anti-freeze toothpaste, cheap, dangerous, etc". So when they grow up and have kids themselves, they will go to the store to buy something and see "Made in China", and its game over.

      --
      "Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."
    17. Re:Toddlers eat things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know how you can say their is no personal responsibility when people in these companies can end up executed and their organs harvested after a quick show trial for having embarrassed the party.

      Talking about Responsibility lets see people who wnat ever cheaper goods, not caring about the environmental or social costs to the people in these factories take some.

    18. Re:Toddlers eat things by illtud · · Score: 1


      The chinese replaced the original glue with another, why? The chinese for some reason seem unable to follow specifications. All the recalls I seen from China are because they changed a part of the design for no good reason.

      It's funny; back around the 1900s or so when the US was just getting ramped up with lots of production and exports and world trade, there were all sorts of abominations just like this []

      Then manufacturers sprung up who could make a profit off their reputation for quality, and Industry generally cleaned up their act quite a bit.


      It wasn't the magic market that fixed those problems, it was regulation, the stuff that business now likes to slander as "red tape" holding them back and making them uncompetitive. Betterment came from radical reform driven by common people shocked by stories exactly like this one. I'm dismayed by the comments to this story full of "chinese corruption" explanations when it's just a natural consequence of unregulated business, a period all developed countries have passed through. This an an effect of a development phase, not a cultural failing.

    19. Re:Toddlers eat things by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      It wasn't the magic market that fixed those problems, it was regulation Let's not be bickering idiots in front of all Slashdot: both regulation and market forces contributed to this. Exactly how much of each deserves credit is the study of economists. You are obviously not an economist; at a guess, you seem to be more interested in political rhetoric and pushing your socialist-leaning agenda, judging from your simplistic, highly partisan response and snarky comments about "magic markets".

      Disclaimer and admission of imperfection: My original post was simplistic too.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  35. new product planned by LM741N · · Score: 1

    Company officials said that their new product "Bufo Toad" should replace any revenue lost through the GHB scandal.

  36. They replaced one chemical for another by fawzma · · Score: 1

    which lead to this..

  37. I just ordered mine! by EllisDees · · Score: 1

    That's a pretty reasonable price for GHB.

    --
    -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
  38. Not really by jbeaupre · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I actually had to research how big something you swallowed had to be before doctors became concerned. The the rule of thumb seems to be stuff about the size of a quarter (2.4 cm) or larger is trouble. Assuming it's not sharp or poisonous. Granted, anything could be a problem, but the doctors seem to have a wait and see policy for small stuff. Safer to let it pass than trying to go in and get it. They often wait for the large stuff too, but the ilealcecal valve is where stuff tends to get stuck.

    So for non-toxic beads, hospitalization might not be necessary, but at least ask a doctor to evaluate your kid.

    --
    The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    1. Re:Not really by ultracool · · Score: 1

      When I was 11 or so I would swallow small beads just to prove that nothing will happen. My reasoning was "It's just plastic. It will just come out on the other end." Nothing happened. Though I guess if I was doing it now it would be a bit more interesting...

  39. GHB by circletimessquare · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    meet will wheaton, who forever more will be thought if as wesley crusher, no matter what he does, even though he left that role behind in the 1980s

    meet the spotted owl, who will forever more be thought of as the enemy of logging, but it's just a bird

    meet the element lead, which has wonderful uses in nuclear reactors and batteries, but will forever more be thought of as something china likes to put in children's toys

    first impressions are unfair, but you will forgive me if i have more sympathy with lead, the spotted owl and will wheaton than i do with a dangerous drug like ghb

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  40. GHB occurs naturally in the body.... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 0

    , being a byproduct of muscle activity in (all?) mammals. As such, it is also present in trace amounts in meat. At one time, you could buy pure GHB powder as a "dietary supplement" in vitamin shops. It is STILL available by prescription under the brand name Xyrem.

    ANYONE could fail a drug test that looked for GHB at any time. Same goes for a powerful psychedelic called DMT, which is also a human neurotransmitter. This stuff makes LSD look like a placebo in comparison.

    So each and every reader out there is currently in possession of 2 DEA Schedule I controlled substances. You are expected to do your patriotic duty, and turn yourselves in by the end of the day....:)

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  41. Dual Use Tech by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    That's a funny coincidence. More likely they have those common metabolic pathways because it's more economical for the same factory to produce both the toys for kids, and the GHB for older kids, from the same common source. I wonder just how much GHB comes from these Chinese factories. I bet we don't find out in time for Christmas.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Dual Use Tech by nunyadambinness · · Score: 1

      "I wonder just how much GHB comes from these Chinese factories."


      It's not GHB, it's a precursor that metabolizes in the human body to produce effects similar to GHB, which is one of its minor metabolic products.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1,4-butanediol

      "1,4-Butanediol is used industrially as a solvent and in the manufacture of some types of plastics and fibers. In organic chemistry, 1,4-butanediol is used for the synthesis of -butyrolactone (GBL)."

      It is an extremely common ingredient in many industrial applications, which is why it's far cheaper and far more abundant than 1,5-pentanediol, which is what was supposed to be used.

      Its uses include:

      "Tetrahydrofuran (THF), 48 percent; polybutylene terephthalate (PBT) resins, 23 percent; gamma-butyrolactone (GBL), 21 percent; polyurethanes, 5 percent; miscellaneous, including uses as a solvent, a coating resin raw material, and an intermediate in chemical and pharmaceutical production, 3 percent."

      http://www.the-innovation-group.com/ChemProfiles/Butanediol,%201,4%20-.htm

      I can't honestly tell if your post was facetious, but if it was, your sense of humor is awful and if it wasn't (as I suspect) your conspiracy theory fails like all the others in the light of factual information.
    2. Re:Dual Use Tech by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I didn't cite any "conspiracy". And you haven't disproven the commonality of GHB and toy material production businesses, just offered an alternate explanation. I didn't say I had proven one, just that I'd like to know more.

      BTW, you're not going to get anywhere attacking all "conspiracy" theories as baseless, when there is no shortage of conspiracies, proven and otherwise. Especially attacking without proof, but with just a legitimate explanation, as are the others you attack.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:Dual Use Tech by nunyadambinness · · Score: 1

      I didn't cite any "conspiracy".


      Exactly, you just intimated one, which is all you people ever do, and is far worse.

      I was right, you were trolling. I should have known better than to try and educate a troll.
    4. Re:Dual Use Tech by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      You're using "conspiracy" to mean something else that isn't a conspiracy. And you're using "trolling" to mean something that isn't trolling.

      "You people"? Now your perfect symmetry of the common denial projector is complete.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:Dual Use Tech by ifwm · · Score: 0

      "Now your perfect symmetry of the common denial projector is complete."

      What fun, now try a sentence that actually has meaning please. Preferably one that is constructed according to the rules of grammar. The quoted attempt does not meet the criteria.

      "And you're using "trolling" to mean something that isn't trolling."

      Well, I think what he meant was something like the above quoted sentence, which precisely meets the definition of trolling.

      Hate it all you want, you're a fucking idiot. Who say incredibly stupid shit like "Now your perfect symmetry of the common denial projector is complete". I mean, do you realize how incredibly fucking stupid your post looks with a nonsense statement like that?

      I guess not, you keep posting. And getting owned.

    6. Re:Dual Use Tech by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      "Trolling" means posting something designed to produce only predictable responses. You're just as illiterate as they are.

      More so, because you can't even read a grammatically correct sentence of the form "[adverb] [subject] [verb] [adverb]", when the subject is "[possessive pronoun] [adjective] [noun] [preposition] [def article] [adjective] [adjective] [noun]". Like "already your stupid bullshit in that meaningless rant format was worthless".

      What a stupid cunt you are. Do you need me to explain that to you, too?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    7. Re:Dual Use Tech by ifwm · · Score: 0

      "'Trolling' means posting something designed to produce only predictable responses."

      You posted to defend your grammatically incorrect post, PREDICTBLY.

      "More so, because you can't even read a grammatically correct sentence"

      If you were capable of writing one, then maybe you could say that and it would be true.

      "What a stupid cunt you are."

      See, trolling. How easy you are to manipulate.

      "Do you need me to explain that to you, too?"

      Not really, you're a pathetic loser who gets what little social interaction he has from the trolls he makes on a web board. You live for arguing with people until you're defeated (like now) at which point you rely on insults and nonsensical musings. You know you're not very smart, so you attack anything that resembles evidence of that, knowing you can't live with being less intelligent than you portray yourself.

      See, you already explained it to me, you just didn't realize it.

      And by the way, what was it, "Good doggie, who's a good doggie". :)

      I own your fucking soul, and there's not a fucking thing you can do but make another idiotic response in defense, because you can't let someone else get over on you.

      But I just did.

  42. Let me be the first to say... by gillbates · · Score: 1

    Won't someone think of the children!

    Um, oh... wait - that's strangely appropriate...

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
  43. Outsourcing to the lowest bidder by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    We're reaping what we sowed. We wanted cheap crap, we got it. Personally, I'd rather pay a little more for non-poisoned stuff, but that's just me.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    1. Re:Outsourcing to the lowest bidder by ultracool · · Score: 1

      Now, the kids' PJs can either be flame-retardant or non-carcinogenic, but not both!

  44. Terrorism potential by davidwr · · Score: 1

    How hard would it be for some 3v1l company to spike their products with stuff that turns into something Really Harmful when it is consumed, used, or disposed of?

    Sure, it would bankrupt the company. But if the goal of the company is to poison its customers or the environment then they probably don't care about money.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Terrorism potential by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      From Invader Zim:

      Tak: The great thing about your people, Dib, is that most of them don't notice. All they see is another faceless corporate venture, not a plan for world conquest!
      Dib: Wait. Is there really a difference?

  45. Not really - get informed by begbiezen · · Score: 0

    The rich get richer, the poor get even more poor. (I'm surprised by your reaction)
    try wikipedia for starters,
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organization#Criticism_3
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_WTO

    You tell me what's good about it, I'm all ears.

    1. Re:Not really - get informed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You tell me what's good about it, I'm all ears."

      You answered the question yourself in your first sentence.
      "The rich get richer, the poor get even more poor."

    2. Re:Not really - get informed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meep Meep

  46. National Security by mcrbids · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is why the Chinese manufacturers are getting in trouble. They are substituting cheaper, UNSAFE alternatives into commonly produced goods and then sending them off. The sad part is, the number of injuries and deaths we see in the U.S. and other countries, is *nothing* compared to the the number injuries and death suffered by the Chinese consumer. I agree with everything you said. But what this also shows us is the effect that China has on our national security!

    With everything being manufactured in China, out of our hands and control, what's to stop the Chinese from deciding to "taint" products essential to our national security? What if the Chinese Govt simply ordered the cessation of manufacturing certain things that we really need?

    China has tied their currency to the dollar making their money artificially cheap. This has caused all our manufacturing capacity to go to China. Short term, US benefits. Long term, China holds the cards.

    And we're OK with this?
    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    1. Re:National Security by Yahweh+Doesn't+Exist · · Score: 1

      >And we're OK with this?

      no, General Jack D. Ripper, sir

    2. Re:National Security by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      And we're OK with this?


      Right now for the populace: Yes. Because they're ignorant of the danger.

      For those of us that took in their MBA without critically evaluating the consequences of some
      business decisions: Yes. They ONLY see the almighty dollar and don't for one moment think of
      the Law of Unintended Consequences, of which we're seeing a fairly high-profile example thereof.

      Me? OH, HELL, NO. I'm NOT at all "ok" with it and if the funding comes in, you can bet your bottom
      dollar that I will NOT be off-shoring a single thing from the company that we're trying to start
      up. Not only can I NOT do this, I won't even if I could.
      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    3. Re:National Security by sbillard · · Score: 1

      With everything being manufactured in China, out of our hands and control

      This is only true because we don't demand higher quality. Our current Wal-Mart culture of lowest-bidder-always-wins is the reason things are beyond our control and "out of our hands".

      IF I have the option of paying more for something made of higher quality and made by a company that doesn't take advantage of lax "labor laws" or "environmental laws", I will gladly pay more for that "something".
      Similar to national elections, it only appears we don't have a real choice and it is out of our hands and beyond our control. We just need to collectively make it known that we demand choice/quality/accountability/leadership/whatever. But, I'm afraid you and I are outnembered.

      You're absolutely right. We (USA) don't manufacture anything anymore and have become an increasingly "service-based" workforce/economy and are reliant upon intellectual property laws to sustain that.

      BTW - there is no such thing as intellectual "property". We are screwed.

    4. Re:National Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By law any equipment vital to national security (such as satellites, military equipment, etc) must be made in the US. China can't hurt national security directly.

    5. Re:National Security by mink · · Score: 1

      Thats funny, because I head about a company making body armor for our troops that is making most of the product (except some final steps) in China. I think they were located in the NE USA (MA, CT or some state like that).

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  47. Better question: did they care? by Moraelin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They should have known about this reaction, but didn't do their research.

    A better question is: did they even care?

    There seem to be an awful lot of such incidents lately, involving swapped materials, ranging from poisonous toys to ethilene glycol in toothpaste to exploding lithium ion batteries, all coming from China. I'm sorry, but that's no longer looking like isolated "oopsie" cases where someone forgot to do their research. It starts to look like they have a whole culture based on not doing that research at all, or plain old not care as long as they can pocket the difference.

    I mean in this case one might even argue that they didn't research what it decomposes into, but other cases involved such blatant cases as:

    - lead paint, which is _known_ to be toxic. You don't have to research what it metabolizes into, it's just toxic as it is.

    - ethilene glycol, a known poison, used instead of the more expensive glycerine in toothpaste

    - the membrane which should collapse and open the circuit when a battery overheats, replaced with much cheaper stuff that doesn't. It doesn't take that much research to understand why it's there, and why a battery without that safety can burst into flames.

    Etc.

    In fact, I'll venture a guess and say what it really reminds me of: corruption and kleptocracy. Now I don't have any first-hand experience with China, but I've seen cases in other places, and, honestly, the more I hear about such Chinese manufacturing incidents, the more it starts to sounds like that.

    The way that works is, sorta, along the lines of "it doesn't matter how much you're paid, it matters how much you can steal / embezzle / demand in bribes / etc". Whole pyramids get built where any good job (judged through the aforementioned criterion) is either given to relatives of party officials, or essentially auctioned to whoever gave a bigger bribe. Then essentially the winner is inoffficially _expected_ to get that money back with interest, by abusing that function to take more bribes or plain old steal.

    In which case, the way it would go, isn't even that some ruthless capitalist wanted to cut production costs, gain a competitive advantage and invest it in some form or shape into expanding his operations. It's probably just some private guy along the chains who switched materials and pocketed the money. It's not the evils of capitalism, it's plain old the evils of unchecked corruption.

    Especially the communist block generated quite a few such structures, which is why I wonder about China.

    Actually, I'll give you one more reason why I worry about China. Because they have a whole _surrealistic_ history of just that.

    If you look as far back in time as the Battle of the Yalu River, you'll find such surrealistic stuff as that many shells used by the Chinese fleet were filled with sawdust or cement, because some enterprising souls in the navy had embezzeled the funds for cordite and split the loot with the manufacturer. Or stuff as monumentally surrealistic as that a battleship was missing two main guns, which again had been stolen and sold on the black market. If you didn't go "WTBF?!" already, read it again and roll it a bit in your head. Big Fucking Guns, off a battleship, stolen and sold on the black market.

    At this point, I'm sure someone will point out that it's been more than a century since then, and China did have two (or arguably even 3) changes of regime and direction in the meantime. But did the culture change in that time? Because from where I stand, it doesn't look that way. The corruption of the Qing empire continued seamlessly into the surrealistic warlord era during Chiang Kai-shek's regime, which in turn continued seamlessly into the corrupt regime under Mao. And now we have arguably the same guys who enriched themselves during the communism, and not by honest means either (the official salaries of government offi

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Better question: did they care? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Ultimately it is a management failure - blindly trusting the contractors in a place where you have little or no legal recourse is just a bit stupid. Of course hiring people that speak the language and have them go over there and check things out instead of blind trust would be sensible but it is seen as an unacceptable added cost.

    2. Re:Better question: did they care? by randyjg2 · · Score: 1

      Umm, corruption is probably the wrong word.

      (noto bene: I am only an amateur new institutional economist, so take this with a grain of mustard seed.)

      There is a very good review of the actual problem at http://www.iisg.nl/hpw/papers/law-ma.pdf "LAW AND ECONOMIC GROWTH: THE CASE OF TRADITIONAL CHINA
      - A REVIEW WITH SOME PRELIMINARY HYPOTHESES"

      In a nutshell (may O'reilley forgive me) is that the Chinese have never had a rule based legal system for civil law, but one that was based on adjudication by social networks (common called gang or small town justice here in America)

      In my opinion, at least, the reason is that Chinese has never engaged in much foreign trade, and foreign trade is the impetus for developing such institutions (Grief has a seminal paper contrasting Italian and Magrebhi traders in the middle ages illustrating the mechanism...see "Readings in New Institutional Economics")

      You see, the two approaches to civil law are equivalent as long as you are dealing with your own territory. One you extend beyond that territory (as Italian and Mahgrabi traders did when they started operating in the far east) social network based civil law breaks down. It is not corruption, exactly, but rather the fact that it is a little difficult for social network interaction to adjudicate matters when there IS no direct social interaction. Rules, however, due not attenuate with distance. (For technogeeks, think distributed, long term transactions with no compensation spheres)

      The Chinese have been expanding their economy worldwide, but they have not yet developed the institutions to make that happen viably, and, in another year or so, they are going to pay a terrible price for that. Unfortunately, so are the rest of us. We are starting to see the effects now.

      Though it is hard for American (or anyone else, apparently) to understand, the one great benefit of the rise of Western capitalism has had is the establish of the institution of rule based civil law throughout the world trading communities. Granted, it is pretty weak in a lot of areas (You can't even get real mortgages in many third world countries, there is no guarantee you hold on to the property) but it is taking hold. Whatever you feel about Western economic imperialism, it is the only reason a global economy is possible.

      Until the Chinese started getting adventurous in their search for access to foreign resources such as oil, and started eroding the institution of rule based law in those areas a side effect, replacing it with their own social network based civil law. You see this everywhere, from the export quality issues in China to the neoconservative social network regime issues with rule based law we face here in the United States. (Neoconservatives use a social network based civil law as a guiding principle, i.e. rule of law only applies to those NOT in their social network)

      As I said, in the local areas, both basis's for civil law are roughly equivalent. When you get to long range interactions, however, social network based civil law breaks down. That why the Iraq war went bad, and why the subprime market went south. It is not corruption, it is the face that the compensating mechanism, the balance of the checks and balances, is missing.

      For example We had the check (congressional permission, contract law) but we did not have the balance (congressional oversight, proper auditing, investigative journalism). Instead, social networks acted as the balance, but in both cases there was no opposing social network to PROVIDE a balance. (The "Dixie chicks" don't really count as a balance for the Iraq war. Not their fault, the Democrats didn't even count as much as the Dixie chicks did. Neither group has a significant social network support them.) Instead of having a rule of civil law emerge as a balance, an anti war social network emerged as a balance few years later. That is a very worrisome thing from an institutional economics point of view.

  48. Retailers links all gone by jmcwork · · Score: 1

    If you go to any of the former retailers - Amazon, Wal-Mart, etc. searching for 'aquadots' (any variation) leads to a 'not found' message or something unrelated to the beads. It would be nice if they put a notice acknowledging the recall, but I guess that opens them up to some level of liability. I always thought the things looked too much like Dippin Dots anyway.

  49. Chinese manufacturing and Product specifications by RonTheHurler · · Score: 3, Informative

    As someone who's actually had a product line manufactured in China, I can say this. In general, they consider product specifications as a guideline only. They'll do whatever they can to relax tolerances, substitute materials and shortcut processes to lower costs, without the engineering or product research background to support those decisions. They don't pass those lower costs on either.

    I gave up having anything made in China years ago. The quality control alone ended up costing more than any savings I got from Chinese labor. In some products, we had as high as a 20% defect rate, and 5% was normal. Now I use automated machines to make my goods, and I hire local employees to do the design and operations work. You know what? now I have a better product AND a better price than I used to get from China!

    http://www.rlt.com/

  50. There's no Chinese word for "quality" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As far as I can tell

  51. Loss of conciousness not so rare by j-stroy · · Score: 1

    I know several who have ended up looking after people who have "G-holed". That is they took too much GHB "recreationally" or by accident (drank from someones waterbottle.. not water) or their high/stupid/sadistic friend screwed up the dose.

    The problem is extremely low metabolism and inability to protect your own airway.. some people die.It can real ruin someones night.
    It has definitely been used for sexual coercion, and in our community has been involved in date rapes, which does not have to include a fully passed out person.. heck happens even without intoxicants.. just someone who is not able to exit from a sexual situation where they are abused and later subsequently confused about their own level of responsibility, so it is left unaddressed.

  52. Do any of you have any idea what GHB is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is a muscle relaxant. It helps you get a good night's sleep and wake up feeling refreshed, especially after working out. It used to be sold in health stores all over the place because it helped body builders keep a hard work out regiment. It does NOT get you intoxicated or high or any kind of altered state of mind. I am not sure what happens if you overdose on the stuff, but normal doses won't put anyone in a hospital.

    The only problem with it is that it acts as an alcohol amplifier. If you take it with alcohol, it's like you drank 3 times as much. Unless these kids were getting into daddy's happy juice, they weren't getting stoned.

    1. Re:Do any of you have any idea what GHB is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does NOT get you intoxicated or high or any kind of altered state of mind.

      You've apparently never taken it, then, because yes, it definitely alters your consciousness and makes you high, and it's quite a nice feeling (similar to alcohol in some senses, but distinctly different, and without a horrible hangover).

  53. Mass Hysteria by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 2, Informative

    Five sick children and how many of these have been sold world-wide? Millions? And people should know that the according to ABC News (Australia) the two children there "...swallowed large amounts of the beads...."

    Read that again. "Large amounts." http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/06/2082480.htm

    This is a case of mass hysteria. More children probably get hurt from falling off a bicycle or choking on their Fruit Loops.

    --
    The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
    1. Re:Mass Hysteria by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      That's the attitude for safety nowaday: the cost of the recall plus inventory loss is much lower than any potential lawsuit. Most of these "standards" seem questionable to me -- like you have to consume 100 times of the allowed quantity for a prolong period of time to actually get sick -- but you would die sooner if you consume 10x of allowed amount of water, oxygen, vitamins or anything else for a much shorter period of time.

      There are 1.3 billion people in China consuming local products (which should have much lower quality than the export ones) yet there life expectancy match up to that of the US. And most of health problem there lately resemble that of the US: too much fat, over nutrition. They would have consumed large amount of lead in the products and paints which, in excessive amount, would have cause lower IQ, but they have produced large number of college graduates.

  54. Please shut the fuck up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    "ANYONE could fail a drug test that looked for GHB at any time. Same goes for a powerful psychedelic called DMT"

    That's completely wrong.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyltryptamine

    "There are no drug tests that would show DMT usage. None of the basic NIDA 5 drug tests or any extended drug test will show a result for DMT."

    "This stuff makes LSD look like a placebo in comparison."

    That's wrong too.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSD

    "Dosages of LSD are measured in micrograms (g), or millionths of a gram. By comparison, dosages of almost all other drugs, both recreational and medicinal, are measured in milligrams (mg), or thousandths of a gram. Hofmann determined that an active dose of mescaline, roughly 0.2 to 0.5g, has effects comparable to 100g or less of LSD; put another way, LSD is between five to ten thousand times more active than mescaline."

    I hate people like you so much, you sit around your fucking dorm room with your other loser friends and mentally masturbate about the drugs you take, repeating the same ridiculous misinformation, and propagating it to other losers like you in order to impress them with your "drug knowledge".

    I think that would work a lot better if you actually bothered to know what the fuck you were talking about.

    But, since it's clear you don't, all you've done is make yourself sound like another burnout spouting crap about things beyond the comprehension of his screwed up little brain.

    1. Re:Please shut the fuck up by vorpal22 · · Score: 1

      "This stuff makes LSD look like a placebo in comparison."

      That's wrong too.


      I think you misunderstood the poster. What I believe he was referring to was the fact that the effects of a standard dose of DMT are generally considered to be far more bizarre and intense than those of a standard LSD dose. I really don't think that he was comparing potency in terms of required dose at all. I am in agreement with him; I've read a large number of DMT and LSD trip reports, and the DMT ones generally scare the pants off of me in terms of how the drug alters your perception and understanding of the world while intoxicated.

      Additionally, he said that anyone would fail a DMT drug test *if* the test looked for DMT. Whether or not such a test exists wasn't relevant to his statement. At the same time, I believe that the poster is wrong about this, because unlike GHB, we don't have DMT coursing through our bodies regularly; DMT is largely confined to the (IIRC, but I may be wrong) pituitary gland.

      And, dude, you really sound like you have some hostility issues. People like you amuse me, because frankly, spouting off your nastiness, you're likely only making yourself miserable. The rest of us are too busy enjoying life to really much care whether or not we have your approval and if you hate us.

    2. Re:Please shut the fuck up by Cheesey · · Score: 1

      You've definitely got anger issues.

      Seriously man, you need to chill out. Here, take one of these. The first one is free...

      --
      >north
      You're an immobile computer, remember?
    3. Re:Please shut the fuck up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You've definitely got anger issues."

      Or maybe I'm having fun with a bunch of loser-ass stoners, like you for instance.

      Save the armchair psychology, thanks. If you think you can diagnose "anger issues" from a few AC posts, then I understand why you think it's a good idea to use drugs.

    4. Re:Please shut the fuck up by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 1

      Yes, I was referring to the intensity of the DMT experience compared to that produced by LSD, not the dosage levels of the individual drugs. And the extremely rapid onset of smoked DMT compounds the intensity. You can go from baseline to complete detachment from consensus reality before you can set the pipe down. LSD effects take an hour or 2 to peak, and manifest slowly.

      On the issue of drug testing, DMT is normally found (in trace amounts) throughout brain tissue, not just confined to the pineal gland, where it is believed to be produced. I'm not sure if it would be excreted as DMT in the urine, but it is certainly metabolized to something that then gets excreted. The NIDA-5 and all other "drug tests" are actually looking for drug metabolites, not the actual drugs themselves. This would greatly complicate a hypothetical test for DMT, because the breakdown products would be similar if not identical to those of serotonin, a closely related compound.

      --
      Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  55. To quote George Carlin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "What ever happened to survival of the fittest and natural selection? The kid that eats too many marbles doesn't grow up to have kids of his own?"

  56. Execution to save "made in China" by doug141 · · Score: 1

    I'll bet a responsible party for the chemical substitution is fingered and executed within a month or two.

  57. Trade agreements by Geof · · Score: 1

    We have trade agreements with clauses to protect investors. Why can't we add protections for consumers? When something like this happens, the country should be required to take action against those responsible or to provide effective measures for those harmed to do so. Failing such action, the country would be open to retaliation under the agreement. That's just my first thought so it may not be the best approach, but the current situation in which investors are protected and consumers (and others) are not is definitely out of whack. Fat chance it'll be fixed though.

  58. don't put marbles in your nose by cmdr_tofu · · Score: 1

    put them in there do not put them in there!

  59. What I want to know... by butterwise · · Score: 1

    ...is how they keep the Chinese factory workers from passing out and raping each other?

    --
    If a baby duck is a "duckling," why would anyone want to eat "dumplings?"
  60. Why in my day... by Abattoir · · Score: 1

    We didn't have fancy toys for Christmas. We had sticks and rocks, and we were happier for it!

    Uh, I guess because the sticks and rocks didn't contain dangerous chemicals? :-\

  61. Start a local business by CranberryKing · · Score: 1

    Isn't it nice. After all the years of creating safety standards for toys and consumer goods, just to throw it all away now that we don't manufacture a flipping thing and 'assume' that our source partners in developing countries will naturally have gone through that too. Oh, that makes sense especially when they charge pennies to the dollar of what we used to pay our own workers. Corporations don't care about safety, they just want someone else to be liable.

    Need a business idea? How about building your own high quality product right here in your hometown. We need them.

  62. Starving children in China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I was a kid, my mom told me about starving kids in china. I told my kids that chinese kids have no toys. We sent them all the lead and GHB as a gift.

    GHB good yang!

  63. Why are kids eating their toys?? by luwain · · Score: 1

    I saw this story on CNN, and I was puzzled. The toy in question is a craft toy that has beads that when sprayed with water stick together. It's for kids 4-years-old and older. In Australia, a 10-year-old ATE dozens of the beads !! They showed a video of the recovered girl and her Mom. The girl didn't seem retarded, so my question is : WHY IS A TEN YEAR OLD EATING HER TOYS !?? Doesn't the consumer bear any responsibility for their actions? Does every toy manufacturer have to make sure that their products are edible??
    What about iPods? Both my 7-year-old and 10-year-old have iPods -- can they eat them? If they eat their iPods and die, should Apple recall all iPods??

    1. Re:Why are kids eating their toys?? by toriver · · Score: 1

      WHY IS A TEN YEAR OLD EATING HER TOYS !??

      1. She was peckish.
      2. Hormone-like additives had brought about puberty early, she had PMS and acted irrationally.
      3. ....
      4. She profited!

    2. Re:Why are kids eating their toys?? by DigitalSorceress · · Score: 1

      Darwin's having a good chuckle for himself... guess he's finally gotten over being pissed off about those Intelligent Design idiots.

      --

      The Digital Sorceress
  64. In other news today.... by killmofasta · · Score: 1

    Nick Nolte has volunteered to personally pick up every toy bead set at your home...

    http://www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/nolte1.html

    He claims that he personally knows of the dangers of GBH...

  65. yes; saddens me to see this on slashdot by Non-Huffable+Kitten · · Score: 1

    Since many slashdotters think crticially when it's a more on-topic story, it really makes me sad that some are just accepting the media drivel here.

    For starters, what do alternative uses of a substance have to do with anything? Water is used in nuclear reactors, oh noes! Guilt by association through alternative uses is a stupid emotional argument. (And before you try to argue that water is usually used legitimately and this isn't: I'd say that there is far more recreational use than use as a weapon).

    Don't get me wrong, GHB isn't harmless. People have died from overdoses or combinations with alcohol and it generally has a very steep dose-respone curve. Of course, dangerousness has hardly anything to do with whether it should be legal (this holds both from a pragmatic and an idealistic POV). Just my 10^-2

    --
    Medium cat is MEDIUM.
  66. oh, but on the positive side, at least some posters pointed it out before me, so I guess slashdot is still better than most other sites :)

    --
    Medium cat is MEDIUM.
  67. Re:Please shut up by Diakoneo · · Score: 1

    Hey Cheesey, I think you've started a new meme here!

    "Dude, do a couple beads for crying out loud!"

    --
    "Well..here I am..." - Jubal Early
  68. I tried the date-rape drug... by HeadlessNotAHorseman · · Score: 1

    I tried the date-rape drug once. It didn't work, nobody raped me :-(

    --
    I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
  69. Putting up a good front (was: Cut Corners) by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 1

    Also, note that the head of China's Food and Drug Administration was *executed* for this. They really took it seriously.
    No, they really take getting caught seriously. His execution is all about putting up a good front, they are not in the least interested in fixing the problem. Everybody is in on the take, make no mistake. He got executed because he got caught.
    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:Putting up a good front (was: Cut Corners) by snoogans126 · · Score: 1

      Simpson's wisdom:
      Inspector: Apu Nahasapeemapetilan, you have disgraced the Kwik-E-Mart Corporation.
      Apu: But, sir, I was only following standard procedure.
      Inspector: Ah, true. But it's _also_ standard procedure to blame any problems on a scapegoat or sacrificial lamb.

      From episode [1F10] Homer and Apu

  70. Replying to a comedy post by FoamingToad · · Score: 1

    As this one isn't particularly insightful or interesting.

    But earlier on I saw mention on this on 4chan. I dismissed it out of hand as mindless trollery.

    Now, seriously, I am wondering:

    (a) What has science done?

    and

    (b) Where is your god now?

    I'm now going to buy some dog curtains and get rid of the answering machine before it tries to slit my throat.

    F_T out.

    1. Re:Replying to a comedy post by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      As this one isn't particularly insightful or interesting

      +5 funny, the mods did well. No karma for funny but I don't need it anyway (and I usually check the "no karma bonus" as I did then)

      (a) What has science done?

      Well lets see... electricity, astronomy, medicine, the hydrogen bomb... what elese? You take the good with the bad.

      (b) Where is your god now?

      I don't worship Waldo!

      I'm now going to buy some dog curtains and get rid of the answering machine before it tries to slit my throat.

      Dog curtains?

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    2. Re:Replying to a comedy post by FoamingToad · · Score: 1

      Sorry if my previous was misinterpreted. "This one" was referring to my own post, not yours - please accept apologies if you thought I was attacking the parent.

      "What has science done" and "where is your god now" are both memes from the *chan networks. Similarly dog curtains and homicidal answering machines are references to this wonderful piece of investigative journalism.

      F_T

  71. Happy Fun Ball by WallaceAndGromit · · Score: 1

    Isn't it wonderful that we got China into the WTO in the 90s, so we could buy all their cheap goods?

    Anyone reminded of Happy Fun Ball?

    --
    Name: Mr. Anon E Mouse; SSN: 555-55-5555
  72. Not practical to have a 'habit' with LSD by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

    If you do LSD daily, you need to double your dose each day to feel the effects. Tolerance doubles each day, and halves each day of non-use. So, even if day 1 cost you a penny, day 30 would cost over a million dollars. OF course you could just do it every other day...

    --
    -Clio
    Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
    Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
  73. MOD PARENT DOWN: I was totally wrong by smellsofbikes · · Score: 3, Informative

    Everything I said was true, but for a different molecule: butadiene, not butanediol.

    *sigh*

    To do: get more sleep, read before hitting 'submit'

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  74. Toys from China by PrefersVMS · · Score: 1

    And here the USA is worried about terrorists threats. Right? Put heavy security on airplane flights.
    Disrupt train/bus centers for fear of terrorists. Read everyone's email and tap their phones.

    And for what?

    Then along comes Red China (communist, anti-American country, as opposed to Taiwan, the Democratic
    China) that builds toys for the USA and the world. Coat the toys with a lead compound to kill off the
    children. Put chemicals on the toys that will, with the addition of moisture, become GBH, a date-rape drug.

    Makes me wonder what OTHER chemicals have been put on their toys?

    I've often asked when did we sign a peace treaty with Red China? Did we? Because if we didn't,
    then why hasn't this been claimed as an act of aggression AGAINST the freedom-loving children
    of the world? Why hasn't this been addressed at the top levels of our government as a TERRORIST
    ACT AGAINST US?

    Walmart has many stores in Red China. And a couple of factories, from what I've heard.
    Does this fraternization with an enemy make them part of this act of aggression? Think about it.

    Just think about it. If we've caught two or three toys that have been chemically altered to become
    death-dealing or harmful objects, how many more have slipped in? If one child dies from this, then
    who wins?

    Think about it.

    1. Re:Toys from China by demon · · Score: 1

      I have three words for you: "Normalized trade relations". That's the problem.

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
    2. Re:Toys from China by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the point, killing or seriously intoxicating a few kids is not their goal, these are accident that draw unwanted attention. The real goal is to have most westerner lose a couple IQ point due to continous almost harmless poisonning to offset the IQ loss of their own workforce caused by their total lack of respect for pollution prevention.

      Somehow it's a war, and everyone is losing it.

  75. Chinese government sponsored attacks on the West by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People in the West need to understand that these Chinese incidents are sponsored and coordinated by the Chinese government to kill western children and damage the reputation of Western companies to destablize the Western economies. China is a country that is the enemy of all nations and the future is going to prove this once and for all. If the West doesn't kill the Chinese they are going to wipe you out. This is just the first stage of a much broader plan. For now it seems that the Chinese are content to kill, mame and injure Western children and companies, but it will get more involved over time. -anon

  76. OMG by tgd · · Score: 1

    There's actually sane parents left in this country!

    I applaud you.

    Well, not really, people would look at me strange at work but in my head I'm applauding you.

  77. No, you will not go to hell for that. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    I am just an 11 y.o. girl here to talk to you. Want to come over and play in my state? My name is heidi and you can call me at (202) (671-7233). Don't worry about my dad or my mom. Just ask for heidi and let them know that you want to come and play with me.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  78. Not true. You were. by WindBourne · · Score: 1
    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  79. Actually, they did change for good reason by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Ever thing that they used were cheaper. The leaded paint is a good example. BTW, testing on the product did occur. It just happens in China.

    Personally, I do not blame mattel, etc. I blame the parents that keep buying the crap. They NEED to stop. If you stop, then companies like mattell will get the message and call it quit on it. For 3 years, I have made it a point to NOT buy chinses made items for my kids (I will buy other stuff from china since it can not be avoided; but only a few toys). It was a BITCH esp. last year. I have noticed that the small stores are now stocking items from all over the world. I have bought items Germany, Britain, Japan, Mexico, Canada, India, and even USA. All much better quality. I am guessing that next year it will get even easier. The hard part is you have to avoid the wal-mart and toys'r'us AND above all else, avoid the mattels, hasbro, etc.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  80. As opposed to the west by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where we take it so seriously, we say "oh, I'm sorry" and maybe even only get a payrise for failing..!

  81. Doc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please, Leave IFWM/Flyingwhitey/lyingwhitey alone. All you do is give him credence. The idiot use to post here a great deal and was just as worthless back then as he is now.