Slashdot Mirror
McDonald's, Cadmium, and Thermo Electron Niton Guns
An anonymous reader writes, snipping from a story at NPR: "'How did the Consumer Products Safety Commission find out that cadmium, a toxic metal, was present on millions of Shrek drinking glasses now being recalled by McDonald's? Well, an anonymous person with access to some pretty slick testing equipment tipped off Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) about the problem. Her office confirmed that somebody using a Thermo Electron Niton XRF testing gun found a lot of cadmium, sometimes used in yellow pigments, on the surface of the glasses. The source overnighted glasses to Speier's office last week, which then turned over the test results and specimens to the CPSC. ... By law, no more than 75 parts per million of cadmium is supposed to be present in paint on kids toys. Speier's office said the amount found on the glasses was quite a bit higher than that.' Seems like the answer to a previous question about at-home science — this blogger seems to have been one of the anonymous sources."
Science, saving the world one experiment at a time.
people forget that a Thermo Electron Niton XRF testing gun now comes in every Happy Meal.
The glasses were made in China.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Doesn't it seem more likely that the original discoverer worked in a different professional lab, rather than having that sort of equipment at home?
This isn't an argument supporting the validity of "home labs." Those handheld XRFs are about $30K. I'd love to have one in MY home lab, where the most expensive equipment is a $300 distillation kit that I had to save for six months to justify.
My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
My guess is that the glasses and the tip come from the same source. Best for all of us if that person remains anonymous.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Write Jen a letter asking who the other tipster was.... Jennifer Taggart
Why? Clearly the tipster wants to be anonymous.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
A two trillion dollar budget, and still they miss this.
It used to be that public safety was the number one purpose and concern of the government. I guess poisoning children is less important now than making sure those with political power get bailed out. Children don't vote, after all. Well, except maybe in Chicago.
They probably missed it because it isn't above any established standard. The glasses were voluntarily recalled because a tougher standard may be pending. CNN has a poorly edited story about it.
<Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
What naturally occurring substance has the highest known melting point? Answer: Cadmium?
You're right. We should expect the government to test every product made for children for sale in this country...for all known toxins...before they go on sale. Of course if it did then you'd complain about the Obama nanny state stealing your money with excessive income tax.
What color is the sky in your world?
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
Is this is a trap?
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/reports/2010plan.pdf
and still they miss this
Maybe if they really DID have a two trillion dollar budget, they could afford to test every single object ever sold anywhere in the US.
Until then, buy yourself a $30k x-ray gun and trust nobody.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Since these glasses will be recalled, and probably not a lot were sold, they'll become an interesting deadly item for collectors.
You'd actually probably have to test every single toy, not just each product. Manufacturers are notorious for cherry picking which samples get sent for testing and reviewing.
I would suspect years of defunding regulators and appointing industry allies in key enforcement positions.
It's SOP for the GOP. Cases in point:
MMS and Deepwater Horizon. ("The reports portray a dysfunctional organization that has been riddled with conflicts of interest, unprofessional behavior and a free-for-all atmosphere for much of the Bush administration’s watch.")
Tax enforcement ("over the past dozen years, staff at the Internal Revenue Service has shrunk by about 20 percent. That affects the agency's ability to catch people who cheat on their taxes. One estimate of the annual loss in tax revenue is $300 billion.") And before anyone apologist says, "BV-b-but C-C-Clinton!", tell me who ran the House and Senate? That's right, the GOP.
As I've already pointed out, when you vote anti-government, you get sabotaged government. So let me take a page out of the right's rhetorical playbook and ask them, "Why do you hate America?"
I sometimes use it to analyze soil samples in the field. Since you aren't necessarily shooting a homogeneous substance, you sometimes get results that don't reflect the overall concentration. To get meaningful data you have to send it to a fixed lab where they will extract it and get an analytical result that is more likely to reflect the real concentration.
Really, the government should require the companies to test these things instead of having the government completely involved in babying every toy company. Then when they slip up make them pay dearly. Making sure everything that reaches us is safe shouldn't be the direct responsibility of the government, rather making sure it's the companies that deliver these products to us responsibility.
Why?
Is McDonalds going to hire a hit man?
Why would the tipster contact an elected official rather than the CPSC directly? After all, they have a web page just for this process: http://www.cpsc.gov/talk.html
Was there some political motivation in going thru an elected official? Is this an insider?, a Competitor? Does it matter?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Congratulations! You hit every tired political meme across the entire political spectrum. Brilliant!
...we end up with Thermo Electron Niton XRF testing guns being illegal to possess in the US.
Do you have ESP?
Is McDonalds going to hire a hit man?
No, but the tipster wants to say employed. They no doubt have a family to feed.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
The boring kind, or the fun kind with pictures of dead folks and Illuminati imagery? More specifically is the problem with corruption, not enough spot checks, too much import volume, or all of the above?
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
What color is the sky in your world?
Red white or blue depending on what the chemical manufacturing plant next to my house is making.
Correction - the paint on homes is considered lead based paint if the house was built earlier than 1978. FWIW, lead based paint is considered 0.5% Pb or greater by weight and any paint with lesser quantities of lead is considered lead-containing paint. HUD housing regulations for lead paint kick in when children 0-6 are present, and OSHA considers any lead in paint to be covered by the lead exposure standard.
So what do we do instead? What are the systems in place to prevent... oh none. OK. So surely there is a system in place to punish... oh, no? OK, so we leave it to the courts? OH, the CEO and officers in the company can't be held liable in any way what so ever? So then what stops them from using a profit motive to justify poisoning people? Nothing. Well alright then, lets go ahead and just move along, nothing to see here.
So what do we do instead?
We have laws that specify tolerance levels, sample occasionally, and slap them silly if they get caught - hopefully hard enough that the overwhelming majority will feel it's not worth the risk.
Thank you Cadmium Man for alerting us to the danger!
You're right. We should expect the government to test every product made for children for sale in this country.
Yes, absolutely, and I say this as a leftie who considers Obama to be a populist corporate shill. The whole point of giving the government enough powers to run a social welfare state is so that it deals with problems like this.
for all known toxins.
We're not talking about some rare and exotic poison here, but rather some very basic stuff. It's not the first time it happens, either.
So, yeah, someone in the govt clearly didn't do their job while happily wasting taxpayers' money, and should be called out for that.
"slap them silly", by which you mean, take a small cut of the profit.
CAPTCHA is: customs
feeding them shit for food and turning them into future fatasses
Our food is only 5% shit by weight, and it takes more than just food to turn them into greasy, overweight nerds - specifically, you need WOW and a good internet connection.
a stupid clown and a dinky playground
Yeah? Let's see your clown and playground! From what your girlfriend says, you're the clown, and calling your "playground" dinky would be a compliment.
"i'm just big boned" or "its genetic"
Hey, your Mom liked my big bone, and that kind of thing is genetic. Sorry the "enhancement" ads lied to you, little anonymous coward.
- McDonalds
I've seen these glasses on display; they appear to be actual glass, although I could have been fooled. I didn't look very hard.
I assume the cadmium is in the paint on the exterior of the glass.
So it isn't a surface in contact with food.
It isn't a product that should be considered a toy. (FFS it's glass. Give the little darlings a nice razor blade to play with too.) So why does the "toy" standard apply?
I don't really get the recall at all, but McDonald's position, afaik, is that the cadmium levels are within legal limits, but the recall is being done to be sure of their customer's safety.
The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
I am not saying that the glasses are safe, or should be recalled. But if a parent feeds a child this toxic cancer causing mixture of chemical that McDonald's calls food, I hardly see how they can complain about a little paint that probably is not even above current standards. The fumes coming from the SUV is probably more toxic.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
you said "maybe if they [CPSC] really did have a two trillion dollar budget"
If ... then ... is basic logic. Quoting the "if" part and claiming it means something other than what is implied by the "then" part is not how it works.
in no way changes the principle that was being expounded.
When did I claim it did? The only claims I made were:
1) IF the CPSC really had a two trillion dollar budget THEN they could afford to test every single object ever sold anywhere in the US.
Since (as you pointed out using my so-called "useless" number) they don't, they are incapable of testing everything. This is a simple observation that does not attempt to refute whatever statements the original poster made.
2) You have to be responsible for your own security.
For instance, you could buy your own testing equipment, just like the blogger in the article. Or read the blogs of bloggers who buy their own testing equipment and blog about their discoveries. This too is a simple observation that does not attempt to refute whatever statements the original poster made.
Perhaps the fact that I didn't disagree with the original poster has confused you.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
People who don't have liquid assets* aren't affected by inflation
"Those people" constitute an empty set. You are vulnerable to inflation if you have any of the following "liquid" assets:
"The rich" don't care as much about inflation because they can move their investments to a more stable currency. This "capital flight" devastated Latin America when much of the country's wealth left its financial system overnight.
The poor and middle classes, however, are devastated. We generally have:
All of those are wiped out by inflation.
Inflation also affects interest rates. A bank might lend $1000 today for $2000 a year from now, but the bank can lose money if inflation makes $2000 of next year's dollars worth less than $1000 of this year's dollars. Movements in interest rates directly affect "the rich" but also make it harder for everyone else to get loans, interest on a savings account, and the like. It slows job growth as financing to expand becomes more costly.
In short, inflation sucks. For everyone, but especially the poor and middle classes. That's why every country's central bank works to keep inflation reasonable.
DATABASE WOW WOW
require the companies to test these things instead of having the government completely involved
Yes, because self-regulation works just ever-so-well. When Shrub changed the rules in Texas so that the companies voluntarily self-reported chemical spills the number of spills dropped by over 60 percent. He cited that as one of his great environmental success stories during the 2000 campaign.
when they slip up make them pay dearly.
Thirty years ago that idea might have worked, but with today's executive mobility the boss who orders tests falsified will be working for another company long before any fines are levied.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
The logic of your reply can only mean it will never happen that way. That's not how government works anymore. New laws are hastily passed in response to outrage - whether from the left, the right, the top, the bottom; whatever the group can agree on being angry about at the moment and politicians can look good getting behind. But wouldn't it be nice...
I think your just being a drama queen.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Do you have any idea how many products are sold in the US? Here's a hint: so many that there's no chance in hell of the government testing every single one. Problems like this are actually extremely rare, it'd be an enormous waste of resources if you even wanted to pretend it was feasible. Furthermore, more than likely no one was even harmed in THIS case. It's still obviously a failure on McD's part, and reasonable efforts to prevent this from happening again, but it's just not possible to prevent "bad things" from ever happening.
So if you want to accuse people of wasting taxpayers' money, I think you should think critically about the kind of money you're suggesting they spend.
There are several kinds of news in this report.
I am first of all puzzled why hand held X-ray spectrometers (XRF) don't get coverage in the popular technology press.
The XRF device is quite close to the technology modelled in the Star Trek science fiction TV series.
These hand held spectrometers retail for $30,000. Several firms are offering similar devices. That means a kit could possibly be offered for $3000 or even $300, given say 3 or 4 years as bargain versions of the key components are gradually put into production.
Even at $30,000, a hand held XRF unit has all kinds of potential as the basis of a materials and environmental testing service that bills customers for $100 to $35 an hour.
The second very disappointing news I pulled out of this article is my son's 2007 high school Chemistry textbook does not mention X-ray spectrometry. He is using a California state approved textbook.
Heck, I look at his book further and note, it doesn't index "chromatography" or "gas chromatography" either.
I have been asking my son "Have you learned how to do inorganic cation analysis yet?" Chemistry class was the high point of my years in high school 45 years ago.
Looking both ways I see a problem: The California high school chemistry curriculum is stuck in the past. He should have used an XRF in chemistry lab.
I'm stuck in the past too. At Lawrence Hall of Science in Berkeley I took photos of the Lawrence 4" synchrotron. I have been thinking, gee, for some reason I think it would be handy to build a particle accelerator. Now I know, the gadget I might build is for sale. I am going to check EBay for an XRF real soon now.
Now you know what gift to request for Fathers day, or at least what to drop hints about...your very own Happy Meal w/Thermo Electron Niton XRF testing gun!
You have not played this game very long, have you? /. user intellect to work man!
Put that
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
Do you have any idea how many products are sold in the US? Here's a hint: so many that there's no chance in hell of the government testing every single one.
You don't need to test every single thing ever sold. But food utensils? Come on, that's basic common sense that this kind of stuff comes right after food and drugs. Or what, would you prefer lead spoons next?
Oh, and the argument that "too many are sold" is fallacious in the first place. You simply don't allow to sell this kind of stuff without certification; if this means less variety because certification queue is full, it's not a big deal.
On June 2 abcnews ran a story you can easily find with the Google query (( Mouazzen Shanghai )) - "The Flip Side of China's Economic Miracle A German Businessman Finds Corruption in Dealings With China". Basically his business was in arranging the international sale of heavy equipment - his mistake was to stop the video-documentary after the crane was in a numbered container in a huge line with other trucks to get thru customs. Sometime after that the crane got fraudulently swapped - the relatively large effort involved in fraudulently swapping a heavy crane is the cautionary part, they WILL go to that length to steal-a-buck pver there.
Funny how so many people complain about "made in China" while no-one is turning down cheap gadgets.
Nah, BP. Goddam Belgians.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
CyanobacGovernment isn't there to do its 'job'. It is there to grow and consume resources put out by its food source (us).
Teaching the food source that government is the answer to every problem is simply a survival mechanism.
--- Mercutio was right.
...what the hell is in the special sauce.
...not to buy dead, rotting flesh from these creeps.
Oooohh...this is a toughie. Highly toxic material, slapped onto a drinking glass. Cadmium. Oh! Cadmium charm bracelets! Could it be China? Again? Why don't we learn?
Or maybe I guy called Vinnie the Butcher sold it to them from the back of van. This is New Jersey after all.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Belgians? The headquarters are in London. Is this a meme that I'm missing?
...just saying.
Bibo Ergo Sum.
People who don't have liquid assets* aren't affected by inflation
"Those people" constitute an empty set. You are vulnerable to inflation if you have any of the following "liquid" assets:
"The rich" don't care as much about inflation because they can move their investments to a more stable currency. This "capital flight" devastated Latin America when much of the country's wealth left its financial system overnight.
The poor and middle classes, however, are devastated. We generally have:
All of those are wiped out by inflation.
Inflation also affects interest rates. A bank might lend $1000 today for $2000 a year from now, but the bank can lose money if inflation makes $2000 of next year's dollars worth less than $1000 of this year's dollars. Movements in interest rates directly affect "the rich" but also make it harder for everyone else to get loans, interest on a savings account, and the like. It slows job growth as financing to expand becomes more costly.
In short, inflation sucks. For everyone, but especially the poor and middle classes.
Thanks for explaining this for me. Economic education in the USA is drastically poor and most people don't understand how our money system actually works and how these things impact them.
Inflation is not something that "just happens". The federal government "prints" (most of it is done by computers actually) money out of thin air to finance much of its budget, which devalues the assets held by every American citizen. That's why it is a hidden tax. Like I said, instead of taking more of your money, they take its value. It ultimately has the same effect, except you won't see it come up as an issue during any campaign.
The central banks are directly responsible for inflation. Our fiat currency has no basis, is created out of thin air, and is then lent to the federal government by the Federal Reserve at interest. See the problem?
If the only money that exists is created by the Federal Reserve, and all of it eventually has to be paid back with interest, there is not enough money in circulation to pay back all debt. Therefore all the government can do is borrow more money at interest to make payments on interest. Debt can only accumulate. It's built into this system as part of its deliberate design. Do not take my word for this, please. Research it. You will see the same thing.
You have none of these problems if you have a representative currency, an example of which is a gold standard or a silver standard. But then the government has to finance all of its budget through confiscatory tax collection (income, excise, tariffs, etc) and cannot obtain unlimited funding through inflation. That naturally places a check against how large and powerful it may become. I'll ask again: see the problem (for them)?
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
A government cannot get "unlimited funding through inflation." Our government can run budget deficits because people will keep loaning us money - i.e., buying Treasury securities. Post-WWII Germany, Zimbabwe, Argentina, and a bunch of other countries serve as good examples of why a government's budget is not helped by running the presses.
If fiat currencies suck because of inflation, representative currencies suck because of deflation. With representative currency there is by definition a fixed amount in circulation, but that does nothing to stop the never-ending rise in demand for currency. Higher demand with a fixed supply of currency causes deflation.
Deflation sucks almost as much as inflation because it hurts those who borrow money. If you owe someone $1000 and the currency appreciates, you now have to pay back $2000 in constant dollars.
You don't get rid of inflation by using a representative currency; instead, you get negative inflation. Except that you now have no mechanism for controlling inflation.
DATABASE WOW WOW
It's not literally unlimited in the sense that it can indeed be quantified. For all practical purposes, however, it is unlimited in the sense that they will crash the entire economy and completely devalue the currency before they will decide that maybe they should stop doing that.
What do you suppose a treasure security is? The government needs another billion dollars. So it asks the Federal Reserve to create this money. The Federal Reserve then creates a billion dollars. It gives that to the federal government in exchange for a piece of paper created by the federal government called a treasury note. This is what the Federal Reserve calls a securities asset. It's basically an IOU signed by the federal government. The government then spends that billion dollars and one way or another, it enters the economy and increases the money supply by one billion.
This whole discussion would be much simpler if you'd research a few topics, such as the "Federal Reserve" and "fractional reserve banking" and "fiat currency".
You may find this interesting. Back in 1941, a Congressman named Wright Patman wanted to know where the Federal Reserve got the money to purchase two billion dollars worth of government bonds (securities assets) in 1933. These are actual quotes from when he asked that question of Marriner Eccles, who was then Governor of the Federal Reserve System:
Eccles: We created it.
Patman: Out of what?
Eccles: Out of the right to issue credit money.
Patman: And there is nothing behind it, is there, except our government's credit?
Eccles: That is what our money system is. If there were no debts in our money system, there wouldn't be any money.
Like I said, the Federal Reserve has been amazingly candid about its activities. Political organizations half as powerful usually hide behind platitudes and such.
By the way, whenever you hear the media talk about the "national debt", most of that is what the federal government owes to the Federal Reserve. The majority of it is not foreign debt as you seem to imply. In either case, foreign debt is not why the federal government can obtain nearly unlimited funding through the hidden tax of inflation. Regarding that domestic Federal Reserve debt, at the moment the Federal Reserve creates the money, it lends it to the federal government at interest. Therefore there cannot possibly be enough money in circulation to pay back that debt. This point cannot be emphasized enough.
Regarding your comments about possible deflation of representative currency and the harm it might do to borrowers, I don't consider that a bad thing. Under such a system, saving your money, building wealth over time (much more viable without inflation!), being thrifty, and not going into debt unless absolutely necessary are all rewarded. The current negative savings index of the American people would be strongly discouraged under that system. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Also, a representative currency needs absolutely no mechanism for controlling inflation. You state the lack of such a mechanism as though it were a downside. If you have a gold standard or a silver standard, you cannot have inflation because there is a finite amount of gold and silver on the planet. I already addressed your concerns about deflation by stating that they'd discourage the very behaviors that tend to destabilize an economy, like rampant debt and negative savings.
If you want a bit more edification, research Andrew Jackson's political battle against international bankers who wanted to establish a Federal Reserve type of system back in his day. They wanted to do it for quite some time before they finally managed to do so during the early 20th century. He gave a warning to future generations that we should have heeded.
In fact I'd kindly ask that you not respond until after you have researched that event. Unfortunately we don't have presidents like Jackson anymore who really represent our
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein