Slashdot Mirror


Safety Commission To Rule On Safety of Rulers In Science Kits

The Consumer Product Safety Commission has been trying decide for weeks if science kits designed to teach children are safe enough for children to use without vigorous testing. It's not just the chemicals or sharp items in the kits that they are troubled with however. They are also concerned about the dangers of paper clips, magnets, and rulers. From the article: "Science kit makers asked for a testing exemption for the paper clips and other materials. The commission declined to grant them a blanket waiver as part of the guidance the agency approved Wednesday on a 3-2 vote." To be fair, paper clips can cause a lot of damage — just look at what Clippy did to Microsoft Office.

21 of 446 comments (clear)

  1. So does anyone wonder by Just_Say_Duhhh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    why the poor science education in the United States is such a big problem?

    --
    I need trepanation like I need a hole in the head.
    1. Re:So does anyone wonder by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not really. We have a nanny state that is hell bent on protecting the idiots and children from all the evils of the world,while neglecting to remember that the nanny state itself is evil.

      When we realize that the nanny state is just as evil as everything it is trying to protect us from, then we'll truly be free ... again.

      People in Ivory Towers always love to treat everyone else like idiots needing their superior guidance. Because we're too stupid to function in a society without their wisdom and knowledge.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    2. Re:So does anyone wonder by inviolet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People in Ivory Towers always love to treat everyone else like idiots needing their superior guidance. Because we're too stupid to function in a society without their wisdom and knowledge.

      My brother relates a similar sentiment, but concerning the regulators themselves . . .

      Suppose that somebody erected a control tower to oversee the car traffic in a busy Wal-Mart parking lot. The controllers in the tower work all day every day to direct the cars to and from their spaces. It is hectic work and they go home every day exhausted.

      Now suppose we ask those controllers about the prospect of converting the parking lot back to uncontrolled. This question would immediately trigger their resistance to change and their desire to hang on to their jobs. But suppose they are honest enough to understand that this is happening to them, and so they ignore it and try to answer objectively.

      The problem is that, in their objective experience, an uncontrolled parking lot is completely infeasible. Their jobs are hectic, even frantic, all day every day. If asked to imagine a parking lot without control, they would visualize a chaotic scene of collisions, arguments, and even gun battles. They HAVE to visualize that, in order to see themselves as useful and virtuous.

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
  2. And people wonder why the US is falling behind by ncttrnl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If our kids aren't smart enough to use a ruler without injury, what can we really expect them to learn?

    1. Re:And people wonder why the US is falling behind by Ltap · · Score: 4, Funny

      A better question might be: "Is our children learning?"

      --
      Yet Another Tech Blog
      (but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
      http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
    2. Re:And people wonder why the US is falling behind by mysidia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Our product safety commission apparently can't understand the difference between learning tools for children and toys for physical play.

      A toy for physical play is something designed for a young child to throw around or manipulate mechanically.

      Tools for learning are things like books, pens, paper, pencils, paperclips, markers, scissors, knives, protracters, compasses, hole punches, staplers, paper cutters, syringes, beakers, test tubes, etc.

      Tools for learning are not for physical play. Children need to learn and be able to use them, even though they would be dangerous if misused.

  3. Does this mean... by mrsteveman1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ....that the "My First Meth Lab" is probably never going to reach store shelves?

  4. Some rulers are dangerous by Storebj0rn · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's clearly irresponsible to expose kids to some rulers; Saddam Hussein, Joseph Stalin and under certain conditions George W Bush

    --
    "Windows are for cheaters" - Bruce Springsteen
  5. Re:Can't you simulate a chemistry set with softwar by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because where is the fun in that? See, chemistry sets are designed to encourage children to pursue science. If you are just doing it on the computer, why not just play a FPS on the computer? It doesn't teach kids to really explore or to think like a scientist.

    The Consumer Product Safety commission should only be concerned about things that are really hazards when used correctly or things that are easily used incorrectly, for example, lead based paint on children's toys, yeah thats a real concern. The fact that some children -might- -possibly- use some materials in a science kit and get hurt is nearly non-existent.

    The more we regulate science kits and lose children's natural curiosity in the world around us by essentially telling them that anyplace other than indoors watching TV and doing a bit of exercise on the treadmill is going to kill them, the more we can watch the US slip further and further into the dark ages...

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  6. The federal commission of me agrees by roman_mir · · Score: 4, Funny

    The federal commission of me agrees: science should be banned in the USA, so should be the last remnants of common sense; any display of individuality and unhealthy interest in any particular subject need to be investigated to establish the safety of such behavior as it relates to the society in total.

    Everything must be made not just safe enough, but safe with a huge margin of error so that there is no chance of any accident happening ever at all. Of-course accidents are mostly responsible for a large number of scientific discoveries, so any evidence of scientific discovery must be investigated to isolate the main reason and find out where the safety procedures have failed to prevent such an occurrence to make sure it never happens again.

    Have a safe day.

  7. Magnets are not what they once were by bugs2squash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have seen Xrays of children that have swallowed magnets - it aint good, and probably could have been prevented yet still allowed children to explore magnetism. magnets are also much stronger and more brittle than they were when I was a kid, the risks have changed and it is responsible to review policy. I don't think anyone wants to stop children learning here and I don't want to buy a science kit for my kid that's full of things that are more dangerous than they need to be.
    By all means balance risk against learning benefit, but let there be some balance, not just recklessness to save a penny by not removing the sharp edges on a ruler.

    --
    Nullius in verba
    1. Re:Magnets are not what they once were by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here's a thought: teach your kids not to swallow magnets.

      If your kid is too stupid not to eat two magnets, they shouldn't be given a science kit. Heck, you should probably just lock them in a padded room so they can't hurt themselves. Science kits aren't given to two year olds, if your kid who is 7 or 8 swallows magnets, either you've failed as a parent or your kid is pretty damn stupid.

      If you don't like what is in science kits, don't buy them for your kid, and your kid will end up in a low paying job eating away at society's wealth by using welfare and the like.

      But let us who can actually raise kids and don't want our kids to end up with dreams and aspirations beyond the local Burger King buy the kits for our kids.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Magnets are not what they once were by Abcd1234 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you can't figure out at age 7+ that a magnet isn't food and that chemicals aren't treats, either you have a mental handicap or your parents have utterly failed.

      I'll repeat to you what I said to the other guy: you *clearly* underestimate how stupid kids can be. Good judgment and common sense are something most people learn the hard way through trial and error. Spend a little time in a trauma ward and just see how intelligent your average fucking adult is, let alone a 7-year-old...

  8. Re:Can't you simulate a chemistry set with softwar by snowraver1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As someone who has played with software based labs, it doesn't compare to the real thing. It's one thing to click on two test tubes and have a thrid change color, but it entirely different to see the color change in real life as you add the reagents.

    Science used to be cool because it was exciting. Small explosions, corrosive chemicals, and chemical reactions are cool, clicking some buttons on a computer program to simulate this is lame. If you want kids to like science, it needs to be (somewhat) dangerous. Schools should be encouraging thinking (ie. fire is hot so don't burn yourself, don't drink/touch hydrochloric acid, etc). If a few kids get hurt, well, hopefully they at least learned something, even if that something is that science can be dangerous.

    --
    Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
  9. This is why US science education is screwed... by Dahamma · · Score: 4, Informative

    You know all of those guys who worked for NASA in the 60s, designing and building the rockets that took us to the moon? Well, they had radioactive sources and Geiger counters in their science kits.

    And kids today are going to have to fight to get paper clips and magnets. Sigh.

  10. Re:50's chemistry kit by symes · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is an important point - and I wonder if anyone has every bothered to investigate whether a bit of risky fun early in life is more likely to interest kids in science than teaching them from a rather dull text book. When I was a kid a bunch of us went on a school trip to a nuclear power reactor. When we visited the control room the senior engineer took us to a panel, turned a dial and made us watch as a temperature guage moved upwards - he had moved the control rod up out of the stack. He explained what was going on, we were all facinated, and then said he ought to put it back or the alarms might go off and he might get in trouble. Ok, not a chemistry set, but it highlights how engaging a bit of real world experimentation can be. I can't imagine kids these days could even get close to insides of a reactor, let alone play with control rods. Those were the days...

  11. Re:recommendations? by Duradin · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you can find a copy, most likely digital and illegal as the physical version is rather rare bordering on non-existent, The Golden Book of Chemistry Experiments has a lot of experiments that can be done with household items or other relatively common components.

    "Many of the experiments contained in the book are now considered highly dangerous for unsupervised children, and would not appear in a modern children's chemistry book." from Wikipedia.

  12. Re:Can't you simulate a chemistry set with softwar by azmodean+1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Consumer Product Safety commission should only be concerned about things that are really hazards when used correctly or things that are easily used incorrectly, for example, lead based paint on children's toys, yeah thats a real concern. The fact that some children -might- -possibly- use some materials in a science kit and get hurt is nearly non-existent.

    Surprise! That is exactly what this is about, but the commission is being stupid. The makers of the science kits are bundling ordinary objects like rulers, paper clips, etc in their kits, and the commission is saying that they have to have a testing regime in place that tests everything that goes into the kits for lead and other toxic chemicals because it is arguably marketed to kids. The solution will be that the kit makers will stop making science kits, even something completely innocuous like "how magnetism works kit", because the burden of testing everything that goes into the kits outweighs the potential profit.

    There was a very similar story a while back about low-powered motorcycles marketed to kids that had lead in the ENGINE. The end result looked like it was going to just destroy the market for the product simply on the basis that there was lead in it, regardless of the fact that even if a child disassembled the engine and ate the part in question, it was present in an alloy that would not release the lead into the child's system.

    What the story is really about is the committee trying to make their mandate apply to absolutely everything, regardless of whether it had any real chance of causing damage to children.

  13. Re:Can't you simulate a chemistry set with softwar by AkiraRoberts · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I agree. Real explosions are fun. Real fire is fun. I still remember the day in 7th grade when we were finally allowed to use bunsen burners. It is in my top 10, despite losing an eyebrow. I think the danger of getting hurt or, in rare cases that probably involve doing something deeply stupid that might well disqualify you from the gene pool, killed are outweighed by just how a) fun and b) useful learning science can be.

    And rulers? Rulers? Are you fucking kidding me?

    --
    words, words, words, lemur, words, words words
  14. Re:recommendations? by Atriqus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Found it readily readable/downloadable here.

    --
    Hey, look! It's Bono's brother.
  15. Re:Can't you simulate a chemistry set with softwar by himurabattousai · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sad, but true. This is the same agency that nearly killed the sub-250cc motorcycle market because most of bikes (and ATVs as well) with engines that small are meant for kids to learn on. Yes, adults do occasionally ride 150-cc dirtbikes, but kids are the target user.

    Why was this market nearly killed? The CPSC was afraid of kids licking the battery terminals and sucking on lead wheel-balancing weights. Never mind that kids can't really swallow these things, or that these parts won't poison you even if swallowed. They have lead, and lead is bad. The CPSC doesn't care to look any further than that.

    --
    "osake no hou ga, biiru yori ii" to omotteiru.