SACRAMENTO – A lawsuit was filed earlier this month by the California Chamber of Commerce against California Attorney General Xavier Becerra in an effort to end the requirement for Proposition 65 warnings on acrylamide in food and beverages.
“The effect of too many bogus warnings is no warnings,” said CalChamber President and CEO Allan Zaremberg in a press release. “This case is about clarifying for both businesses and consumers that food does not require Proposition 65 warnings for acrylamide. This will reduce unnecessary fear for consumers and litigation threats for businesses.”
Acrylamide forms naturally in many types of foods and beverage when cooked at high temperatures, but the chamber says there’s no evidence that it's linked to cancer.
While many experts are in full support of the lawsuit, others believe that it could lead into a dangerous direction in respect to the thousands of other label warnings required by Proposition 65.
“[It] undermines the credibility of all other Prop. 65 warnings down the road,” said Steve McCarthy, vice president of public policy and regulatory affairs of the California Retailers Association. “Consumers are already becoming accustomed to seeing these warnings everywhere, but if they’re also providing information that’s just misleading or incorrect, that’s even more deeply problematic.”
However, McCarthy also expressed his concern with the overwhelming amount of warnings on labels, saying they may actually be meaningless.
“We’re getting into a world where too many warnings are no warning at all … It’s definitely a problem and a concern, particularly for our members – the retailers – as well as manufacturers,” he said.
Originally implemented in 1986, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act, or Proposition 65, was passed with the intention of protecting the state’s drinking water sources from being contaminated with chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm, but has turned into a logistical nightmare for the state over the past four decades.
The law requires businesses to inform consumers about exposures to such chemicals and requires the state to maintain and update a list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.
The Office Environmental Health Hazard Assessment last July proposed modified amendments to Proposition 65 that could increase the amount of warnings on food products – potentially leading to even more concerns for the Golden State.