On May 28, 8:03*am, gwatts wrote:
AF6AY wrote:
...
The do-gooders done did too much with all those warnings and
attempts to protect us all from everything.

If a product is dangerous, why shouldn't it have warnings?
Particularly when
there are known carcinogens and other health hazards involved?

It's not being a "do-gooder" or "doing too much" to discover hazards
and
eliminate or contain them.

Sure, not everyone who uses Strip-X will get cancer. But some of the
components of it are known carcinogens, and a proven hazard. More
important,
we can't know ahead of time who the susceptible folks are.

Naaa, it's the people who think they should be rewarded for stupidity
and basic capitalism that took all that stuff off the market. *Some
idiot did something stupid with the product and decided to sue. *The
company looked at a long legal fight or settlement and settled.

Maybe. But I doubt it.

More likely, they looked at the *possibility* of such a lawsuit, the
scientific
evidence of the hazards of the ingredients, the limited profit and
declining
sales, and just stopped making the product.

Once a chemical is shown to be dangerous, the manufacturers can't
claim
ignorance anymore.

They...decided it would be more profitable
to eliminate the product and concentrate on other things as they're not
in the business to keep consumers satisfied, just get their money and
keep as much of it as possible.

Profitability is what "capitalism" and "business" are all about.
Without
profitability, a capitalist company just disappears.

Since the formula for Strip-X appears to be in the public domain,
anybody
can make it and sell it. Would *you* be willing to set up shop to make
it
and sell it, with all the risks that entails, and the very limited
market for it?

73 de Jim, N2EY