I think I bought toxic tuna
 

I was about to open a can of tuna and I noticed on the side it said "Warning may contain chemicals known to California (prop 65) to cause birth defects, reproductive harm.

Ingredients: light tuna, water, vegetable broth (soy), salt
Allergens: fish, soy

Product of China

I haven't noticed this warning on tuna before.

https://oehha.ca.gov/media/download...//p65122917.pdf

Mercury makes the proposition 65 list of possibly harmful chemicals, with "developmental" effects as the given reason, birth defects and reproductive harm could come under that heading. So maybe it's just about mercury, and it's just now made it to the label. Nothing new, excess mercury from higher tuna intake has been a risk for a long time.

This putting every possible chemical contaminant in one bucket and having a single warning that doesn't specify what the contaminant is in a particular product seems stupid.

Thanks teaser!

I've been switching to smaller fish like herring and sardines, hoping those are better choices. They don't have that warning label.

I noticed a while back McDonalds has the same warning on their doors.

I have a saying "everything is known to cause cancer in california, best not to live there". There are tonnes of everyday products that carry this legal disclaimer.

Two quick cut and pastes from google searches:

California's Proposition 65, also called the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act, was enacted in 1986. It is intended to help Californians make informed decisions about protecting themselves from chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.

Take Coke and Pepsi, for example. Manufacturers recently changed their caramel coloring to avoid the Prop 65 label even though the FDA had said before the changes it would take more than 1,000 cans of pop a day to reach doses shown to lead to cancer in mice.

Yeah, everything under the sun is know the cause cancer according to the State of California.

I had no idea they changed sodas just for us!

Yesterday I shopped and no other tuna has that label, only 99cent store. Maybe the water in China is as bad as the air.

I'm afraid I fit right in with California I am so picky - no nail polish, no food dyes, fragrance free products, no pesticides. I only relent on nitrites although the calif. EPA ranks it a class II carcinogen. Although I have a few gray hairs I will probaby never color my hair because it causes 2% of leukemias.

I dont blame anyone for avoiding chemicals and exposure / ingestion of heavy metals as much as possible, but the Cause Cancer in California really does not give you all tge info one is required to weigh the associated with a product, it will not give you the chemical of concern or the quantity of mercury in that tin of tuna, and that does not mean you are not buying an item that might cause you harm if it does not have that warning, its a catch all or a red flag to do further investigation depending on the item. Its like the "idiot light" in a car... it can indicate "something" but what lol

I just checked my tuna cans - I eat a lot of tuna as well as other fish - and neither brand had the warning. Chicken of the Sea has soy, but Choice Landing doesn't - just carrot & pea extracts. Tastes good too!

Thanks Bonnie choice landing brand sounds good.

DANGER: living may case death...

:D That's so true for other people.

Got some roofing tar on my hands that had the usual CA Warning:

Cleaned that off with carburetor cleaner spray marked "Not for sale in California" glad I don't live there! :lol:

If your tuna can said that, then I would worry.

Why is soy in a can of tuna?

That's why I don't buy canned tuna.

That's a guarantee!! :lol: :lol:

I've wondered that, too. For that matter, any vegetable broth. Why not just tuna? And how do they get away with calling it water-packed when it has other ingredients?

I hope someone can solve the mystery!