A California Superior Court judge has overturned a ruling requiring tuna companies to brand their cans with mercury warning labels under the state's Prop 65 legislation. Prop 65 requires that products that may cause cancer or reproductive harm carry warning labels, but the judge decided that mercury in tuna doesn't qualify, despite tuna's popularity and the clear threat mercury poses to the development of fetuses, infants and children. Read why at the LA Times.
Related News
Continue Reading
Dirty Dozen™ food chemicals: Potassium bromate
EWG’s recommendation
Avoid or limit foods containing potassium bromate.
Potassium bromate has been classified as a possible carcinogen by the World Health Organization’s cancer research agency, based on...
Food was on the table. Now Congress should deliver.
Food was on the table during the election – and voters are hungry for change.
While many issues mattered to voters, polling shows that food issues like rising food inflation, food safety and how food...
State food chemical laws don’t create chaos. They make food safer for everyone.
More than a dozen states have now passed laws restricting certain chemicals from food. Most apply to food served in schools, and a few may apply to food sold in stores.
Companies have argued that...
Dirty Dozen™ food chemicals: Titanium dioxide
EWG’s recommendation
Avoid or limit foods containing titanium dioxide.
Titanium dioxide is a color additive used to brighten packaged foods. Food-grade titanium dioxide contains a large amount of...