It doesn't matter where the paint was bought. Where it was made is more important. California bans almost anything and everything as a matter of course. Obviously there are chemicals that cause cancer, but the relationship is complex. I don't know what rules California follows, but it's possible that they are based on laboratory testing at unrealistic exposure levels.

Like most things it's a matter of commonsense. It might be prudent to paint in a well ventilated area, but I doubt hobby painting will cause a problem. Modern paints are probably safer than paints of old. For a start they don't contain lead and VOCs are also being reduced. Sometimes that might result in paints that aren't effective, but hey, they are safe!

If anyone is really worried they could always retire to their armchair and not paint anything. Beware though, as I understand a statistically significant number of people each year die in armchairs.

Andrew

Use it.

The tin is labelled to suit as wide a market as it can, hence that peculiar warning.

I've an idea I have seen somewhat similar elsewhere; but I forget what for. That assertion appears written by lawyers for lawyers rather than technical people, and one is tempted to ask if it means the paint is safe in Utah or Nevada.

The reference might show what is really meant, what concentrations, situations, etc.; what part of the body it may harm, and what precautions to observe. It's probably based on frequent, heavy industrial use of the offending ingredient; not occasional hobby use of the complete paint.

Most paints, lubricants and solvents are or contain substances that can cause skin damage and even cancer with sufficient prolonged or frequent exposure, so obviously need the usual workshop hygiene precautions; but for proper information I suspect the paint's real MSDS would be more useful than something written to suit legal blokes in one single US State!

So use it, but simply take common-sense care in doing so.

I can’t buy a small tin of Phoenix paint to obtain the correct colour for my loco to then colour match locally as it cannot now be shipped (flown) overseas, presumably because it will spontaneously blow up and bring down the plane. I wonder how the hobby paint in the rapidly vanishing hobby shops get here.

There is a study that found Parsnips contain carcinogens! How many of us have stopped eating them. Seriously provided you use a suitable mask and disposable gloves, with the quantities you are probably spraying something else is going to kill you first.

I bought an Americam made X-Acto saw the other day which came with the same warning, Not sure if you have to inhale it or ingest it to cause harm!

I might sue them anyway as there was no warning about cutting yourself, which I did opening the packaging….

Dave

According to a friend who lives in Ca even some foodstuffs have that cancer warning on them. Looks like the Ca lawmakers are covering their axses.

regards

I remember when I was in the Air Force when Polyurethane paints became the norm for painting aircraft, when the painters were working in a hangar there was a choking mist of polyurethane paint particles. Not all that long after the paints came into use, painters were developing throat cancers, there ensued a frenzy of regulations and PPE for the painters and we mere mortals were excluded from hangars whilst paint spraying took place. The Crown, who had immunity from prosecution until the mid 80’s, in those days were very lax about potential hazards to personnel, asbestos was an area they totally ignored until statistics became overwhelming. Dave W

As far as your own use, you take note and assess the risks. One then either uses the stuff or not. The problem is that you know little about the product you are about to use. The warning on the label or the COSSH sheet is of little use unless you really unstand the subject. You can go to the internet which is full of misinformation, deliberate or accidental, even or, particularly, from respected sites (on numerous occasions members of this site have said that Kasenit is toxic which is untrue). In the end it is your choice.

As for cancer there is, or may was, a common test where a laboratory rat was fed with the suspected carcinogen at something like 80x the suspected lethal level. If a cancer developed the substance was carcinogenic. One lab tested distilled water and the rat died of cancer.

JA

I doubt that many American ambulance-chasing lawyers could be described as 'politically correct'…

The problem is that in California there are companies who specialise in private prosecutions of firms who haven't used the warning, even if no harm is caused.

You will probably be O K , as long as you don't drink more than a gallon of the stuff, or apply more than 5 coats to your skin!

Remember some of these warnings result from giving rats about ten times the dose that anyone would consider excessive.

But such warnings keep the punitive damages at bay!

Common sense is not that common, particularly where an opportunity to sue for damages may be a possibility.

Howard