A Case Report on California's Proposition 65

To the Editor. —  I hope that the article entitled "Sound Science in the Implementation of Public Policy"1 was placed in JAMA to ascertain whether your readers were actually paying attention. Well, this reader was.The explanation of Proposition 65 given in this article was a bit esoteric. Essentially, this "risk prevention" legislation requires labeling of all consumer products if even the slightest measurable amounts of man-made carcinogens or teratogens are present; these are minuscule levels that, for most of the listed substances, pose no real risk to anyone. Naturally occurring toxic substances are exempt, as are chemical pollutants produced by all government-run facilities!There are obvious, glaring deficiencies in the Proposition 65 legislation, as follows:First, Proposition 65 defines a "significant amount" as a "detectable amount." In fact, sophisticated technological methods allow detection of quantity designations such as parts per quadrillion. No epidemiologic data exist to support the claim