RT Journal
A1 Davis RM
T1 Proposition 65: More warning about the risks of tobacco
JF JAMA
JO JAMA
YR 1989
FD September 22
VO 262
IS 12
SP 1632
OP 1633
DO 10.1001/jama.1989.03430120082023
UL http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.1989.03430120082023
AB To the Editor.— 
    Kizer et al1 reported the implementation of California's Proposition 65, a new law that requires businesses to provide a "clear and reasonable warning" to people before exposing them to chemicals "known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxic effects." In a subsequent letter,2 Dr Berger criticized the law's approach to the regulation of toxic chemicals on several grounds. One argument is that the warnings "dilute consumer awareness of really dangerous and correctly labeled products, such as cigarettes."In response to this argument, two important points should be made, which were missing in the reply by Kizer and colleagues. In the first place, the assertion that cigarettes are "correctly" labeled is debatable, a point that has been addressed elsewhere.3-5 Second, there is great irony in Dr Berger's criticism in that Proposition 65 will lead to improved labeling of tobacco products.Proposition 65 will