Thomas The Train and Friends Toys Recalled

  • Thread starter Thread starter edward
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Friends Train
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the recall of Thomas & Friends toys due to lead in the paint, raising concerns about product safety, manufacturing practices, and the implications for child health. Participants explore the history of the issue, the role of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), and the broader context of imported goods from China.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express frustration over the presence of lead in toys, questioning how such issues could persist for two years without resolution.
  • Concerns are raised about the safety of products manufactured in China, with some arguing that the lack of oversight contributes to potential dangers.
  • Participants debate the meaning of "voluntary recall," with differing views on whether it implies proactive measures or a response to external pressure.
  • There is skepticism regarding the actual danger posed by lead paint on toys, with questions about how much lead children might ingest and the implications of lead exposure.
  • Some participants emphasize the serious health risks associated with lead exposure, particularly for young children, citing potential long-term effects on brain development.
  • Others inquire about the specific levels of lead found in the paint and whether these levels pose a significant threat compared to historical cases of lead poisoning.
  • There is a discussion about the historical context of lead in paint, including its use for vibrancy and preservation, and the implications of lead dust exposure from toys.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on the severity of the health risks associated with lead in toys, the effectiveness of regulatory bodies, or the implications of manufacturing practices. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific dangers posed by the recalled toys.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include a lack of specific data on the amount of lead found in the toys and the absence of consensus on the health implications of lead exposure from these products. The discussion also highlights the complexity of assessing risk in the context of children's safety and product manufacturing standards.

  • #31
Evo said:
Thanks for bringing that up. I never ate my toys when I was little. If your child eats toys... You might have a bigger problem than paint. :rolleyes:

How many toys would the child have to eat for it to be a health hazard?
edward said:
The safe level for lead in the fetus and toddlers is ZERO. It affects the development of the brain and central nervous system. The child doesn't have to chew on the wooden toys to be exposed. As the toys bump and rub together the child ends up with lead dust on his/her hands which gets transferred to the mouth. The dust can also be inhaled. That is why lead based paint was banned in 1978.
What I meant was—

You might say that ionizing radiation, or smoking has a safe level of ZERO. But getting an x-ray (or stepping outside for that matter), or smoking one cigarette is generally not considered harmful from negligibility. What I was asking, was that if this train set was more like getting an x-ray or not. Because it is only a little bit of paint on a few toys probably with a finish over it. That's what I was thinking.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Mk said:
What I meant was—

You might say that ionizing radiation, or smoking has a safe level of ZERO. But getting an x-ray (or stepping outside for that matter), or smoking one cigarette is generally not considered harmful from negligibility. What I was asking, was that if this train set was more like getting an x-ray or not. Because it is only a little bit of paint on a few toys probably with a finish over it. That's what I was thinking.

It was a lot of paint on millions of toys. I gave a link to the EPA indicating that each of the toys had enough lead content to drastically affect the IQ of a toddler. I am thinking that it was a minimum exposure of 10mcg per sq cm. Even that figure has now been disputed by recent medical studies. I don't think there is anyway to quantify or compare a toddler chewing on a toy to an X ray because of the variation of lead exposure.

Ionizing radiation and smoking affect people later in life and even at that not all people are affected the same. The affect of lead in children, is identical, immediate, and irreversible.

You are assuming that there was a non toxic finish over the paint. I am assuming that their was not. The only non toxic sealer that I know of is soy based and very expensive.

Regardless a child chewing on the toy would dislodge both sealer (finish) and paint.

Try to understand that the toys went to the one segment of the population most likely to be affected by lead and most likely to be exposed to it by their actions.

It is not like a kid stepping out for a smoke.:wink:
 

Similar threads

Replies
60
Views
13K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
Replies
32
Views
7K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 193 ·
7
Replies
193
Views
23K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
11K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
8K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
68K