Why were Buckyballs banned by the government?

[Danger]

And are cow magnets smaller than a baby aspirin?
To my eye, they look to be a solid metal bar the size of a fat crayon. Could you have swallowed one?

They were quite expensive, so I was allowed to play only with broken ones. Some were about the size of a peanut.
There might be a matter of definition involved here. I do not see any difference between "foolish" and "idiotic" and "moronic" and several other terms that all indicate the bottom of the gene pool (unless you get into technical psychiatric conversations).
The bottom line to me is... if it's obviously not edible, how stupid do you have to be to swallow it? I know a girl who choked half to death on a condom once, but that was bad luck and bad fit as opposed to outright stupidity.

Om... all that I can say is that I wouldn't be caught dead on that site, and if you check the numbers you'll see that their members are leaving like rats from a sinking ship once they tune into what's going on.

 

[dlgoff]

I would buy some Buckyball cubes, but ...

I mean, my god, this is an old scientists dream!

https://www.getbuckyballs.com/images/cart/buckycubes/product-image.png?v=205

Super magnets! I see flying cars, boats, bicycles, and skateboards when I think of such things.

This is the reason they should be banned. Maybe we can work this thread into this one.

 

[DaveC426913]

They were quite expensive, so I was allowed to play only with broken ones. Some were about the size of a peanut.

So we're down to you being the examplar, and the rest of the world not being as experienced as you. I'd say that's a pretty weak stance.

There might be a matter of definition involved here. I do not see any difference between "foolish" and "idiotic" and "moronic" and several other terms that all indicate the bottom of the gene pool (unless you get into technical psychiatric conversations).
The bottom line to me is... if it's obvious not edible, how stupid do you have to be to swallow it?

OK, so it seems you've categorized anyone (deliberately or accidentally) swallowing anything inedible (including kids as young as 3) as "bottom of the gene pool".

OK, but that's about 95% of the bottom of the gene pool.

Whether or not you need it, I would say that constitutes a justifiable reason for enacting regulations to protect that 95% of the population.

 

[Danger]

it seems you've categorized anyone (deliberately or accidentally) swallowing anything inedible (including kids as young as 3) as "bottom of the gene pool".

You have once again sidestepped the fact that these things are not intended for children and it's a parents' duty to decide whether or not a given child is smart enough to not eat one.

 

[OmCheeto]

This is the reason they should be banned. Maybe we can work this thread into this one.

No! I'm serious! Check out the prototype in my back yard:

All those fan wheel thingys won't work without lots and lots of super magnets!

And trust me, I've not done the math to make sure any of this will work. So I know it will work.

 

[turbo]

With all these bans in place, soon we won't be able to eat anything.

Well, a ban on Brussles sprouts couldn't be all that bad...

 

[Danger]

All those fan wheel thingys won't work without lots and lots of super magnets!

You underestimate me, Sir. I guarantee that I can spool those suckers up to 30,000 rpm or better with a couple of ripe beer farts. If that happens to fail, I can drag the ex-from-hell out of retirement. She could suck-start at 747, so I don't think that your little toy would be much of a challenge.

 

[OmCheeto]

You underestimate me, Sir. I guarantee that I can spool those suckers up to 30,000 rpm or better with a couple of ripe beer farts.

Deja vu of my first days at PF.
(Wollie started the thread on 12-7-07, I joined PF on 12-8-07)

..suck-start a 747...

Not sure how or when I'll be able to add that phrase to my lexicon, but I'm sure I'll manage. Thank you, Sir!

 

[Skrew]

So instead of individual responsibility it's up to the government to prevent people from buying magnets because there is a chance some children will swallow them?

 

[OmCheeto]

So instead of individual responsibility it's up to the government to prevent people from buying magnets because there is a chance some children will swallow them?

Actually, I think this whole thread is an Obama conspiracy to institute gun control laws.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7CyPtF0ChA

Gaussian Guns! Run for your lives!

No! It's our second amendment right to own Gaussian guns!

Dear oh dear oh dear... 100 days... Evo called it.

 

[Nano-Passion]

The parents should be blamed, not the object itself. There is a myriad of things that can hurt young kids, it is the parent's responsibility to make sure it doesn't happen.

 

[DaveC426913]

The parents should be blamed, not the object itself. There is a myriad of things that can hurt young kids, it is the parent's responsibility to make sure it doesn't happen.

The point I have been trying to make is that people do not realize how dangerous they can be. The implications of a material as strongly magnetic as Neodymium (namely that, if mishandled, can lead to life-threatening injuries) is simply beyond most peoples' experience.

Practically everyone in the modern world has some familiarity with regular magnets and they are categorically innocuous, which is why these ones catch them unawares.

 

[Nano-Passion]

The point I have been trying to make is that people do not realize how dangerous they can be. The implications of a material as strongly magnetic as Neodymium (namely that, if mishandled, can lead to life-threatening injuries) is simply beyond most peoples' experience.

Practically everyone in the modern world has some familiarity with regular magnets and they are categorically innocuous, which is why these ones catch them unawares.

This is a huge philosophical question in itself that has been going on for a very long time. What criteria decides that an item should be banned or regulated? It seems that the criteria you state is that not only is it more dangerous than a few of the other items, but its danger is also underestimated to the unsuspecting.

Tough subject to argue about really, it is too subjective in my opinion. Though something tells me that there are a lot more objects that also possesses the same danger. So why this one? Don't you hear about all of the other accidents that happen to other children?

Read this to get a perspective about the product.

Craig Zucker, co-founder and CEO of Maxfield & Oberton says that Buckyballs were never marketed to kids. “Toys ‘R’ Us has been asking for our product for years, but we don’t [sell it there],” he says.

This is why we can’t have nice things. People keep swallowing them.

it markets the toy as a novelty product for adults—and includes several warning labels explaining that the product is dangerous if swallowed and not intended for children under age 14

Source http://www.businessweek.com/article...ecall-buckyballs-are-dangerous-when-swallowed

 

[DaveC426913]

it markets the toy as a novelty product for adults—and includes several warning labels explaining that the product is dangerous if swallowed and not intended for children under age 14

I would point out that only the packaging has that label. Once out of the packaging their innocuity belies their danger.

Pills are dangerous too, which is why we now know to keep them in their bottles - with labels.

 

[Nano-Passion]

I would point out that only the packaging has that label. Once out of the packaging their innocuity belies their danger.

Pills are dangerous too, which is why we now know to keep them in their bottles - with labels.

Things take time. It takes a lot of media exposure to get people to understand not to drink X red bulls in a given time or X aspirins in a given time. But it happens, and no bans have been issued for these cases -- even though they lead to death.

 

[Danger]

Good grief, Dave! What is your problem with this item? Did your kid eat one or something? By your logic, we have to ban every substance on the planet that isn't certified as food. Let's make glue illegal; the little idiots might clog their noses shut and suffocate. No more pop cans either; they'll stick their fingers in the holes and get cut. Perish forbid what mayhem might result if they get their incompetent little fingers on a set of golf clubs; got to put those in the gun safe with your rifles. Don't forget to lock the tees and balls up separately, since the clubs aren't nearly as deadly without them.

 

[Nano-Passion]

Good grief, Dave! What is your problem with this item? Did your kid eat one or something? By your logic, we have to ban every substance on the planet that isn't certified as food. Let's make glue illegal; the little idiots might clog their noses shut and suffocate. No more pop cans either; they'll stick their fingers in the holes and get cut. Perish forbid what mayhem might result if they get their incompetent little fingers on a set of golf clubs; got to put those in the gun safe with your rifles. Don't forget to lock the tees and balls up separately, since the clubs aren't nearly as deadly without them.

Dave's argument was that these objects appear to be relatively safe due to experience. He has a point.

But all dangerous things go through that phase, and it takes time for it to catch onto the general public that it is dangerous.

 

[Danger]

Dave's argument was that these objects appear to be relatively safe due to experience. He has a point.

And he has made it abundantly clear. My point is that no competent parent will give anything swallowable to a kid who is stupid enough to swallow it. If they do, they have no right to blame anyone else for the results. That's why 2-year-olds don't get Teddy bears whose eyes can be pulled off and eaten. Guess what a Lego brick can do to a kid's guts. I don't see them being outlawed.

 

[DaveC426913]

Good grief, Dave! What is your problem with this item?

I don't really. What I have a problem with is people assuming that they've got the market cornered on what constitutes intelligent behaviour and what constitutes common sense. Common sense is highly experience-based.

It's one thing to say this is an overreaction; it's another to say "anyone who doesn't see this the way I do is an idiot".

Did your kid eat one or something? By your logic, we have to ban every substance on the planet that isn't certified as food. Let's make glue illegal; the little idiots might clog their noses shut and suffocate. No more pop cans either; they'll stick their fingers in the holes and get cut. Perish forbid what mayhem might result if they get their incompetent little fingers on a set of golf clubs; got to put those in the gun safe with your rifles. Don't forget to lock the tees and balls up separately, since the clubs aren't nearly as deadly without them.

All red herrings and straw men. We are talking about this item, and this item has put many people in the hospital with life-threatening injuries. That's undeniable, no matter how many reducto arguments you put forth.

Yes - if cutting their fingers on pop cans and requiring hospitalization with life threatening injuries were starting to become common - you can bet your granny's girdle they'd be pulling the product and replacing it with something safer.

As for the other ones, (golf clubs, rifles), clearly you are not reading anything I've been saying about devices whose danger is readily apparent.

Too many people think they know too much about how the world works, and how it should work for them.

 

[Evo]

My kids never put things in their mouths that weren't supposed to go there. I kept things out of the way that could be a danger, and my kids weren't stupid swallowers. Don't know any nice way to put it.

If your kids try to swallow anything they can get into their mouths, keep that stuff out of your house, or muzzle them. They're your kids, take responsibility.

"Oh my GOD, someone made something my kid could swallow! It shouldn't be for sale if my kid can swallow it! I shouldn't have to think about if it's something I should buy! You need to guess that I have small children that swallow anything they get their hands on, and I don't pay attention, and not manufacture it!"

 

[DaveC426913]

My kids never put things in their mouths that weren't supposed to go there. I kept things out of the way that could be a danger, and my kids weren't stupid swallowers. Don't know any nice way to put it.

If you're kids try to swallow anything they can get into their mouths, keep that stuff out of your house, or muzzle them.

And therefore the rest of the world operates the way your household did, so the world's rules should be applied as they do in your specific household.

(Not you specifically Evo, just in general. That's the gist of my problem with this.)

 

[Evo]

And therefore the rest of the world operates the way your household did, so the world's rules should be applied as they do in your specific household.

(Not you specifically Evo, just in general. That's the gist of my problem with this.)

Yeah, use common sense. Keep small objects out of your house. IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY! No one else.

OMG, MY CHILD SUFFOCATED ON A PING PONG BALL!

Ok, that's YOUR fault, not the ping pong ball.

 

[Jakeus314]

Banning these is so incredibly wrong I can't explain my feelings. How? Just how can anyone think banning the sale will help ANYTHING... I feel bad for our country if this is evidence of future choices. The parents who let their kids swallow these things should be charged with a crime...

 

[Danger]

"anyone who doesn't see this the way I do is an idiot".

I never said that, nor did I imply it. What I said initially was that any 14-year-old who swallows magnets is an idiot; I then extrapolated it to other people who put foreign substances into their mouths and try to blame society for the outcome.

All red herrings and straw men. We are talking about this item, and this item has put many people in the hospital with life-threatening injuries. That's undeniable, no matter how many reducto arguments you put forth.

I guarantee that it's not even a tiny fraction of the number who have died of peanut allergies, and I don't see any blockades around Dairy Queen. I don't know about anyone else, but I sure never heard of those things being a hazard until less than 15 years ago.

Yes - if cutting their fingers on pop cans and requiring hospitalization with life threatening injuries were starting to become common - you can bet your granny's girdle they'd be pulling the product and replacing it with something safer.

I very much doubt that, and the kind of idiots who get cut are the same kind who eat magnets.

As for the other ones, (golf clubs, rifles), clearly you are not reading anything I've been saying about devices whose danger is readily apparent.

Really? How many people actually think about the hazard presented by golf tees? A kid who would swallow a magnet would probably stab himself with one of those. Or poke his eye out. (I saw someone get stabbed with one once, when he sat down without realizing that it was in his pants pocket. It was funny as hell to the rest of us, but he sure didn't think so.)

Too many people think they know too much about how the world works, and how it should work for them.

I know that my part of the world works very well by having people not eat inorganic objects.

 

[Nano-Passion]

And he has made it abundantly clear. My point is that no competent parent will give anything swallowable to a kid who is stupid enough to swallow it. If they do, they have no right to blame anyone else for the results. That's why 2-year-olds don't get Teddy bears whose eyes can be pulled off and eaten. Guess what a Lego brick can do to a kid's guts. I don't see them being outlawed.

Well yes, I agree. Which is why I responded that most other objects are not taken seriously until it becomes publicized on TV or by other sources of media.

 

[Curious3141]

I would point out that only the packaging has that label. Once out of the packaging their innocuity belies their danger.

Pills are dangerous too, which is why we now know to keep them in their bottles - with labels.

On the same basis, the following are dangerous in that they pose a swallowing risk, bear no caution on the product itself (sans packaging) and should therefore be banned:

1) Tyre valve caps
2) Used or discarded staples
3) Ball bearings
4) Nails
5) Screws
6) Rivets
7) Button cells
8) Toothpicks
9) Cotton swabs (what you call "Q-tips" in the US)

and too many other household things to name. Heck, if we want to absolve the parents of ALL responsibility, we might as well include packets of dessicant (silica gel) with a "DO NOT EAT" warning clearly printed on the packaging, on the basis that the children likely to swallow those packets are unlikely to read and/or heed that warning.

We have to be reasonable about this. At some point, we have to draw the line and say that parents should step up and be responsible for the safety of their children. When I was a kid, my toys didn't come with screw-on battery compartments. Now, every single one of my own kid's toys come with this "feature", and frankly, it's a PITA, because my son has never been dense enough to attempt swallowing one of his batteries. In fact, it's a completely unnecessary imposition because my son manages his own battery collection, has his own battery tester, and has a screwdriver to change out used batteries himself. The fact of the matter is, I did a risk assessment, satisfied myself that he fully understood the risks, and was smart/mature enough not to do anything stupid, and I let him have the freedom to do these things which modern children are apparently not "supposed" to be doing.

Let's stop mollycoddling the children, let's reintroduce the notion of parental responsibility, and stop blaming the least likely party for mishaps. Only then will there be real hope for society.

(BTW, I agree with the bans on some obviously hazardous things like lead paint on chew toys for infants, because there is no way to escape the hazard even with full parental supervision. In these cases, using the toy as intended carries a serious hazard. What I'm against is taking this sort of caution to the extreme).

 

[Evo]

On the same basis, the following are dangerous in that they pose a swallowing risk, bear no caution on the product itself (sans packaging) and should therefore be banned:

1) Tyre valve caps
2) Used or discarded staples
3) Ball bearings
4) Nails
5) Screws
6) Rivets
7) Button cells
8) Toothpicks
9) Cotton swabs (what you call "Q-tips" in the US)

and too many other household things to name. Heck, if we want to absolve the parents of ALL responsibility, we might as well include packets of dessicant (silica gel) with a "DO NOT EAT" warning clearly printed on the packaging, on the basis that the children likely to swallow those packets are unlikely to read and/or heed that warning.

We have to be reasonable about this. At some point, we have to draw the line and say that parents should step up and be responsible for the safety of their children. When I was a kid, my toys didn't come with screw-on battery compartments. Now, every single one of my own kid's toys come with this "feature", and frankly, it's a PITA, because my son has never been dense enough to attempt swallowing one of his batteries. In fact, it's a completely unnecessary imposition because my son manages his own battery collection, has his own battery tester, and has a screwdriver to change out used batteries himself. The fact of the matter is, I did a risk assessment, satisfied myself that he fully understood the risks, and was smart/mature enough not to do anything stupid, and I let him have the freedom to do these things which modern children are apparently not "supposed" to be doing.

Let's stop mollycoddling the children, let's reintroduce the notion of parental responsibility, and stop blaming the least likely party for mishaps. Only then will there be real hope for society.

(BTW, I agree with the bans on some obviously hazardous things like lead paint on chew toys for infants, because there is no way to escape the hazard even with full parental supervision. In these cases, using the toy as intended carries a serious hazard. What I'm against is taking this sort of caution to the extreme).

A sane parent! Bravo!

 

[DaveC426913]

1) Tyre valve caps
2) Used or discarded staples
3) Ball bearings
4) Nails
5) Screws
6) Rivets
7) Button cells
8) Toothpicks
9) Cotton swabs (what you call "Q-tips" in the US)

Zero of which are toys.

Being toys is one of the stipulations I mentioned.

 

[Integral]

I hear ya, but I still insist, a product is a legitimate danger to the public if:

- it can send you to the hospital with life-threatening injuries
and
- it is otherwise a reasonably innocuous thing, not known by most people to have such a risk associated with it
and yet
- is a toy.

Perhaps they should have banned it as a hazard rather then a defective product.

 

[DaveC426913]

A sane parent! Bravo!

That sane parent has to know something is a danger.

Should every parent race to the emerg every time their child swallows a nickel? No. The doctor would cuff them updside the head and send them home with a laxative. We have been taught that, common sensically some things are not a danger if swallowed.

These magnets are a (relatively) new health risk.