

CEO Fights Feds: Save Our Balls - sbjustin
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/ceo-fights-feds-save-our-balls.html

======
tptacek
This came up a few weeks ago on HN. Not to express any opinion about the
regulatory action happening here, but you might be surprised to learn that you
could be better off swallowing a nail than you would be if you swallowed a
pair of these tiny magnets.

Swallowing the magnets is a _big deal_. As they transit your system, they can
easily find themselves on either side of a fold of tissue, whereupon they lock
together, gradually kill the tissue, leak gut bacteria into the bloodstream
and create sepsis.

On the other hand, if you swallow a nail, there is apparently a very good
chance that your doctor will just tell you to go home and look for it in your
poop. This according to a journal article I found last time the story came up.

Worse still, the risks are deceptive. As a parent, you would no doubt freak
out completely if you discovered your toddler ate a nail. I know I'd be at the
emergency room minutes later. On the other hand, parents are routinely told by
their doctors to wait and watch the poop when other innocuous round objects
are swallowed. It is very easy to see how parents could make the wrong call
about the magnets and wind up with gravely ill children as a result.

\---

More things you might want to know about the CPSC complaint:

* Despite warnings, there've been numerous continuous incidents of kids needing surgery after ingesting the magnets.

* The magnets are marketed to kids 14 years and up; there are apparently lots of reports of teenagers using the magnets to hold jewelry for e.g. fake lip piercings.

* When you sell tiny rare earth magnets to teenagers, it is awfully hard to ensure that those magnets don't end up in the GI tracts of little kids that share a house with those teenagers.

* Warning labels for this suck because the product practically demands to be taken out of packaging; once you assemble a structure with them, it's not like you break them back up and put them in a box.

* Little kids love these things, because they're shiny, they click, and they move in unexpected ways.

The CPSC wants the death penalty for this product. I'm not there with them,
but I see where they're coming from.

~~~
Inufu
If people are retarded, it's hardly the fault of that company, is it? You
don't blame the gun company when somebody shoots himself ...

~~~
bryanlarsen
It's the old "reasonable man" test that the courts use. A reasonable man knows
that guns are dangerous.

On the other hand, a reasonable man may not realize that swallowing magnets
are far more dangerous than swallowing similar objects that aren't magnetic.

~~~
Vivtek
Which is why each package has five different warning labels on it. Sheesh.

~~~
makomk
From the comments I've seen in other discussions about this, people are
entirely capable of reading all the warning labels and still failing to
realise that swallowing these is actually far more dangerous than swallowing
other metal objects.

They just seem to see the warning labels as an example of "health and safety
gone mad" so to speak, of someone putting unnecessary warnings on about
something that obviously can't be that dangerous. I can't see a good way of
avoiding this problem.

Edit: Apparently there were similar comments in the previous HN discussion; at
least one person[1] failed to grasp how much more dangerous they were if
swallowed than other objects despite reading a 14-page complaint that
described in graphic detail the exact mechanism by which they were more
dangerous, the serious medical consequences, the long-term health risks even
with prompt and successful surgery, and the history of kids being injured in
this fashion by them. They're basically impossible to sell safely.

[1] <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4294215>

~~~
tptacek
This not only seems true, but demonstrably is true. CPSC worked with the
vendor of this toy for years getting labels and notifications out; the reports
of children requiring debilitating surgical procedures to remove tiny little
rare earth magnets from their GI tracts _increased_ over time.

------
ChuckMcM
It is symptomatic of a larger problem, the inability to characterize risk
coupled with the demand for action. Some characterize it as a tragedy of the
commons, personally I agree with Schneir that its simply bad parenting and bad
luck.

------
sbjustin
[http://www.getbuckyballs.com/buckyballs-only-marketed-to-
adu...](http://www.getbuckyballs.com/buckyballs-only-marketed-to-adults-cpsc-
press-release/)

~~~
tptacek
This article contradicts itself, or is overtly intending to mislead its
audience; the article _itself_ points out that the product is marketed 14+.

The problem isn't that 14 year olds will swallow magnets --- although they
might, since CPSC tracks reports of them being used to hold fake piercings.
The problem is that 14 year olds often cohabitate with 2 year olds, and 14
year olds aren't renowned for judgement and organizational skills.

------
bigtech
from the CPSC press release:

Since 2009, CPSC staff has learned of more than two dozen ingestion incidents,
with at least one dozen involving Buckyballs. Surgery was required in many of
incidents. The Commission staff alleges in its complaint that it has concluded
that despite the attempts to warn purchasers, warnings and education are
ineffective and cannot prevent injuries and incidents with these rare earth
magnets.

~~~
Foy
TL;DR - Americans are too stupid to handle magnets safely. Therefore we have
to ban this product.

~~~
jaaron
I can see both sides of the argument. The case for personal responsibility is
strong, but I can also see the case that this product is _deceptively_
dangerous, i.e.- it resembles many other non-dangerous products, leading to
easy consumer confusion, when in fact it is particularly dangerous. Not many
other toys carry a risk of _surgery_.

But all of that aside, my issue is that the CEO doesn't seem to be
particularly sympathetic to a product which has hurt his customers. I'm sure I
don't have the whole story, but the impression is that the CEO's attitude is
one of "well, we warned you, what more do you want?" rather concern for safety
and taking creative action to protect customers.

------
j_baker
You know, I really have to question the author's credibility. The blurb at the
bottom says:

 _Todd is the author of “Dispatches From Bitter America.” The book is endorsed
by Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee and Sean Hannity. Click here to get your copy._

...which leads me to believe this is more political than a case of really
wanting to save Bucky Balls. For example, notice how the article is almost
exclusively dedicated to the CEO, while the "victim" only gets half a
sentence?

~~~
kevinpet
You don't share his politics, so therefore you disregard everything he has to
say?

I'm pretty sure this article is about the CEO. You know, since it starts off
talking about his letter?

I envy your ability to instantly and accurately decide every controversy
merely by learning the political affiliations of the parties.

~~~
j_baker
How exactly does "question the author's credibility" translate into "disregard
everything he has to say"? Regardless of the author's political affiliations,
I seriously doubt that his writing appealed to the likes of the people like
Sarah Palin by being sane, rational, and thoughtful.

I mean, sure, there's a good chance he's really an intelligent and respectable
guy, but I think the simplest answer is that he's a political shill and has no
credibility. And that's the answer I'll stick to until I see evidence that I'm
wrong.

~~~
snowwrestler
Why would it matter if he is intelligent, respectable, or shilling? If he told
you it was raining, would you look him up on Open Secrets before you grabbed
your umbrella?

~~~
j_baker
No, but I would definitely look up at the sky to see if it was raining before
believing him. I only believe weather conditions that are given to me by
people who are intelligent, respectable non-shills.

------
msg
I was in the gift shop at the Pacific Science Center (Seattle) two months ago.
The Buckyball demo video was playing on the corner of the sales counter,
surrounded by the other science toys and kits that the museum sells. So I feel
this claim of "marketing to adults" is somewhat disingenuous.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
When I was in high school there was a gas station on the edge of town that was
very relaxed about the legal age for purchasing cigarettes. But I never blamed
Camel for that. ;)

~~~
tptacek
Camel's marketing of cigarettes to children is a huge issue.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
I happened to smoke Camel's back then so that is the brand I stated in my
tale. But my friend smoked some nasty unknown clove crap he also purchased at
this gas station. My point was that you can't always blame the manufacturer
for how the product is placed/sold/controlled once it reaches the retailer.
When I worked at a convenient store in college, we set up the displays and put
up the window posters... not some company rep or anything. I would never
expect all the different suppliers to come by every time we switched stuff
around to make sure their product was not too close to the candy aisle. So I
would not expect the Bucky Balls people to go to every retailer to make sure
they are not selling them to kids. That is just not a reasonable expectation
to have.

~~~
msg
I don't think this is about "blaming the manufacturer" for the behavior of
retailers. My anecdata is that they distributed their product to the gift shop
of what is, overall, a kid and preteen museum. For adults, there is a King Tut
exhibit and an IMAX theater, segregated from the rest. The main flow has
animatronic dinosaurs, a bug house, a tide pool, a bunch of touchable
exhibits. Kids come through on field trips. So this product is wrong for that
retailer. There was probably no location in the store that would have kept it
from being seen and wanted by kids.

Maybe the Buckyballs guys will say, "hey my hands were tied, I couldn't do
that level of due diligence with every store I sell my product to." And the
regulator will respond, "hey my hands were tied, I couldn't allow the product
to be sold without that level of diligence."

That doesn't mean that regulator is somehow being unfair to Buckyballs. It
means the laws of physics are being unfair to Buckyballs for not allowing them
to create a cool sticky product without health risks to children.

Yes, there's a certain amount of proportion that needs to be taken. Yes, more
kids die from drowning in backyard pools. But it's not unreasonable to ask
that these products (like cigarettes, like prescription drugs) are more
difficult for children to acquire at retail.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
So then the answer is to more strictly enforce the stated age warning. The
gift shop should be fined. Bucky Balls doesn't need to be shut down. Stores
disregard age ratings on so many things because I don't believe they ever get
punished for it. Parents also disregard age warnings but that is their call to
make since it is their child. But if they do, there really shouldn't be much
they can do about it. That is my opinion. You think whatever you wish.

------
bksenior
It was alluded to in the comments, but how is this worse than steak knives,
time locking doors, things with exposed wires or any other dangerous objects?

~~~
Dramatize
A kid can't swallow a steak knife.

------
sp332
Discussion on the ban 2 weeks ago
<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4294041>

------
rdl
Would these be vastly less fun if they were bigger, and thus a lot less likely
to be swallowed? 1" diameter rare earth magnets would be pretty fun I think,
although maybe more dangerous (due to being stronger)?

------
temphn
There are about 10000 things that are toxic if swallowed. Household cleaning
supplies, toothpicks, you name it. Warnings do nothing, the kinds of people or
children who swallow them aren't going to be reading warnings.

The paradoxical thing is that the complete abandonment of personal
responsibility (no parent is responsible for watching their child) is coupled
with a requirement that the business owner assume superhuman levels of
responsibility (devising his product in such a way that it is bad-parent-
proof).

------
hellosamdwyer
One would imagine that the Obama team would want this story to die ASAP. Pick
up the phone! Let my buckies go!

------
caycep
what does obama have to do w/ this?

~~~
elarkin
Not a lot, though as the head of the executive branch he could likely
intervene to prevent the ban.

~~~
DerekL
No, he can't. The CPSC is an independent agency, run by five commissioners.
The president nominates the commissioners, but he can't give them orders or
fire them without cause.

