Yeah, I’m willing to believe that basically anything that doesn’t cause instant painful death would be allowed in the U.S.
I’m also willing to believe that the E.U. would ban something on the grounds that their friend’s cousin saw this article once about how it causes increased fatigue.
It’s almost like lawmakers have a tenuous link to reality or something.
The market will take care of it.
That’s the reason why the European public opposed and thankfully prevented TTIP. OTOH we don’t see these crazy compensation cases, where people are awarded millions of dollars for their own stupidity (pouring hot coffee in your lap, “drying” your cat in the microwave, confusing the speed-control of your RV with an autopilot, …), because the mentality is: If it’s on the market, it should be safe. Of course companies are trying to lobby into the regulatory authorities and erode this system, but we are not there yet.
Cases like those of Francis Oldham Kelsy (I’m pretty sure her story of single-handedly preventing the introduction of Thalidomide to the US was once mentioned on BB) are probably a thing of the past.
Difficult question: At one hand…protection of consumer in the EU is stronger, but at the other hand, if you will try (home)chemistry, photographic prints and all kind of hobbies wich involves the use of chemicals here in the EU you have problems.
First the sale of CMR-Substances https://oshwiki.eu/wiki/Carcinogenic,_mutagenic,reprotoxic(CMR)_substances is banned to the general public see Nr. 28 to 30 at page 236 at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02006R1907-20140410&from=EN which means that as private person you do not get e.g. borax anymore here.
Then you have regulation 98/2013 https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/crisis-and-terrorism/explosives/explosives-precursors_en which will restrict the use of sone chemicals for members of the general public. New draft here: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-security/20180417_regulation-proposal-europarl-council-marketing-use-explosive-precursors_en.pdf “Interesting” points at page 19 Nr. 6 and 7. Problematic issue: Nitric acid (3% or 10%) and sulfuric acid (15% or 40%) are on this list: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-security/20180417_regulation-proposal-europarl-council-marketing-use-explosive-precursors-annex_en.pdf
Thank you if you try to patinate metals and you are a private person…
Outlook:
CoRAP
https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/evaluation/community-rolling-action-plan/corap-table
RMOA
https://echa.europa.eu/understandng-rmoa
PACT
https://echa.europa.eu/pact
Sorry…I can understand that customer protection is important, but I have the feeling that here in the EU this thing is a " bureaucratic monster" with a political agenda (to ban more or less the use of chemicals for private persons) and they overshoot completely.
bombjack
Especially here in Germany, a lot of chemicals were banned as a reaction to this plot:
I have an old Amiga computer which I would like to retrobright. But since this incident, it is impossible to get hydrogen peroxide in the neccessary concentration.
Yes…that is the biggest hoax in history…that guys where under surveillance from german police. The chemical dealer which sold the hydrogen peroxide got suspicious after the first canister but then he became a visit from the police with asking him to deliver the canisters of hydrogen peroxide to them. He refused first, but then he insisted to change the hydrogen peroxide from 35% to 3%.
At this time buying a big canister or better drum of conc. hydrogen peroxide nothing special. It was and is a industry chemical, which is used in big amounts, if you have business. Same with NaCN…I know a galvanic company and they used 25 to 50 kg drums of that stuff…
The other issue with this pseudo terrorists, there goall was not producing this kind of organic peroxides aka “Mother of Satan”, instead they want to concentrate the hydrogen peroxide to over 90% and use it for a “blasting cap sensitive” explosive (there is a patent for that). This was the reason for the military detonators…I see that wikipedia is right in that case.
But form my experience in chemistry (studied three years) and work now as technician at a university, you need lab equipment for that und the storing of the concentrated stuff in that amount is completely a different story…
Back to chemistry I make workshops for kids (here form 2012 http://illumina-chemie.de/cyanotypie-t3305-s4.html ) and here I have to use the concentrated stuff if I make this on bed sheets or here a thread http://illumina-chemie.de/chemigrams-and-co-t4590.html#71699 with my photographic trials and gumprinting http://illumina-chemie.de/gummidruck-bzw-gum-bichromate-t4096.html
As privat person REACH and the other stuff impacts me very strong…because you do not get the chemicals (legally) anymore e.g. most of the recipes in “Patina: 300+ Coloration Effects for Jewelers & Metalsmiths” or “The Colouring, Bronzing and Patination of Metals: A Manual for Fine Metalworkers, Sculptors and Designers” can you forget…because the chemistry is restricted at least for “members of the general public”. If you try to make a business to overcome this issue, than other restrictions e.g. the complete REACH-thing kicks in…
bombjack
Reminds me of this story:
I don’t fully disagree with you, but you’re funny arguing about a “hoax bomb plot” and signing the post with “bombjack”.
TBH, I wouldn’t sell you neither hydrogen peroxide nor sulfuric and nitric acid if you came around. 
This is the case-law equivalent of the old saying that people only use 10% of their brains. Stop it.
They used to be proponents of a link between thimerosal in vaccines and autism, though that seems to no longer be on their website for some reason.
I wanted to chime in on that one but you put it better that I would have.
The McDonald’s coffee case, at least, was entirely justified. It’s not a case of negligence by the buyer, but a case of a company disregarding previous issues and instructions and assuming selling an unsafe product was something they’d always get away with.
I miss pseudoephedrine so much 
The very last time we managed to buy a packet was the week of my wedding and my fiance came down with a headcold. After that it went prescription only, and then "we don’t even carry it because it’s so sought after for making meth (here, we call it “P”, for pure).
Stupid drug addicts chasing elusive highs so incredible they burn our your pleasure centre and you never feel again…
To expand:
The elderly woman in question was served 82 degrees C coffee, a temperature too hot to safely consume. When she spilled it on herself she recived third degree burns on her thighs, buttocks and groin that required skin grafts and disabled her for two years. Her initial lawsuit was to recover medical costs in the amount of $20,000, but was offered only $800 by McDonald’s. At trial it was reveled that McDonald’s had previously recieved hundreds of complaints about how hot their coffee was, and despite that notice the company chose to do nothing. The jury decided that in addition to the medical damages that McDonald’s deserved to be punished for their negligence, so they added $2.7 million in punitive damages, or about a day’s worth of coffee sales.
Whenever you hear about a “crazy” American tort judgment it’s worth fdrilling down to see what actually happened in the case as very often the actual facts are something like Liebeck v. McDonald’s.
Thanks!
I feel like the way these stories are presented, your “Crazy American tort judgement” is actually, and obviously, more a reflection on something like the rampant capitalism that makes them think they should be allowed to get away with this sort of thing. Of course, it’s not branded that way because anything that makes capitalism look bad is not allowed.
Thanks! I was going to work up something like this, so you’ve saved me some effort. 
I really want this meme to become as dead as the stupid 10% brain nonsense.
OK, end back-patting.
Got the name from the (old) game and use it for over 20 years in the web as pseudonym.
Why wouldn´t you sell me this chemicals…where is the problem? E.g. I etch copper, http://illumina-chemie.de/upload/437_113684319856f0dfa690ab4.jpg
Made this piece with POSITIV 20 http://www.farnell.com/datasheets/2723418.pdf and a leaf. You can use nitric acid for that or a other etchant…what or better should that be illegal?
bombjack
GMO regulation is actually a good thing. But thats just me.
I find many of EU’s policy as wary and pro-active. the mentality is more “we dont know the effect of this substance, lets restrict its use before it causes any damage” rather than the more casual “oh, lets allow it and if anything adverse happens, we’ll see”
Sometimes it seems over-cautious, but I can’t help but think that that’s because we’ve been infected with the American “Capital must be allowed to do whatever it wants at all cost” mentality a bit…
If you can’t see it yet, I doubt you accept my explanation.
Anyways: you are a random stranger on the internet and not even very active on this BBS, you choose to sign your post with a pseudonym containing the word “bomb” (while nearly no-one here signs their posts, BTW) and you argue about something at least close to a conspiracy theory.
Yeah its over cautious, but its also a policy of “human life is precious, lets not experiment with it”. With the strides in innovation and capitalism, it doesn’t hurt to have someone be overcautious in some respects.
Its interesting to note, many times I have noticed products get approvals in the EU based on safety but not in the US - because capitalism!
Neither is the correct way, somewhere in between is ideal. But we don’t really get to choose that way, do we.
