NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - A toilet brush with a tag that says “Do not use for personal hygiene” has taken top prize for the wackiest consumer warning label of the year, according to an anti-lawsuit group.
The Michigan Lawsuit Abuse Watch, M-LAW, whose main mission is to reveal how lawsuits and anxiety over lawsuits have created a need for overly obvious warnings on products, sponsors the The Wacky Warning Label Contest each year.
Other top finishers this year include:
– A scooter with the warning “This product moves when used.”
– A digital thermometer with the advice “Once used rectally, the thermometer should not be used orally.”
– An electric blender used for chopping and dicing that reminds users to " “Never remove food or other items from the blades while the product is operating.”
– And a three-inch bag of air used for packaging that read “Do not use this product as a toy, pillow, or flotation device.”
“Warning labels are a sign of our lawsuit-plagued times,” said Robert B. Dorigo Jones, M-LAW president. “Plaintiff’s lawyers who file the lawsuits that prompt these warnings argue they are making us safer, but the warnings have become so long that few of us read them anymore-- even the ones we should read.”
The group hopes the contest will remind us all to read the warnings on our products more carefully and motivate judges to stop what it says are frivolous lawsuits.
The winning labels were chosen by listeners of a popular morning radio show in Detroit.
i agree. there should be a law that says the loser of a piece of litigation should pay all costs, including those of the opposing side. i bet this would stop people from suing the corporate giants real fast. i mean these insulation workers and other tradesmen who are suing the corporate giants because they are dying from asbestos expsure – give me a break. it’s like they were not going to die someday, right? and just because they suffer horribly before they die – everyone knows dying isn’t easy. and the babies that became brain damaged for life because Syntex chose to save money by reducing the sodium levels in their baby formulas. nobody forced the parents to use that prduct, but now those same parents seem to think that Syntex owes them something. i tell you, it is lawsuits like these that drive up the cost of doing business in this country. if the corporate giants are afraid of being sued just because their consumers are injured or die, then how can those corporations be expected to really rake in the big bucks for themselves and us stock holders?
so what’s next? warnings on airline tickets that say: “everything that goes up will come down – either by choice or otherwise.” no, i don’t think even that would stop some widows and orphans from taking advantage of our litigious society and sticking it to the airlines. the corporate giants need to start using the influence that they purchased when they contributed to their politician of choice, and get the law changed to help those that really matter in this country. a little public relations on their part by making people believe that law suits against corporate giants are frivilous and stupid wouldn’t hurt either.
sorry, susan. i’m really not trying to hijack your thread or take it off topic from the humorous warning labels. i just want to say that i used to work in the law departments of a couple of large companies, and the rationale behind poking fun at some of these often absurd labels is to give consumers the false impression that this is how corporations spend their litigation dollars – by defending themselves against people injured when they use a product improperly. most lawsuits against the giants, however, are of the variety that i mentioned in my earlier post. the only reason that frivolous lawsuits are in the news right now is because it is on the agenda of big business to have the laws changed, not only for the things that you reference, but also for the more serious issues. only, the giants want you to believe all they are going to change are the things that we are laughing about - while thy push the real changes through the back door with everyone’s consent. in this way, anyone who believes that a corporation should be held fully liable for injuries suffered by it’s consumers will be seen as being against frivilous lawsuits - because corporations are painting all lawsuits against them as being frivilous. i used to share an office with the public relations person and the lobbyist and their speaker phones, so i understand how the game is played.
back on topic. i remember some of the warning labels we looked at when i was in school. one of my favorites had to do with gasoline powered lawn mowers not being manufactured for the purpose of trimming tree limbs and hedges. it seems people had a nasty habit of dropping the running mower on themselves or their helper – and then of course suing the manufacurer.
My favorite product warning is the one that comes with the dessicant packet that gets stuck in with your new electronic equipment and advises that you not eat it. Hell, I’d have been popping those suckers back like Pez if they hadn’t warned me.
The classic ones are the cardboard sun protector that you can put behind your windshield that says “Do not use while operating vehicle”
Then there is the cruise control in the RV (Camper) that said “NOT AN AUTOPILOT. Do not leave steering wheel while cruise control is engaged.” or something like that. You can just imagine the dude who put his RV on the highway and then popped in the back to fix himself a cup of coffee…
Actually, that does come from a real lawsuit. A guy bought a Winebago, set the cruise control, and then went in back to make himself a sandwich.
When it crashed, he sued. He won over a million dollars and a new RV. Frankly, I don’t think the judge/jury should have helped put this guy back on the road!
Yes, it is an anti lawsuit group, that being said I think that the point is a valuable one. Too many warnings make it difficult to tell which warnings to be concerned. Working in a lab there are warnings on NaCl that would make you think that it is rat poison. All for something that is in your dinner table salt shaker. It makes it difficult to tell what warnings are real and which are just to cover their butt or if there is a real danger.
I am all for making the world safer, but this is not making the world safer. It is similar to honking of horns. If it is only done to get attention it is a useful tool. If every one uses it all the time, it is just noise.
For my humorous entry I will place the warning from the NaCl in our lab.
Caution! May cause eye and skin irritation. May cause repertory tract irritation. May cause digestive tract irritation with nausea vomiting and diarrhea. For eye contact flush with water for 15 minutes and get medical aid immediately. For skin contact , flush with water and get medical aid. If ingested, give 2-4 cupfuls of milk or water and get medical aid. If inhaled, remove to fresh air and get medical aid. Important! do not use this product until Material Safety Data Sheet has been read and understood
I was going to say that you can probably eat the silica gel itself with no problem–though it may contain other substances that could be harmful. However, some numbskull might try it and then get sick and sue me, so I won’t say that.
A few years ago some city council in California was all set to ban water (unknowingly) after a city employee researching hazardous materials for the council stumbled across a joke website detailing the dangerous properties of H2O. :roll: That one was such a joke it even made the papers here in Texas.
Kind of reminds me of when CNN briefly displayed the Challenger’s reentry speed as several times the speed of light immediately after the Challenger accident. I was watching and spewed coffee about halfway across the room.
We had a thread on all the stupid product warnings a while back. Those were really funny. It could probably be found with the search, but I don’t feel like finding it.
These are too funny, Susan…now I need to look at some of my warning labels
