PDA

View Full Version : Is cheap California wine loaded with arsenic?



JDubya
03-21-2015, 08:13 AM
More trouble for California????


Can this state not catch a break? First it was the crippling drought, now it seems that the wine they produce is chock full of enough arsenic to kill a herd of buffalo with just one bottle!!!!





HOLD THE FRANZIA AND TWO BUCK CHUCK. YOUR CHEAP WINE MAY BE FILLED WITH ARSENIC

Arsenic-tainted wine? It's not just the fate that befell Napoleon — Californians are unwittingly drinking it, too.


Many popular, low-priced brands of wine sold in California contain illegal and dangerously high levels of poisonous arsenic, according to a class-action lawsuit filed March 19 in California Superior Court.


The suit claims dozens of California wineries are violating state law by knowingly producing, marketing and selling arsenic-contaminated wine. Independent testing showed the wine contained up to five times the maximum amount the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allows for drinking water.


Some of the popular wine brands named in the lawsuit include Franzia, Ménage à Trois, Sutter Home, Wine Cube, Charles Shaw, Glen Ellen, Cupcake, Beringer and Vendage. The wines named in the lawsuit are primarily white or blush varietals including moscato, pinot grigio and sauvignon blanc that are priced under $10.


http://www.laweekly.com/restaurants/hold-the-franzia-and-two-buck-chuck-your-cheap-wine-may-be-filled-with-arsenic-5444149


Wait a minute... there's a brand of wine called Ménage à Trois????

Why???? Why would you name a brand of wine after the French word for three way sex???

So, I guess if you went to the store & got a bottle of Charles Shaw (aka Two Buck Chuck) and another bottle of Ménage à Trois, you could then say, that you picked up a Two Buck Chuck and a Three Way F#ck?

Salut!

Peter1469
03-21-2015, 08:20 AM
lol

GrassrootsConservative
03-21-2015, 08:27 AM
How come their big-government regulations don't prevent this sort of thing?

PolWatch
03-21-2015, 08:30 AM
How come their big-government regulations don't prevent this sort of thing?

doesn't this article prove that they were eventually caught?

GrassrootsConservative
03-21-2015, 08:51 AM
doesn't this article prove that they were eventually caught?

Well, yeah, but don't you think that's an incredibly low bar?

JDubya
03-21-2015, 08:53 AM
doesn't this article prove that they were eventually caught?

Exactly!!!

If it weren't for the big, mean ol' nanny-state gub'mint, the sainted, faultless little private sector angels would be selling us God only knows what!!!!

Crepitus
03-21-2015, 08:54 AM
How come their big-government regulations don't prevent this sort of thing?
It did. I took a while because the wine makers were deliberately violating the rules. Without those rules they would just continue poisoning people in pursuit of the almighty dollar like good little conservatives. Exactly as the polluters will do without the EPA.

GrassrootsConservative
03-21-2015, 08:58 AM
They would have been caught eventually anyway, and then they would have been brought to justice. Now what's going to happen instead is they are going to buy off some corrupt Liberal politicians and continue poisoning the dumb sheeple of California.

GrassrootsConservative
03-21-2015, 09:00 AM
It did. I took a while because the wine makers were deliberately violating the rules. Without those rules they would just continue poisoning people in pursuit of the almighty dollar like good little conservatives. Exactly as the polluters will do without the EPA.

But we have the EPA now. How come there's still pollution? Why is the great pacific garbage patch still there? Why is there an abandoned purse still lying half-covered with leaves in an alley I pass on my way to work every day? Who's not doing their job picking up cigarette butts? Where are all my tax dollars going?

GrassrootsConservative
03-21-2015, 09:04 AM
It's sad that you all have to take every drop of success and blow it way out of proportion in your blind support of government. I suppose when 99% of what you get is failure you have to take what comes your way, but still, it's sad.

PolWatch
03-21-2015, 09:07 AM
Well, yeah, but don't you think that's an incredibly low bar?

yes....but there will always be unscrupulous businesses that will find ways to evade public health regulations in favor of profit. To raise the bar would require each business have a federal health inspector on duty at all times. Doesn't sound feasible.

Crepitus
03-21-2015, 09:08 AM
But we have the EPA now. How come there's still pollution? Why is the great pacific garbage patch still there? Why is there an abandoned purse still lying half-covered with leaves in an alley I pass on my way to work every day? Who's not doing their job picking up cigarette butts? Where are all my tax dollars going?
Are you really so naive that you think simply making a rule/law stops the crime? In your little dreamland the government just waves a magic wand and all the violators stop? You have to catch the bastards first my friend, and then you have to prove they were in fact violating the law in court.

Grow up.

PolWatch
03-21-2015, 09:09 AM
But we have the EPA now. How come there's still pollution? Why is the great pacific garbage patch still there? Why is there an abandoned purse still lying half-covered with leaves in an alley I pass on my way to work every day? Who's not doing their job picking up cigarette butts? Where are all my tax dollars going?

so you never think of picking up the purse yourself? You wait and rely on government to do that for you?

JDubya
03-21-2015, 09:13 AM
Are you really so naive that you think simply making a rule/law stops the crime? In your little dreamland the government just waves a magic wand and all the violators stop? You have to catch the $#@!s first my friend, and then you have to prove they were in fact violating the law in court.

Grow up.

In this case, there is/will be oversight & monitoring via inspection I'm pretty sure.

GrassrootsConservative
03-21-2015, 09:13 AM
yes....but there will always be unscrupulous businesses that will find ways to evade public health regulations in favor of profit. To raise the bar would require each business have a federal health inspector on duty at all times. Doesn't sound feasible.

Or people could just take their money elsewhere...

JDubya
03-21-2015, 09:15 AM
so you never think of picking up the purse yourself? You wait and rely on government to do that for you?

Hell, I'd have picked that sucker up the first time I saw it, in hopes that it might be stuffed full of money!!!!!

GrassrootsConservative
03-21-2015, 09:16 AM
Are you really so naive that you think simply making a rule/law stops the crime? In your little dreamland the government just waves a magic wand and all the violators stop? You have to catch the bastards first my friend, and then you have to prove they were in fact violating the law in court.

Grow up.

Don't tell me to grow up, we're having a discussion. Or I'll put you on ignore and we'll stop. You are the one that believes in laws and rules, not me. I believe in educating people and bestowing morals on them. In your dreamland it is the government that waves a wand and then they all stop, not mine. I don't pretend to have faith in government because I know it doesn't work. Anyone with their head just a little above the sand knows government doesn't work.

/Edit If you believe in government don't accuse me of believing in government, that's not going to get you anywhere. Persuade me to support a failing government.

GrassrootsConservative
03-21-2015, 09:18 AM
so you never think of picking up the purse yourself? You wait and rely on government to do that for you?

Isn't that what I pay them for? Or no, do you vote me having higher taxes so they can continue to use it to give blacks in Cleveland cellphones and food stamps in exchange for votes and do studies on why the flag blows the way it does on a windy day?

GrassrootsConservative
03-21-2015, 09:25 AM
If I am going to give as much money to my government as I am I better live in an immaculate motherfucking utopia. Otherwise I'd rather take my money elsewhere, but I don't have that option because you all enslaved me to the system.

JDubya
03-21-2015, 09:49 AM
Don't tell me to grow up, we're having a discussion. Or I'll put you on ignore and we'll stop. You are the one that believes in laws and rules, not me. I believe in educating people and bestowing morals on them. In your dreamland it is the government that waves a wand and then they all stop, not mine. I don't pretend to have faith in government because I know it doesn't work. Anyone with their head just a little above the sand knows government doesn't work.

/Edit If you believe in government don't accuse me of believing in government, that's not going to get you anywhere. Persuade me to support a failing government.

Wait a minute..... you don't believe in societal rules or laws & you actually think you can teach morality to people or somehow "bestow" morals on them????

Really?????

:loco:

Wow. Just wow!!!!

And right wingers don't get why the rest of society views them as kooks & goofballs.

Please explain to us all exactly how you think one can bestow morals upon another.

:smiley_ROFLMAO:

JDubya
03-21-2015, 09:51 AM
Isn't that what I pay them for? Or no, do you vote me having higher taxes so they can continue to use it to give blacks in Cleveland cellphones and food stamps in exchange for votes and do studies on why the flag blows the way it does on a windy day?

So I guess all that "personal responsibility" crap you right wingers love to yap about ad nauseum just goes right out the window when it comes to applying it to yourself, eh?

Figures.

Crepitus
03-21-2015, 10:20 AM
In this case, there is/will be oversight & monitoring via inspection I'm pretty sure.
One would certainly hope.

Crepitus
03-21-2015, 10:23 AM
Don't tell me to grow up, we're having a discussion. Or I'll put you on ignore and we'll stop. You are the one that believes in laws and rules, not me. I believe in educating people and bestowing morals on them. In your dreamland it is the government that waves a wand and then they all stop, not mine. I don't pretend to have faith in government because I know it doesn't work. Anyone with their head just a little above the sand knows government doesn't work.

/Edit If you believe in government don't accuse me of believing in government, that's not going to get you anywhere. Persuade me to support a failing government.
I'm not accusing you of anything except the tired old scheme of arguing by "appeal to extremes".

As far as failed government, without that government these winemakers would be able to continue to poison people. Unless you think they are gonna stop because they suddenly got "morals"?

PolWatch
03-21-2015, 10:55 AM
I'm not accusing you of anything except the tired old scheme of arguing by "appeal to extremes".

As far as failed government, without that government these winemakers would be able to continue to poison people. Unless you think they are gonna stop because they suddenly got "morals"?

Its wanting it both ways. Some want to be safe without a system in place to require/enforce safety laws. Some complain about unions but never think of what their jobs would be today without the unions obtaining 40 hour work weeks, safety requirements, benefits and many other things people expect today. Do they really think that every business would operate from a concern for the public or their employees from the goodness of their heart? I suspect $2. more profit would be more valuable than a few sick customers.

We are now seeing the Me generation taking over the nation....nothing matters but the bottom line.

Crepitus
03-21-2015, 11:00 AM
Its wanting it both ways. Some want to be safe without a system in place to require/enforce safety laws. Some complain about unions but never think of what their jobs would be today without the unions obtaining 40 hour work weeks, safety requirements, benefits and many other things people expect today. Do they really think that every business would operate from a concern for the public or their employees from the goodness of their heart? I suspect $2. more profit would be more valuable than a few sick customers.

We are now seeing the Me generation taking over the nation....nothing matters but the bottom line.
Sad, but true.

GrassrootsConservative
03-21-2015, 11:18 AM
Over all of your heads.

Common
03-21-2015, 11:53 AM
Ive heard of most of those wines and Ive drank beringer, but beringer isnt so cheap.

JDubya
03-21-2015, 12:04 PM
Over all of your heads.

Well, we all know how HOT AIR rises, don't we? :biglaugh:

Green Arrow
03-21-2015, 02:56 PM
I hope it is loaded with arsenic. Drinking cheap wine from anywhere is a sin, but drinking cheap California wine? I hope they choke on the arsenic and then get soaked in lighter fluid in Hell.

That's one of the few things about California I will always defend: GOOD California wine beats wine from anywhere else.

Bob
03-21-2015, 03:08 PM
More trouble for California????


Can this state not catch a break? First it was the crippling drought, now it seems that the wine they produce is chock full of enough arsenic to kill a herd of buffalo with just one bottle!!!!





http://www.laweekly.com/restaurants/hold-the-franzia-and-two-buck-chuck-your-cheap-wine-may-be-filled-with-arsenic-5444149


Wait a minute... there's a brand of wine called Ménage à Trois????

Why???? Why would you name a brand of wine after the French word for three way sex???

So, I guess if you went to the store & got a bottle of Charles Shaw (aka Two Buck Chuck) and another bottle of Ménage à Trois, you could then say, that you picked up a Two Buck Chuck and a Three Way F#ck?

Salut!

I have had a lot of CA wine but never at any point drank any of those particular brands.

5 times standard for arsenic? Too much for certain but really, even so, can it actually hurt you?

I think this case is going to court to find that out.


What are arsenic's health effects?
Some people who drink water containingarsenic well in excess of the MCL for many years could experience skin damage or problems with their circulatory system, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
This health effects language is not intended to catalog all possible health effects for arsenic. Rather, it is intended to inform consumers of some of the possible health effects associated with epichlorohydrin in drinking water when the rule was finalized.
Top of page (http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/basicinformation/arsenic.cfm#content)
What are EPA's drinking water regulations for arsenic?
In 1974, Congress passed the Safe Drinking Water Act. This law requires EPA to determine the level of contaminants in drinking water at which no adverse health effects are likely to occur. These non-enforceable health goals, based solely on possible health risks and exposure over a lifetime with an adequate margin of safety, are called maximum contaminant level goals (MCLG). Contaminants are any physical, chemical, biological or radiological substances or matter in water.
The MCLG for arsenic is zero.EPA has set this level of protection based on the best available science to prevent potential health problems. Based on the MCLG, EPA has set an enforceable regulation for arsenic, called a maximum contaminant level (MCL), at 0.010 mg/L or 10 ppb. MCLsare set as close to the health goals as possible, considering cost, benefits and the ability of public water systems to detect and remove contaminants using suitable treatment technologies.
The Arsenic and Clarifications to Compliance and New Source Contaminants Monitoring Final Rule, the regulation for arsenic, became effective in 2002. The Safe Drinking Water Act requires EPA to periodically review and revise contaminants, if appropriate, based on new scientific data. The regulation for arsenic will be included in a future review cycle.

More information on the Six Year Review of Drinking Water Standards (http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/regulatingcontaminants/sixyearreview/index.cfm).


http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/basicinformation/arsenic.cfm#What are arsenic's health effects?

Bob
03-21-2015, 03:10 PM
In water, you must use a lot of water for a long time for arsenic to harm you in the levels more than likely found in those wines.

Bob
03-21-2015, 03:11 PM
I hope it is loaded with arsenic. Drinking cheap wine from anywhere is a sin, but drinking cheap California wine? I hope they choke on the arsenic and then get soaked in lighter fluid in Hell.

That's one of the few things about California I will always defend: GOOD California wine beats wine from anywhere else.

I can't really blame residents of Bakersfield being very angry and hateful against California.

I have long felt one must be a bit insane to live there.

Bob
03-21-2015, 03:17 PM
Its wanting it both ways. Some want to be safe without a system in place to require/enforce safety laws. Some complain about unions but never think of what their jobs would be today without the unions obtaining 40 hour work weeks, safety requirements, benefits and many other things people expect today. Do they really think that every business would operate from a concern for the public or their employees from the goodness of their heart? I suspect $2. more profit would be more valuable than a few sick customers.

We are now seeing the Me generation taking over the nation....nothing matters but the bottom line.

This came up 2 days back on my local news program. This is not protection by the Government nor the unions.

It is a private suit against winemakers.

It is all about money. Isn't that generally the case?

Case in point, if Government saved us, this wine would not be sold.

If unions were good, the public would be in unions. 93 percent however shun unions.

I have complained of a union I was once in, local 34 piledrivers. I was upset they took us to the 36 hour week. Our checks got smaller. The contractors offered us a very fat offer which the union bosses rejected to get the 36 hour week.

Last time I checked, the union went back to the 40 hour week. Apparently they learned the value of 4 more hours at great pay.

Green Arrow
03-21-2015, 03:18 PM
I can't really blame residents of Bakersfield being very angry and hateful against California.

I have long felt one must be a bit insane to live there.

I don't disagree. Pretty much everyone I know takes the first opportunity they get to leave California. Some of them have had to go back...and they act like they love it, but they hate it.

Bob
03-21-2015, 03:19 PM
I don't disagree. Pretty much everyone I know takes the first opportunity they get to leave California. Some of them have had to go back...and they act like they love it, but they hate it.

Sorry but I was discussing Bakersfield. My middle brother was born there. He turned out to be a mess.

Green Arrow
03-21-2015, 03:31 PM
Sorry but I was discussing Bakersfield. My middle brother was born there. He turned out to be a mess.

I was also discussing Bakersfield. What part of that wasn't clear?

Common
03-21-2015, 03:42 PM
I was also discussing Bakersfield. What part of that wasn't clear?

Be patient and kind, some things take time

Bob
03-21-2015, 04:49 PM
I was also discussing Bakersfield. What part of that wasn't clear?

You said California.

Green Arrow
03-21-2015, 05:59 PM
You said California.

Yep. People from Bakersfield take every opportunity they can get to leave California.

Bob
03-21-2015, 06:07 PM
Yep. People from Bakersfield take every opportunity they can get to leave California.

And I said of course. I would not live there for double your earnings.

Captain Obvious
03-24-2015, 06:33 PM
This could be damage control propaganda, who knows...

http://www.naturalnews.com/049095_California_wine_arsenic_science_hoax.html

Mainstream media falls for California wine arsenic HOAX story


(NaturalNews) Four residents in California are reportedly suing wine makers for selling products that contain what the lawsuit claims is a "dangerous" level of arsenic. The lawsuit lists 28 California wineries as defendants, including companies like Franzia, Mogen David and Almaden.

"According to the lawsuit," reports the New York Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/dangerous-arsenic-levels-found-california-wine-suit-article-1.2157716), "tests by three independent laboratories found that in some cases arsenic levels were 500% higher than what's considered safe."

The scientifically illiterate mainstream media jumped on the news, widely repeating the scare story even though it has no basis in actual scientific fact, as I explain in detail below. Here are just some of the scary-sounding headlines and statements found across the media, where journalists have absolutely no clue about the relative toxicity vs. safety of elements such as arsenic or mercury: