Talk:Toy safety

Globalize
First of all; thank you to whoever wrote this article on toy safety. I've made some copy-edits to it, and added a globalize template at the top because the article is extremely western-focused; only really talking about Britian, the U.S., and Canada. It would be nice to know some additional information about non-english speaking parts of the world. Also, seeing as a lot of the toys sold in the U.S. are produced in other parts of the world, and some people percieve "foreign-made" toys as being lower quality perhaps it could discuss issues related to that. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk problem solving 21:41, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response and copyedit - there were some silly typos! I agree with what you're saying about globalisation and it would be interesting to see info about how many of the recalled toys are imported.  violet/riga (t) 21:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I tried to add a bit of international information, namely some info on Chinese exports. Also added some US statistics to complement the UK stats. It is still somewhat Western-focussed, but I'm not sure how to get around that in English-Wikipedia. The article is nicely shaping up, however. Nice bit of collaboration across the water. Lynne Jorgensen 04:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've added in some further references and more European perspective, and noted the ISO standards. I'm more than willing to return here to update and edit further. I work in the safety department of a major manufacturer. 195.108.1.20 16:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Also added sections on work toward global standards.Altair 13 10:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've added a table derived from the International Council of Toy Industries website detailing toy safety standards around the world. With the additions - this table, the Chinese situation, overview of international standards, etc - can we lose the "Globalize" template from this article?Altair 13 (talk) 10:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Problem with Gilbert Atomic Energy Lab
text copied below from a message from me on the main page Error Report:

There doesn't seem to be any evidence that this lab toy kit was subject to a recall as suggested by the DYK item. The article Gilbert_U-238_Atomic_Energy_Laboratory does not mention any such recall. The article toy safety has the lab listed under "Product recalls and safety hazards" but without any references and with the comment "It is not known what adverse effects were caused by the inclusion of radioactive materials in a child's toy if any." This comes across as OR speculation. We should be especially careful about avoiding making unreferenced, unsourced claims on the front page. This magazine article which discusses the toy kit does not mention any recall. This detailed blog commentary suggests that the kit was discontinued because it was a loss-maker. This google answers thread also suggests that the lab kit was discontinued for financial reasons and also that elements of the atomic energy lab toy kit was incorporated into other chemistry lab kits. This detailed auction listing makes no mention of a recall or any safety issue that would complicate sale of the item. Suggest this DYK item be removed, and the lines removed from the toy safety article. Bwithh 17:16, 15 January 2007 (UTC) Bwithh 17:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The DYK item was incorrect - it was not recalled. However, this article does not state that the toy was recalled, and I have attempted to clarify this.  violet/riga (t) 09:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There's no reliable evidence that the kit was a health hazard either, so I'm taking the lab out completely. Bwithh 10:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * For those interested, low grade radioactive uranium ore is still available on the web for about $15 per sample. The ultrahigh grade ore carries a "no children" warning but the low grade ore does not (basically, remember to wash your hands afterwards, and that's about it. And the Centers for Disease Control FAQ on uranium says that "Natural uranium is radioactive but poses little radioactive danger because it gives off very small amounts of radiation"; "no cases have been reported where exposure to uranium is known to have caused health effects in children."; and its main advice under "How can families reduce the risk of exposure to uranium?" is the illuminating "It is possible that higher-than-normal levels of uranium may be in the soil at a hazardous waste site. Some children eat a lot of dirt. You should prevent your children from eating dirt. Make sure they wash their hands frequently, and before eating." Bwithh 10:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Bikes are a toy?
I hope not to nitpick, but if you (the original author, or someone else) could reformulate the wording of "toys like bicycles" to something else, it would be appreciated. Bikes are *not* a toy only, but used as a transportation device by probably more people than are driving cars.

/Per Eric (not logged in) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.242.96.60 (talk) 20:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC).
 * European safety standards refer to "toy bicycles". Perhaps this distinction avoid the confusion eric mentions. Altair 13 17:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

You might wish to check out the following information that is used by EU Notified Bodies GIBarbie (talk) 22:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

European regulations
Since this article came to exist and was cited with the Main template on the article Toy, I've drastically pruned the Regulations section of that article so that it's more in line with summary style. However, I removed a lot of Europe-specific information which is not mentioned in this article. I'm copying it below so that it can (hopefully!) be incorporated here. I really think it fits better here than there, but don't want to unbalance this article by just sticking it in any old place. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk problem solving 21:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

European regulations
The most comprehensive legislation is the Toy Safety Directive of the European Union (EU) (Council Directive 83/189/EEC). This directive is a list of requirements toys must comply with, and is interpreted in the laws of each member state of the EU in their respective Toy Safety Regulations (e.g.: the UK's Toys (Safety) Regulations 1995 (Statutory Instrument 1995 No. 204)). Compliance leads to a CE Mark, which is a mandatory requirement for selling the toy in the EU market. Some items included in the scope of this legislation which are not usually considered toys are; fashion jewelery for children, Christmas decorations, and air guns. The directive provides EU-wide standards on physical and mechanical properties, flammability, chemical properties, electrical properties, hygiene, and radioactivity. The Toys Safety Directive (and subsequent state regulations) also calls for the closest applicable national or international standards to be applied where a standard is not specified in the Directive. This interpretive clause is present to ensure that new and innovative toys are safe before being placed on the market. If a toy is found to be unsafe (by breaching one of the specified standards, or by a manifest risk of injury not specified in standards) then the producer (the manufacturer, or the first importer into the EU of the product unit in question) is held to be guilty of an offence under the Toys (Safety) Regulations (or equivalent EU state law). The principle of due diligence (whereby the producer argues that all reasonable steps were taken to ensure the safety of the consumer with regards to the toy) may be used by the producer to avoid prosecution, fines and possible imprisonment. The unsafe toy is withdrawn from the EU market, with all member states' authorities being notified by means of the RAPEX alert system.


 * I've added that part in, along with some notes on Chinese regs. I think I wrote those Euro Regs notes, incidentally! Altair 13 17:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to the editors for all the useful information. In the EU there is now a new toy safety directive and I have added some details. In the comments above that state "calls for the closest applicable national or international standards to be applied where a standard is not specified in the Directive" I wonder is this really a reference to the process of EC type examination or perhaps a reference to the General Product Safety Directive?GIBarbie (talk) 21:57, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Interesting article related to topic of Toy Safety - potential source
Article on use of PVC and phthalates in toys.

I removed the above from the External links section in Toy as it was not being used to source anything in the article and I felt its relevance was marginal at best. However, it is interesting from the perspective of toy safety and could be used to expand and improve this article, so I'm dumping it here if anyone wants to take a look. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk problem solving 20:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * This article is no longer hosted by the linked site.Altair 13 (talk) 11:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Here's the updated location Article on use of PVC and phthalates in toys. Abqsteve (talk) 21:27, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Criticism section?
Could use a section of criticism of toy safety regulations from a natural selection argument, e.g. the kid who swallows too many marbles doesn't grow up to have kids of his own, thus selecting against stupid children. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.112.21.33 (talk) 02:05, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

lead toys
what about a section on recalled lead paint toys or about the harm or lead paint toys — Preceding unsigned comment added by Z19pghost (talk • contribs) 15:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Small Parts Tag.jpg