Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kohaku

Raku Mugs

Recommended Posts

JBaymore    1,432

Legally the exact way that lead and cadmium bearing "not food safe" wares are required to be identified is stated in the US by the FDA laws. It requires fired on labeling and even specifies the fonts and size. This is because the pieces can change hands multiple times in their life, and things like verbal instructions, hang tags, and the like go "bye-bye". And unfired writing and stickers fade with time.

 

best,

 

.................john

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kohaku    22

Legally the exact way that lead and cadmium bearing "not food safe" wares are required to be identified is stated in the US by the FDA laws. It requires fired on labeling and even specifies the fonts and size. This is because the pieces can change hands multiple times in their life, and things like verbal instructions, hang tags, and the like go "bye-bye". And unfired writing and stickers fade with time.

 

best,

 

.................john

 

John- my understanding is that a glaze can contain lead or cadmium and still be labeled 'food safe' as long as it's been leach tested. Of course, that leach testing assumes specific firing conditions.

 

I'm curious, though, as to what the legal responsibility of the potter would be if they used a 'food safe' glaze that contained lead or cadmium... and their firing process resulted in higher rates of leaching than seen with the original tests. Would they be 'covered' by the manufacturers claim... or would they bear culpability for not testing the function of the glaze under their personal firing conditions?

 

(Let me emphasize, I'm NOT considering marketing a raku dinnerware line... but I'm intrigued by the legal complexities here...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JBaymore    1,432

I'm curious, though, as to what the legal responsibility of the potter would be if they used a 'food safe' glaze that contained lead or cadmium... and their firing process resulted in higher rates of leaching than seen with the original tests. Would they be 'covered' by the manufacturers claim... or would they bear culpability for not testing the function of the glaze under their personal firing conditions?

 

I addressed this exact issue a bit in another thread recently... that lead to a "blow up" with one forum member....... who apparently felt I was "discouraging" people. Can't remember where it was..... I'll look around and put a link here soon. Short answer..... YOU are responsible.

 

best,

 

................john

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×