Warning Labels Becoming Ineffective Due to Overuse, Experts Say
Warning labels have long served as a means to inform consumers about potential risks associated with a product. However, experts argue that warning labels have become so prevalent that their effectiveness has been compromised.
According to W. Kip Viscusi, a distinguished professor at Vanderbilt University, warning labels were once rare but started to gain traction in the 1960s with the introduction of the warning label on cigarette packages. Since then, other products have followed suit in an attempt to mimic the impact of cigarette warnings.
These labels generally fall into two categories: those that caution against purchasing a product, such as cigarette labels stating, “This product can cause mouth cancer,” and those that provide instructions to prevent risks associated with product misuse, like furniture warnings that suggest anchoring it to a wall to prevent tipping.
One of the concerns raised by researchers is the desensitization of consumers due to the ubiquity of warning labels.
Viscusi explains, “One of my main complaints about warnings is that they’ve become ubiquitous. There’s a tendency to say things are risky, slap a warning on it, and that tends to dilute the impact of the other warnings that are out there. So if everything in the supermarket is labeled as dangerous, you don’t know what to buy.”
To address this issue, Viscusi has outlined two criteria for effective warning labels: they must provide new information to consumers, and the consumer must find the information credible. He suggests that warnings are more credible when companies make statements against their financial interest.
However, there has been pushback against the use of warning labels on some products. In a recent ruling, a federal judge stated that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration cannot mandate graphic warning labels on cigarette packages.
Consumer protection advocates argue that warning labels should be a last resort when it comes to ensuring safe product usage. Oriene Shin, policy counsel at Consumer Reports, believes that warning labels alone are not effective and should be coupled with safe design.
The safety hierarchy of product design is seen as a more comprehensive approach to minimize risks to consumers. This multistep process aims to eliminate risks through design measures and, when not feasible, reduce risks through safeguards.
Shin provides an example of a safeguard, suggesting that potentially dangerous products like lawnmowers should require multiple procedures, such as pulling a lever and pressing a button, to start rather than just one.
Warning labels, according to Shin, should be the last tier in the safety hierarchy. She emphasizes that relying solely on warning labels is ineffective, stating, “I have probably seen hundreds of warning labels in the last week, and we probably don’t remember any of them. And that’s the problem with just relying on warning labels. [They’re] the icing on the cake rather than the end-all, be-all.”
Experts agree that a reassessment of the use and effectiveness of warning labels is necessary to ensure that consumers receive essential information without being overwhelmed. By incorporating safe design practices and minimizing the reliance on warning labels, manufacturers can better prioritize consumer safety without diluting the impact of vital warnings.
For more insights on the issue of warning labels and potential solutions, watch the video above.