California is the leader in environmental impact laws, their air pollution is so awful from the industrial surge in the 1980's that they had to start somewhere to clean up their air quality. The state of California has set industry standards and violations to manufacturer's high enough that the companies are conforming to California law. The prime example, cetyl alcohol has been used as a carrier for polymers in hair sprays, gels, etc for years but is now banned above 2% beginning in the year 2008. Ok no big deal you say, well here is the impact-
1. fragrance is usually alcohol based
2. polymers must have a quickly evaporating carrier so they will set
3. the regulations will virtually eliminate all non aresol hair sprays, gels and liquid styling products in the U.S. until manufacuterers (who are scrambling) can accomadate the new laws.
Still not such a big deal, just don't sell it in California. Well here's the catch, the fine for violating is $10,000 dollars PER ITEM so say someone goes to a show in Nevada buys a case of hair spray because it's their FAV and they can't get it in California any more, so they buy it and bring it home. They put it on their retail shelves and they MANUFACTURER is now liable for the fine- there are usually 12 bottles of spray to a case so that's a measly $120,000 dollars. This is where it all begins, state side at least.
The east coast also has a coalition following in much the same direction as California, and then throw the EU in to the mix, toss in some Asian policy and there are so many chemicals that have been proven harmful in some capacity that we should cover our heads in sand and stop breathing!!!
We are trained to do our jobs safely and use the chemicals that we work with in and effective and non harmful way. We all know it is not safe to eat, drink or smoke while applying products, so it should be safe to assume that we wouldn't dream of eating the very products we work with.
Manufacturers have to comply with the laws for every state and it is easier sometimes to put a disclaimer on all packages than to package specifically for each state.
OK, I'll get off my soap box now, and quit ranting about our goofy policies! I can speak from experience when I say that the laws from state to state vary and it is easier to print a blanket statement on a package than it is for a manufacturer to change an individual law. CND had to print on their packages of low odor monomer (made just for our state board exams) that it was "odorless" low odor monomer, they also put on the brush packaging not to wash with soap and water or immerse in any other substance than monomer.
These are just the little things, read the warnings, take appropriate precautions (don't eat the stuff) and if it's really a concern do some research to find out what the tests actually were and the concentration of chemicals that must be injested, inhaled or injected before the adverse reaction occured. HTH
anway what I read was a little alarming. I don't know if it's just mentioned on the bottles you get in the US or if different countries have a similar warning. This is exactly what my bottle states: 
