Editorial: Dangerous toys

Saturday, Nov. 10, 2007 | 7:58 a.m.

At first glance, Australian doctors assumed someone had given a 2-year-old an illegal drug that sent the child into a coma. There was no doubt the child had ingested GHB, a date rape drug.

But after spending a month investigating the case, Dr. Kevin Carpenter found the real cause: a Chinese toy.

The child had swallowed pieces of a toy called Aqua Dots - one of the hottest toys of the year. It consists of a series of colorful beads that can be shaped into designs. When sprayed with water, the beads stick together.

Carpenter found that a chemical used to make the beads stick together metabolizes in the body into GHB, which can lead to vomiting, seizures, coma and death.

Australian officials say the beads were originally made safely with a chemical similar to the one Carpenter found.

However, at some point the manufacturer switched chemicals without the apparent knowledge of the importers or the toy companies. Product safety experts say such switches often happen when a manufacturer is cutting corners, often to curb costs by using a cheaper - but more dangerous - chemical.

By the most recent count, two American and three Australian children have been hospitalized after swallowing the beads. The toy, recalled this week, was on Wal-Mart's list of top toys and was Australia's toy of the year.

Ann Brown, former chairwoman of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, called the situation "horrifying."

"We're just not seeing any letup in the kinds of dangerous products that are coming in from China," Brown told USA Today.

Unfortunately, the Bush administration has not stepped up to counter the scourge of dangerous products coming from China. Instead, the administration and Nancy Nord, the commission's acting chairwoman, have fought congressional efforts to bulk up the product safety commission, siding with manufacturers over consumers. Because America has let its guard down against such dangerous products, children are endangered by their toys. That is unconscionable.