Remove Child Before Folding: The 101 Stupidest, Silliest, and Wackiest Warning Labels Ever
A few years back there was a car (Mazda, perhaps?) commercial featuring babies in strollers in a park. Apparently just to amuse us cognoscenti, it carried the disclaimer “stunt babies on closed course.”
Agh - I read that as “stunned babies on closed course” at first. Well, I’m no child-lover, but that seems a little too far even for me!
They’ve gone even further than that at the top of Nevada Falls in Yosemite, removing any possibility of survival:
http://www.rcarchive.com/hhg/national/gifs/halfdome/pic35.jpg
My favorite use of the “Closed course. Do not attempt” car commercial one was the commercial where the astronauts in space suits were hot rodding their car on the Moon. Thank God for that warning, as I was planning on doing just that the next time I was on THE MOON
Was that the Moloch brand grill?
Comedian I heard years and years ago:
“So I hear these ads that say, ‘School’s started! Please drive carefully!’ and then these other ads that say, ‘School’s out! Please drive carefully!’ C’mon, when do we get a shot at these kids?” 
Yeah, but usually the only reason they can get by with that is that someone else already did said testing. The only alternative would be testing completely unknown and possibly dangerous substances on humans.
I saw one this week - for an ad for some nasal spray. The point of the ad is that our nasal spray is a fine mist that stays in your nose, not dripping down your throat like those other guys. The disclaimer is that the spray dripping down your throat does not affect efficacy. So, the whole point of your product is that it does something that makes no difference. Got it.
It does make a difference, just not to the action of the drug.
That shit is absolutely vile when it drips down your throat.
(Also, the ‘no drip’ stuff lies.)
Unless of course they’re not using “unknown and possibly dangerous substances”?
I mean, it’s shampoo, FFS, how much “unknown and possibly dangerous” do you need? At this point, I think we’ve probably identified the chemicals that will show up in them that will cause blindness and death, and we can just not make shampoo with those in it.
Isn’t pretty much a given that if an ingredient is “unknown”, it is also possibly dangerous?
There’s Johnson & Johnson ‘Nothing But Tears’ Shampoo.
The tears of a clown?
Those cheap “carabiners” (that you see for about $1.00 each)-people use them for key rings. They all say “Not For Climbing”.
Has anyone been killed using these things for technical climbing?
How did I miss this the first time around? I’m sitting here laughing way, waaay too much at that. 
It’s been asserted here and on other boards that post-colostomy education typically includes the instruction that one should not use the stoma for sexual intercourse. This warning, and the associated activity, is not entirely hypothetical. Ick.
holey shit!
If they have to put a Best Before date on that stuff it ought to be “Best before: can explodes due to build-up of gaseous products of putrefaction”.