Comment by cbsmith

Well, if you call it "government overreach" it's hard to be a fan.

> Workers should have refused to work with the material if it were truly dangerous, and the free market would have eventually pushed engineered stone out, giving way to innovation for a better, safer material.

I think you need to consider this from a game theory perspective. Sometimes there are systemic negative outcomes that can only be addressed with systemic mitigations. Governments/the law serve a purpose by establishing the ground rules in which the market operates. How you structure those rules changes systemic outcomes.

Without the ground rules, UFC would devolve into people just shooting each other.