So the default CYA action is put it on anything that might remotely apply, better warn than leave yourself open to being sued. End result is that the "warning" is useless.
Are you /sure/ that's the case? I know Apple's been dinged before because of high "plasticizer" content in some of their headphones. All that ****'s nasty, but I wouldn't be surprised if that meant high levels of lead. Likewise I know there's a problem up here of corner stores in the Mission importing candy from Mexico with high levels of lead in them. It's just not uncommon to find high levels of lead in various items*@#$(especially imported ones).
With Prop. 65 you're still free to ignore them, but for me, I like being alerted to non-obvious things because then I'll ask. Still not quite sure what's wrong about being able to make an informed decision.
To me it seems a lot like wanting to know the COO of something.

