The manufacturer makes a technical liquid based on ethanol, and then changes the ethanol in its composition to methanol. Is he to blame for the fact that someone poisoned her?

On the one hand, those who drank are to blame for drinking what should not be drunk.

On the other hand, the use of methanol in cosmetics is prohibited, the methyl alcohol content was not indicated on the label ... Therefore, the manufacturer is also to blame, but for a different reason. For this and judge. Even if someone used these products as directed, methanol is dangerous, including in contact with the skin, and not only when ingested

This is a game. Both sides are involved. Some pretend that they release something that is not intended for ingestion, others drink it.

Many do not understand the essence of the problem for the state. It is not about blaming someone for the harm done. Yes, sellers and manufacturers will have problems. But precisely because they violated the rules for the circulation of methanol. In Russia, the use of methanol in consumer products is prohibited.

If this ban seems unfair, then this issue must be resolved at the level of legislation. Yes, this requires politics, courts, elections and all that stuff. And just take and break the law out of quiet sadness pouring methanol because he decided something himself, no need.

Yes, the right way is to change the culture of alcohol consumption. There should be cheap beer and wine for those who wish.

It is impossible to completely eliminate the consumption of any surrogates. But the state cannot simply ignore this problem. And the reason is very simple.

According to the law, according to the constitution, we all, each of us, have the right to medical assistance.

The problem is that no one is able to distinguish the order of methanol poisoning from poisoning with completely ordinary alcohol purchased is completely legal in the most honest expensive beautiful store.

Moreover, usually no one distinguishes a person who has a bad heart from an alcoholic. For simplicity, they pretend that they have not noticed anything and walk past.

Medicine is obliged to rush equally to a person who jumped out of the window on its own and to a person thrown out of the window. These people do not look different.

Medical care is very expensive.

That is why it is easier for the state to ban methyl alcohol than to spend huge sums of money to eliminate the consequences of its use.

I am very critical of the ban. But, for a second, what and who limits the control over the turnover of methanol? Ethyl alcohol is no worse, it will perfectly replace. And it's just as cheap. Was it made artificially expensive? Well, this problem must be solved.

To avoid drinking ethyl alcohol, we need a culture of alcohol consumption.

Only we have a crisis. Is always. Hence the problems. You know, besides work, living environment, there is also such an elementary story. Where it is not customary to consume alcohol, for example, sweets are popular. Here, recently, I wanted to buy a cake on the DR. After 21 hours. Branded pastry shops are closed (they are still not at every step). And in hypermarkets one tops, which are a little tired. There is nothing within walking distance. Found one boutique pastry shop. It contains cake in pieces - three times more expensive than in a branded confectionery. You have to drink for this.

P.S. Yes, more. People with disabilities will now undergo rehabilitation and receive a pension. There is also blindness, even with a moderate degree of poisoning. We represent, yes, a new burden on the state thanks to some cunning businessmen who broke the law. Giving a disability pension based on guilt is not possible. If they shared where, as I understand it, they did not give to anyone, then they gave war invalids who distinguished themselves in the service, then all war invalids, then all invalids in general.

And another observation. There are also a lot of comments on my local forum - they are to blame, hurray, self-sawing, etc. But I just remembered that on the same forum, draft alcohol was excellently sold.

Substitution of one ingredient for another is illegal. So yes, it's my fault. After all, he did not write after the replacement that the ethanol in the composition was replaced by methanol. Those. misled the consumer.

With product quality, yes. you need to understand.
But I don't really understand, what are the claims to the manufacturers about the poisoning?
On the bubbles it is clearly written that the products are NOT INTENDED FOR INSIDE CONSUMPTION.
When I was little, we also had drunken animals lying in the bushes with bottles of "snowflake" windshield wipers. But it never occurred to anyone to declare them guilty.

If we are looking for such, I suggest paying attention to the state. Who, except the state and officials, can be to blame for the sharp drop in living standards and, as a consequence, the increase in the number of citizens who live below the poverty line and are unable to buy high-quality alcoholic beverages? Obviously, nobody.
And after all, every day all over Russia someone dies because of the consumption of low-quality alcohol. And they remembered only now.

Apparently, we need a scapegoat. Therefore, the creators of the damn lotion are accused of poisoning people. Lotion not intended for oral consumption, let me remind you.