":::I'm afraid conscience has nothing to do with NPOV. NPOV is the representation of all points of view, not no point of view, so I don't see how adding a description in ANY way could be a violation of NPOV. That said, this still has nothing to do with NPOV as it is a fact. When a person is stupid, he IS stupid, and this is not a violation of NPOV, but it MAY be false. 
 :::Let's leave compassion and sense aside for the moment. Again, let's examine the case of the Australian kids: Out of the few million parents who possess the toys, one particular couple out of all of them decided to let their child play the toy when the toy is clearly labelled ""4 or above"", and thus not suitable, and thus risking their own dear child's life. Clever decision? I don't think so. And out of the few million children who possess the toys, one particular girl, nearly in her teens, decided to eat it. Clever? I don't think so.  
 :::It should be made clear that it's not the manufacturers' fault that these kids out of the so many million simply decided to eat their toys. The toys are not for eating. They ate it. And they're stupid. That's a fact. It's not POV, as much as calling a monkey less intelligent than a man is not POV. ||  

 "