Goedjn writes:

There is simply no value in itemizing the exceptions.

So you simply do not value telling the truth? Or what jurists call the
"whole" truth, not just the generalities?

Making false statements about hazards is itself a hazard. Aka, "crying
wolf". Exaggerating and lying about physical facts is not virtuous.

The essence of scientific truth is diagnosis. Dia=two, gnosis=know, to
detect and distinguish critically. You convict the guilty and acquit the
innocent. Acquitting the guilty or convicting the innocent are both
wrong. Type I and Type II errors. "Erring on the side of caution"
evidences intellectual weakness. The knife is dull, so we'll use it as
a hammer instead.

Especially
when you're trying to half-train a classfull of ignorant savages
like HS/college students who don't want to be there and don't
care, anyway.

Here I will agree wholeheartedly. Tell the little darlings whatever
they need to hear to survive their government fantasyland education.
When they have been utterly evacuated of any fondness for learning and
academics, they will be awarded a diploma purporting achievements. But
by the name of Dewey, they will not have a drop of acid in their hands,
much less roiling in their begoggled faces.