<![CDATA[Consumerist: baby bottles]]> http://cache.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/consumerist.com.png <![CDATA[Consumerist: baby bottles]]> http://consumerist.com/tag/baby bottles http://consumerist.com/tag/baby bottles <![CDATA[ It's been a few weeks without a BPA story, ... ]]> It's been a few weeks without a BPA story, so here goes: Four parents in Ohio have sued Evenflo, Avent America, Handicraft, Playtex Products, and Novartis for using bisphenol A in their baby products. They're seeking class action status. [Washington Post]

]]>
Consumerist-5018428 Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:28:26 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5018428&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Woman Sues Playtex Over Bisphenol-A ]]> A woman in Arkansas has filed a federal lawsuit against Playtex Products over their use of BPA in plastic baby bottles, claiming that the company "failed to adequately disclose that its plastic bottle products are formulated using BPA," according to MSNBC. The suit is seeking class action status, which would make it the second BPA-related class action lawsuit after the one in California against Nalge Nunc International (the makers of Nalgene bottles)—although the chemical is still not classified as toxic in the U.S.

The chemicals industry maintains that polycarbonate bottles contain little BPA and leach traces considered too low to harm humans. The industry cites multiple studies in the United States, Europe and Japan.

But the lawsuit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in New Haven, contends that hundreds of studies and papers have repeatedly shown that BPA can be toxic even at extremely low doses.

"Lawsuit filed against plastic baby bottle maker" [MSNBC]
"U.S. lawsuit alleges plastic baby bottles contain dangerous chemical" [The Canadian Press]

]]>
Consumerist-5011634 Thu, 29 May 2008 12:08:03 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5011634&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Should Companies Replace BPA Baby Products In The U.S.? ]]> There's nothing official about BPA in the U.S. (yet), and there's no legal reason (again, yet) for a company to refund or replace any products that have BPA in them. But with Canada's newly awarded "toxic" status on the chemical last week, and the subsequent announcements by Nalgene and Playtex that they would stop using BPA in their products, what do you think other companies should do? At least one reader who's now stuck with some BPA baby bottles thinks they should offer a refund.

Hello Consumerist,
 
After reading your articles on Canada banning BPA filled baby products and hopefully soon the US, I did some research and was shocked to find the ever popular "First Year's Breastflow" baby bottles I bought for myself last Christmas at Target were not BPA free. Nor has the "First Year" company done anything to remedy the BPA in their wide variety of baby products. Thank goodness my little girl hasn't been born yet and the bottles still sit in her nursery waiting to be used.
 
I figured they'd own up if confronted about it and provide a refund since A) they haven't been used and still sit in their original boxes and B) they should feel some sort of remorse for not making BPA free baby products. I know Target isn't going to care since it's been 90 days and who knows where the receipt is anyways. I don't think it necessarily needs to be solely Target's issue anyways, "First Years" needs to take responsibility for selling products with the BPA chemical and hopefully if more parents catch on and email in, they might actually recall their products and start making safer items for our kids.
 
So I sent in an email to customer care and got this bs canned response about how they don't care. Any advice on how I can get this taken care of and actually read by someone of importance? Thanks!
 
Sincerely, Portia
  From: CustomerService Date: Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:39 AM Subject: Re: Care and Safety Question or Feedback for LearningCurve.com Customer Care
 
Thank you for your inquiry,
 
If you are unhappy with your purchase, the company has established return policies with retailers who buy our products directly. Please return the product along with your receipt to the place of purchase for an exchange or refund. The exchange is subject to the discretion and return policies of the individual retailer.
 
Thank you, Consumer Services
RC2, the company behind Learning Curves, still has no official statement on its recall page.
 
From a strictly PR perspective, we think this is a prime moment to jump in and shore up some goodwill from consumers—first movers in the market who go BPA-free and make a big deal about it can claim to "really care" about you, which translates to brand loyalty and blah blah blah. We also imagine that the faster a company moves to address the issue, the less likely they'll be stuck with any sort of viable class action lawsuit, which you know is only moments away from emerging, like a magical money dolphin only lawyers can see.
 
On the other hand, BPA hasn't been banned or labeled toxic in the United States, and there's still a possibility it won't be proven harmful to humans. (In Canada, chemicals can be labeled toxic for being proven harmful to animals; in the U.S., only humans count.) And the companies who sold the products had no way of knowing, when they initially produced BPA products, that the chemical might turn out to be bad news.
 
What's the general opinion on how a company should proceed?
 
In the meantime: if you're concerned about BPA, take matters into your own hands. Hit up the website Z Recommends for an exhaustive list of companies that produce baby products—it ranks them from excellent to poor and gives you pretty much all the info you need to shop wisely for your baby. They even have a free text message service (which we wrote about here) so you can query them from your phone while you're in the store.
 
Added bonus: here's a good summary article on BPA—what it's found in, what the studies have shown, and what the real risk is once you get past the wall of newscycle hype. (One big takeaway is that you should probably stop using any plastic in the microwave because there haven't been anywhere near enough tests on what chemicals, if any, are released.)
 
RELATED "The Z Report on BPA In Children's Feeding Products, Third Edition" [Z Recommends] "Get Info On BPA-Free Baby Products Via Text Messaging" (Photo: Getty) ]]>
Consumerist-383388 Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:07:45 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=383388&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Canada May Become First Country To Classify BPA Toxic ]]> con_waterbottlebottom.jpgCanada is about to become the first country to declare bisphenol-a (BPA)—used in baby bottles, drink containers, and as a liner in cans—a toxic chemical, reports the New York Times. An anonymous source has said that the work by Canada's chemical review program to list BPA as a toxic chemical "was complete and was recently endorsed by a panel of outside scientists." The announcement is expected any time between today and the end of May.

In the U.S., the current status of BPA is "needs more research," The American Chemistry Council says research proves "there are no serious or high-level concerns for adverse effects of bisphenol-a on human reproduction and development," but we don't trust any organization that has "American" and "Council" in their name.

"Canada Likely to Label Plastic Ingredient 'Toxic'" [The New York Times]
(Photo: ToastyKen)

]]>
Consumerist-380221 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:39:26 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=380221&view=rss&microfeed=true