When the Consumer Products Safety Commission was charged with implementing the new CPSIA, designed to make toys safer, fans of handcrafted goods worried: would we still be able to get our beloved natural toys? After all, toy testing for lead and phthalates has a price tag attached that is harder on the small business owner than it is on corporate giants like Mattel.

Turns out, it’s especially easy for Mattel, as the toy manufacturer gets to use “independent” in-house testing instead of submitting its toys to third-party testing like everyone else, as the AP reports,

The Consumer Product Safety Commission recently, and quietly, granted Mattel’s request to use its own labs for testing.

Although I’d love to not be too cynical on this, guess what? Coincidentally, Mattel spent $1 million last year in lobbying costs.

Read more of this story »

Phthalates are out of kiddie plastic now.  Don’t worry; you can still find the endocrine-disruptor in your makeup and shower curtains and pretty much anything that includes the term “fragrance.”

But have you thought about what they put into the new Barbie dolls instead of phthalates? It’s not like they’re making her ginormous bust size out of wood nowadays.  (Insert Ken jokes here.)

So…what exactly is in your kids’ toys now?

Read more of this story »

Perhaps a more consumer friendly definition is the one provided by the Stop Greenwash site, “Used to describe the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

The site goes on to explain,

“The average citizen is finding it more and more difficult to tell the difference between those companies genuinely dedicated to making a difference and those that are using a green curtain to conceal dark motives.”

Examples of greenwashing highlighted on the Greenpeace site are: GM’s Save Gas Ad Campaign and the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.

Read more of this story »

Doctor Recommends Avoiding Flu Shot, Taking Vitamin D Instead:

A cardiac surgeon and Professor of Surgery at the University of Washington recommends avoiding the flu shot and taking vitamin D instead. Donald Miller, MD, says “Seventy percent of doctors do not get a flu shot.”

The Ultimate Greenwashing: Barbie Goes Green:

“Barbie is always a reflection of current cultural trends and issues, and girls are increasingly aware of making a green statement,” said Richard Dickson, Senior Vice President of Marketing, Media and Entertainment, Worldwide, Mattel Brands. That’s right, Barbie is reflecting the trend of going green. Mattel realizes it wants a piece of the eco-friendly toy pie, but this ploy screams of greenwashing, especially considering the line will only be sold at Toys R Us.

Read more of this story »

When greenwashing is aimed at adults, environmentalists generally find it annoying and sometimes — if it is sufficiently transparent — amusing. But when children are the targets, the environmentalists find it infuriating. So when Mattel recently issued a news release promoting its new line of Barbie BCause accessories for the doll — hats, handbags and the like — it was too much for the blogger on Eco Child’s Play, Jennifer Lance.

The piece that caught the NY Times’ attention is
The Ultimate Greenwashing: Barbie Goes Green.

When I first saw the press release about a “green” Mattel collection of accessories called Barbie BCause, I thought it was an April Fool’s joke. Apparently not. Mattel’s new “playful and on-trend” collection of hats and bags for young girls will be released “just in time to celebrate Earth Day in style.” Which is pretty ironic, really, given that Barbie dolls themselves are made out of plastic and are packaged in even more plastic. And not the kind of plastic you can throw in the recycling bin, either.

Read more of this story »

If she were alive, Barbie would be a woman standing 7 feet tall with a waistline of 18 inches and a bustling of 38-40. In fact, she would need to walk on all fours just to support her peculiar proportions. Yet media advertising, television and Hollywood would reinforce her message, influencing what would become the American ideal of beauty.

And what’s up with Ken being an eunuch?  Leave it to artists to find a creative use for Barbie and comment on this cultural icon.

Read more of this story »

Four years ago, before America was awash in greenwashing, Mothering Magazine featured a great article title "No More Junk Toys: Rethinking Children’s Gifts" by Judith Rubin. Rubin writes,

Like junk food, junk toys can be fun but are devoid of nutrition. Buying them requires little forethought. They are excessively commercial, and are often linked to cross-marketing schemes. They excite children at first, but that initial flicker doesn’t endure. Also like junk food, junk toys have hidden environmental and social costs for which the consumers pay.

The environmental and social costs of junk toys are huge! Plastic toys are often made in sweatshops, sometimes by children themselves, and many of them send the wrong kind of messages to children. For example, Bratz Dolls sexualize young girls, as well as have unfair labor practices, and Barbie’s proportions are unrealistic. According to Empoweredparents.com,

If she were alive, Barbie would be a woman standing 7 feet tall with a waistline of 18 inches and a bustling of 38-40. In fact, she would need to walk on all fours just to support her peculiar proportions. Yet media advertising, television and Hollywood would reinforce her message, influencing what would become the American ideal of beauty.

Besides the materials and energy used in the production of junk toys, these plastic toys end up in landfills and oceans. Life Magazine reported that there is a swath of plastic garbage twice the size of Texas in the Pacific Ocean. Life reports, "Except for the small amount that has been incinerated — and it’s a very small amount — every bit of plastic made still exists."

The safety of toys made in China has been in question lately with the recent rave of recalls. Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law a ban on toys containing phthalates. The Governator said, "These chemicals threaten the health and safety of our children at critical stages of their development." Phthalates have been linked to cancer and reproductive problems. This follows a ban last year in San Francisco on toys containing BPA and certain levels of phthalates. Despite such legal actions, junk toys still dominate the toy shelves.

How can you tell a junk toy from a good toy? Field naturalist Alicia Daniel offers the following list of questions to ask when selecting toys:

1. Will this toy eventually turn into dirt-i.e., could I compost it? Stones, snowmen, driftwood, and daisies-they will be gone, and we will be gone, and life goes on.
2. Do I know who made this toy? This question leads us to search for the hidden folk artist in each of us.
3. Is this toy beautiful? Have human hands bestowed an awkward grace, a uniqueness lacking in toys cranked out effortlessly by machine?
4. Will this toy capture a child’s imagination?

Every year, I send my family a reminder that we do not want any plastic toys or clothes made from synthetic fibers. I wish I could say that they always followed our wishes, but somehow, the message flies out the window when they see some "adorable" plastic thing they think my children can’t live without. My husband has changed the motto to "No More Toys" this year, but the grandparents have already scoffed at the idea. Perhaps I should try sending my family Alicia Daniel’s list to help them make appropriate gift selections. If we are going to tell our children to reduce, reuse, recycle, shouldn’t our holiday gift giving and receiving reflect this practice?