Mist rolling in; feels like being in the clouds.
In case you have been on some remote island or in deep in the jungle without any contact to the human world for the last 3 weeks, you missed the SIGG scandal and their admission that they had not been forthcoming about their lining indeed containing BPA. So while Sigg was selling their "BPA-Free" bottles (not) to confident sucking pregnant women, SIGG was pretending to be an environmental company and laughing all the way to the bank.
I won't bother to rehash all the facts and comments that have come before this, a lot of which has been discussed in previous blogs (you can do a search in upper left corner) but I do want to point out some irony.
The SIGG lining, the old BPA containing lining and the new "eco-care", (what ever that means, they won't say) are made from types of epoxies, a polymer made from resins. Just google epoxy and there are many definitions. But guess what? It's a plastic. SIGG (and Laken) can spin all the eco words they want, but the bottom line is, their lining is plastic, always was and will be.
"... plastics. any of a group of synthetic or natural organic materials that may be shaped when soft and then hardened, including many types of resins, resinoids, polymers, cellulose derivatives, casein materials, and proteins: used in place of other materials, as glass, wood, and metals, in construction and decoration, for making many articles, as coatings, and, drawn into filaments, for weaving."
SIGG is willing to exchange their old bottle for their new one but do you really want to be drinking from an unknown plastic? Yes it beats using disposable water bottles but by now (since you were not deep in the jungle) you know there are many alternatives to SIGG. Have you seen the SIGG bottle that says "I'M NOT PLASTIC?" Kind of ironic.
I am fascinated by the blog and twitter discussions of folks willingly replacing their old SIGG bottle with another SIGG, no questions asked. Is it me or are they missing something?
So I guess that squeezey inexpensive #4 plastic (low-density polyethylene or LDPE) plastic water bottle isn't so bad after all. I'm not a fan of plastic but it beats throwing away single use water bottles. They, #4 bottles, are inexpensive, have a relatively low environmental cost (impact) of manufacturing and can be recycled. (virgin aluminum is many more times environmentally costly compared to steel, glass and plastic) Plastics #2, #4, and #5 have a strong food safety record, so they say.
SIGG (and Laken) claim they are "an environmental company". What is so environmental about using virgin aluminum which is 6 times more "costly" than the next type of container and then lining it with an unknown plastic that you refuse to be transparent about? (oh, must be that 1% planet donation thing they do) It seems to me that drinking from a SIGG is just liking drinking from any other plastic water water bottle, only worse.
Showing posts with label aluminum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label aluminum. Show all posts
Monday, September 7, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
SIGG and BPA - Treehugger Got Hoodwinked
Full rainbow and just spectacular.
SIGG's confession about BPA, bisphenol-A, being in their water bottle lining has shocked the eco world. Almost equally as shocking has been Treehugger's un-in depth reporting about SIGG's containing or leaching BPA issue, which began over a year ago, with their loose endorsement of SIGG's BPA-Free claim. (Could it have anything to do with SIGG and other big green companies who also sell SIGG and their own aluminum water bottles that contain BPA being big time advertisers on Treehugger?) Treehugger's last posting as of this writing ends with "Safe (SIGG)? Yes." Did Treehugger get hoodwinked and can't admit it?
Really? Lloyd Alter, after 4 postings and an ambush of comments still comes to the conclusion that SIGGs are safe? Is he for real? I'm not going to take the absolute position that they are unsafe but I do question those who claim "safe". That is a pretty tall (high on yourself?) order to make. Treehugger even quoted SNEWS, which was tougher on SIGG, and then wimped out in the end. So you're telling me that all pregnant moms and and little beings are perfectly safe sucking on SIGG bottles knowing that we don't know whether they leach below 2 PPB (because it has never been tested) , knowing that we do know (now) they contain BPA in the lining, that we do not know what the ingredients are in the new secret eco-care liner and knowing that Canada, States and Cities have taken the precautionary approach and have banned BPA products for under age 3 because for safety concerns? That's interesting that an entire Country bans BPA due to safety concerns while Lloyd Alter (who's out of Canada) concludes SIGG is safe. WOW.
To continue to make the claim of safety based on such little fact is irresponsible. We don't have the facts in about the safety of BPA since that is ongoing as we speak. We do know that BPA in very small amounts, PPT, is causing fetal and developmental damage. Scientists are working on this now. It is inconclusive for humans, (for some though very conclusive),but not looking good, which is why bans are continuing for precautionary reasons. This is why it is shocking that Lloyd Alter continues to say SIGG is safe.
But media attention is good, right? Even negative media attention is better than no attention at all. Unfortunately it rewards the liars, in this case SIGG. And that stinks.
And still no one is talking about the leaching of aluminum. The OKO Testing done in 2004 showed SIGG leaching aluminum. (you can find it on SIGG's competitor's site, Laken, but conveniently omitted from their own website.) But SIGG on their website says "ensure 0.0% leaching" of aluminum. Hmm, not adding up here either. Let's also be clear about these results. The level of testing was done at standards that are acceptable for drinking water purposes. These levels are high, otherwise most public water systems would fail. SIGG did leach aluminum but below these standards. OKO gave a very good rating for any water bottle that came in below these standards but very good does not mean no leaching. (this is deja vu, right?) This is the same BPA scenario all over again. SIGG then went out of their way to test stainless steel bottles so they could post it on their website to convince their customers of the dangers of stainless steel.
Let's face it, SIGG has cashed in on the water bottle craze using sleazy big corporate marketing tactics. It reminds me of Monsanto claiming on their website how happy their Indian farmers are using their GMO seeds back in 2002 and 2006 but omitting the recent update that these farmers are now committing suicide in the hundreds due to farming debt. Oops, sorry, minor detail omitted.
I've blogged in depth about SIGG and BPA before (see headlines on the right of this blog), and also about SIGG's "greenness". My first blog was over year ago when I didn't buy the BPA-free claim SIGG and Treehugger were making. I've said it before and I'll say it again...consumers have the right to know the ingredients of the products they purchase. Hiding behind "it's a proprietary secret" is deceptive, not transparent and definitely not real "green". Is this where I get to say "I told you so?"
SIGG led us to believe that SIGG was "BPA-Free". They refused to answer direct questions about the ingredients of their lining. They didn't directly lie but they sure danced around in order to satisfy the majority. This is the height of corporate deception. They have confessed that their old lining had BPA. They now claim their new eco-care liner is BPA-Free. Their certifications and testing are on their website and are pretty impressive. I am glad to see they meet Japan's standards since they are the highest in the world. SIGG's new lining sounds legitimately free of BPA and many other nasties. BUT Sigg's new lining is a proprietary secret. Doesn't this take us back to where we were before? That's like the shampoo bottles that list all the ingredients they don't have and then you look on the back only to find the word fragrance.
So my new questions for SIGG (are you may borrow for sure) are:
What are the ingredients in the new lining? (there might be a new gender bender that I would want to know about)
Will you be selling this wonderful new lining formula (and make millions to offset your development research) to the canned food industry so we may all benefit, including babies needing safe formula cans?
What long-term studies have been done on the new formula ingredient to insure safety?
May we have full access to these studies?
If a company can not answer these questions in an honest way, (it's okay to say I don't know) they don't deserve to be considered a "green" company. This is , in my opinion, the largest green washing, eco-deceptive, big business scam event ever. Shame on SIGG for giving false pretense to parents, pregnant mothers, children and the rest with regard to their lining and BPA.
SIGG's confession about BPA, bisphenol-A, being in their water bottle lining has shocked the eco world. Almost equally as shocking has been Treehugger's un-in depth reporting about SIGG's containing or leaching BPA issue, which began over a year ago, with their loose endorsement of SIGG's BPA-Free claim. (Could it have anything to do with SIGG and other big green companies who also sell SIGG and their own aluminum water bottles that contain BPA being big time advertisers on Treehugger?) Treehugger's last posting as of this writing ends with "Safe (SIGG)? Yes." Did Treehugger get hoodwinked and can't admit it?
Really? Lloyd Alter, after 4 postings and an ambush of comments still comes to the conclusion that SIGGs are safe? Is he for real? I'm not going to take the absolute position that they are unsafe but I do question those who claim "safe". That is a pretty tall (high on yourself?) order to make. Treehugger even quoted SNEWS, which was tougher on SIGG, and then wimped out in the end. So you're telling me that all pregnant moms and and little beings are perfectly safe sucking on SIGG bottles knowing that we don't know whether they leach below 2 PPB (because it has never been tested) , knowing that we do know (now) they contain BPA in the lining, that we do not know what the ingredients are in the new secret eco-care liner and knowing that Canada, States and Cities have taken the precautionary approach and have banned BPA products for under age 3 because for safety concerns? That's interesting that an entire Country bans BPA due to safety concerns while Lloyd Alter (who's out of Canada) concludes SIGG is safe. WOW.
To continue to make the claim of safety based on such little fact is irresponsible. We don't have the facts in about the safety of BPA since that is ongoing as we speak. We do know that BPA in very small amounts, PPT, is causing fetal and developmental damage. Scientists are working on this now. It is inconclusive for humans, (for some though very conclusive),but not looking good, which is why bans are continuing for precautionary reasons. This is why it is shocking that Lloyd Alter continues to say SIGG is safe.
But media attention is good, right? Even negative media attention is better than no attention at all. Unfortunately it rewards the liars, in this case SIGG. And that stinks.
And still no one is talking about the leaching of aluminum. The OKO Testing done in 2004 showed SIGG leaching aluminum. (you can find it on SIGG's competitor's site, Laken, but conveniently omitted from their own website.) But SIGG on their website says "ensure 0.0% leaching" of aluminum. Hmm, not adding up here either. Let's also be clear about these results. The level of testing was done at standards that are acceptable for drinking water purposes. These levels are high, otherwise most public water systems would fail. SIGG did leach aluminum but below these standards. OKO gave a very good rating for any water bottle that came in below these standards but very good does not mean no leaching. (this is deja vu, right?) This is the same BPA scenario all over again. SIGG then went out of their way to test stainless steel bottles so they could post it on their website to convince their customers of the dangers of stainless steel.
Let's face it, SIGG has cashed in on the water bottle craze using sleazy big corporate marketing tactics. It reminds me of Monsanto claiming on their website how happy their Indian farmers are using their GMO seeds back in 2002 and 2006 but omitting the recent update that these farmers are now committing suicide in the hundreds due to farming debt. Oops, sorry, minor detail omitted.
I've blogged in depth about SIGG and BPA before (see headlines on the right of this blog), and also about SIGG's "greenness". My first blog was over year ago when I didn't buy the BPA-free claim SIGG and Treehugger were making. I've said it before and I'll say it again...consumers have the right to know the ingredients of the products they purchase. Hiding behind "it's a proprietary secret" is deceptive, not transparent and definitely not real "green". Is this where I get to say "I told you so?"
SIGG led us to believe that SIGG was "BPA-Free". They refused to answer direct questions about the ingredients of their lining. They didn't directly lie but they sure danced around in order to satisfy the majority. This is the height of corporate deception. They have confessed that their old lining had BPA. They now claim their new eco-care liner is BPA-Free. Their certifications and testing are on their website and are pretty impressive. I am glad to see they meet Japan's standards since they are the highest in the world. SIGG's new lining sounds legitimately free of BPA and many other nasties. BUT Sigg's new lining is a proprietary secret. Doesn't this take us back to where we were before? That's like the shampoo bottles that list all the ingredients they don't have and then you look on the back only to find the word fragrance.
So my new questions for SIGG (are you may borrow for sure) are:
What are the ingredients in the new lining? (there might be a new gender bender that I would want to know about)
Will you be selling this wonderful new lining formula (and make millions to offset your development research) to the canned food industry so we may all benefit, including babies needing safe formula cans?
What long-term studies have been done on the new formula ingredient to insure safety?
May we have full access to these studies?
If a company can not answer these questions in an honest way, (it's okay to say I don't know) they don't deserve to be considered a "green" company. This is , in my opinion, the largest green washing, eco-deceptive, big business scam event ever. Shame on SIGG for giving false pretense to parents, pregnant mothers, children and the rest with regard to their lining and BPA.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Stainless Steel Ice Cube Trays - Tips for Making Ice
Beautiful clear day, windy,cool. Only slight brown horizon.
Stainless steel ice cube trays were the original metal ice cube tray invented over 75 years ago in 1933 by Guy Tinkham. (yes they had refrigerators back then, even though people still used block ice cut from the winter, hence the name "ice box") The 1933 ice cube tray model was thin enough to flex causing the dividers to crack and dislodge the ice. There definitely is a knack needed for getting the whole cube in the end; hence the tips for making ice later. But safe to say - the crack is back.
It seems the aluminum tray with the lever, the one some of us fondly remember, didn't appear until 1950, even though aluminum was widely used for cookware. Pulling the lever seemed to be an improvement over having to flex a cold tray and hoping for the best. The aluminum ice cube tray is still around but may be going out of favor with the concern for leaching aluminum.
.jpg)
Aluminum toxicity is of concern for some and even the American Academy of Pediatrics has a policy statement about it. Aluminum is not an essential trace mineral and can be excreted by the kidneys but the concern is that the brain has a tough time excreting it. The half life appears to be 7 years for the brain. So a lot of concerned parents are looking for safe ice cube trays, not only for their ice, but for purees and baby food.
And so here we are witnessing the come back kid - the stainless steel ice cube tray. It's not plastic or aluminum, or silicon, which is suppose to be safe (but then they add all sorts of colors and other stuff). Stainless steel has a high recycled content (minimum50%) and can easily be recycled again (after the car drives over it?) and so is considered a more earth friendly alternative. Food grade Stainless does not leach any highly toxic minerals (at least tested in parts per million) and may leach some iron or nickel, both of which are essential in our diet (if you don't want nickel, here's a huge list of foods to avoid)
In case you are new to using a metal ice cube tray, here are some tips for making ice:
1 - Do not over flow the tray with water as this makes cracking and releasing the ice cubes more difficult.
2 - When the ice is ready, the "slow method" takes, well a little bit more time. Just pull the tray out and set it on the counter for 5 minutes. This allows a little melting so the cubes will release in more cube like fashion. And probably will extend the life of the lever.
3 - The "quickie" is to run the tray, top and bottom, under water to, again, melt the contact between the metal and ice.
4 - After either method, anchor the tray with one hand (might need a tea towel if it is cold) and gently pull up the lever enough to crack the cubes and dislodge the ice. Both of these methods should result in more whole cubes.
5 - For more of a crushed ice result, don't bother with the slow or quickie method. Just pull the lever and crush.
6 - What ever method you used, you may gently shake or wiggle the divider out of the tray; most of the ice remains in the tray.
7 - If you don't use all of the ice, just put the tray back in the freezer and grab it as needed. Wash and store the divider until you make ice again.
I'm not sure what is used to hold the ice in automatic ice makers inside refrigerators. Is it plastic or metal? And what kind? Maybe that's why there seems to be a growing trend, especially among moms, toward the stainless steel ice cube tray.
See what I mean? The crack is back.
Stainless steel ice cube trays were the original metal ice cube tray invented over 75 years ago in 1933 by Guy Tinkham. (yes they had refrigerators back then, even though people still used block ice cut from the winter, hence the name "ice box") The 1933 ice cube tray model was thin enough to flex causing the dividers to crack and dislodge the ice. There definitely is a knack needed for getting the whole cube in the end; hence the tips for making ice later. But safe to say - the crack is back.
It seems the aluminum tray with the lever, the one some of us fondly remember, didn't appear until 1950, even though aluminum was widely used for cookware. Pulling the lever seemed to be an improvement over having to flex a cold tray and hoping for the best. The aluminum ice cube tray is still around but may be going out of favor with the concern for leaching aluminum.
.jpg)
Aluminum toxicity is of concern for some and even the American Academy of Pediatrics has a policy statement about it. Aluminum is not an essential trace mineral and can be excreted by the kidneys but the concern is that the brain has a tough time excreting it. The half life appears to be 7 years for the brain. So a lot of concerned parents are looking for safe ice cube trays, not only for their ice, but for purees and baby food.
And so here we are witnessing the come back kid - the stainless steel ice cube tray. It's not plastic or aluminum, or silicon, which is suppose to be safe (but then they add all sorts of colors and other stuff). Stainless steel has a high recycled content (minimum50%) and can easily be recycled again (after the car drives over it?) and so is considered a more earth friendly alternative. Food grade Stainless does not leach any highly toxic minerals (at least tested in parts per million) and may leach some iron or nickel, both of which are essential in our diet (if you don't want nickel, here's a huge list of foods to avoid)
In case you are new to using a metal ice cube tray, here are some tips for making ice:
1 - Do not over flow the tray with water as this makes cracking and releasing the ice cubes more difficult.
2 - When the ice is ready, the "slow method" takes, well a little bit more time. Just pull the tray out and set it on the counter for 5 minutes. This allows a little melting so the cubes will release in more cube like fashion. And probably will extend the life of the lever.
3 - The "quickie" is to run the tray, top and bottom, under water to, again, melt the contact between the metal and ice.
4 - After either method, anchor the tray with one hand (might need a tea towel if it is cold) and gently pull up the lever enough to crack the cubes and dislodge the ice. Both of these methods should result in more whole cubes.
5 - For more of a crushed ice result, don't bother with the slow or quickie method. Just pull the lever and crush.
6 - What ever method you used, you may gently shake or wiggle the divider out of the tray; most of the ice remains in the tray.
7 - If you don't use all of the ice, just put the tray back in the freezer and grab it as needed. Wash and store the divider until you make ice again.
I'm not sure what is used to hold the ice in automatic ice makers inside refrigerators. Is it plastic or metal? And what kind? Maybe that's why there seems to be a growing trend, especially among moms, toward the stainless steel ice cube tray.
See what I mean? The crack is back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)