Environmental Health Archive

I just returned my AVENT bottles and bottle warmer which included an AVENT bottle to Toys R Us (which is the same company I bought them from, just not the same store). I received a full refund without a receipt in the form of store credit. At first they were reluctant to take them but if you arm yourself with patience and information they will likely take all BPA items back despite there not being an official recall in the US.

I’m really happy about this because I needed to buy more bottles for Sophia since she isn’t taking a sippy cup at daycare. I guess today they tried a bunch of different bottles with her. In their note they sent home with Kurt it said, “Sophia seems to like the older Gerber nipple with three holes in the top of it. She’s so specific. ” I think that’s their way of saying, “She’s a fussy little shit and that’s the only one that would plug her hole!” I couldn’t find what they specified because it’s older. The closest I came was a tan classic Evenflo stage three nipple. I hope it’s close enough.

Actually I’ve been told she did really well for her second day. She did look a lot better than yesterday when she came home. In their notes to us they wrote, “Sophia did really well! She liked it when I blew the bubbles The bumpy ball she found interesting. She did really good! She loves her blanket and we keep it with her everywhere!”

** Update 4 June 2008 **
One of the links that have brought people to this post stats that their Babies R Us store insisted their bottles be complete including nipple. My local store accepted them incomplete. I did however place disks in them to make them look complete. I had already tossed all the nipples I bought because I was using the AVENT sippy cup tops. By the way AVENT sippy cups don’t have BPA, so I still use those.

** Update 20 June 2008 **
I guess Babies R Us isn’t doing store credit refunds anymore. They’re only doing bpa bottle for non-bpa bottle exchanges. This was confirmed by a comment left on the Seattle Mom Blogs by Marla.

** Update 23 June 2008 **
There are a bunch of different message boards linking to this post and each one of them has someone saying to make sure to call your local store before going because not all stores are doing returns. I’d like to mention that it’s a lot easier for the stores to say no when you’re not standing in front of them and other potential customers. It’s better for PR to do some sort of exchange if a customer standing in front of them is concerned about chemicals in their babies bottles. With that in mind, if you live close enough and have some time - JUST GO TO THE STORE WITH YOUR BOTTLES. It might be a long wait while they hem and haw about it, and they may in fact say no, but I bet you’ll get better results if you JUST GO IN PERSON.

I’ve only seen this discussed on Canadian blogs where BPA has been banned, but I just saw this craigslist posting from atlanta. It’s not exatly a reliable source, but I have hopes that it’s true and valid for US stores.

Toys R Us is giving refunds on all bottles containing BPA. They are not widely advertising this fact, though it has been discussed on a few blog sites.

The store manager assured me that all stores are taking part in this recall. You may want to call your store to verify.

I have since returned my bottles. My store accepted the (used) bottles without reciept.

They are refunding for these brands and possibly others:
Handicraft/Dr. Browns
Avent
Playtex
Evenflo
Gerber

A kind soul gave me this tip, so I’m paying it forward.

I bought AVENT bottles because the classes I took at the hospital strongly suggested that breastfeeding mom’s should use the AVENT nipples when bottle feeding because those nipples force the baby to suck in the same manner as if they were breastfeeding. This way there wouldn’t be very much confusion going between the two.

I’m generally leery of plastics to begin with. I’ve been systematically fazing out our plastic storage containers for glass. So a few weeks ago when I started seeing news reports about bisphenol-a (BPA) in baby bottles I blew it off as a rehash of the old story years ago about a girl that discovered di(ethylhexyl)adepate (DEHA) was found in plastic wrap and wanted to know the affect of microwaving it. I don’t own a microwave, but I know that acidic foods like tomato sauce will eat away at plastics as it’s microwaved, that alone is enough to make me not want to do it. Plastic ain’t natural ergo plastic deposits, no-matter the quantity, in my food makes me unhappy.

I did a preliminary search on BPA (yeah I know I just said I blew it off, that just means as I searched I wasn’t worried) and came across a blog dedicated to it. It seemed fanatical and all of the bad brands seemed to be the most common big time brand name ones while the good brands were ones I had never heard of and couldn’t find in stores. Surely, a hospital wouldn’t recommend a brand that was unsafe. Granted they only specified using ADVENT nipples not bottles, and classes I took were almost a year ago. Also, things change constantly. I have no idea how long BPA has been in the news. I tried to learn as much about baby stuff as I could before Sophia arrived, but because I intended to breastfeed types of bottles never made it to the top of the list. And there are too many products and recalls to keep up.

BPA showed up on the local news one night and then I came across this article:

April 22, 2008 By TARA PARKER-POPE - A Hard Plastic Is Raising Hard Questions

While most of the focus is on products for children, including clear plastic bottles and canned infant formula, the chemical is also used in food-storage containers, some clear plastic pitchers used for filtered water, refillable water bottles and the lining of soft-drink and food cans.

Holy crap it’s in can food too?!

Rat pups exposed to BPA, through injection or food, showed changes in mammary and prostate tissue, suggesting a potential cancer risk. In some tests of female mice, exposure appeared to accelerate puberty.

I always chalked up the accelerated puberty in humans to hormones in meats, but it could be this too.

The main concern is the possible risk to infants and pregnant women, although Canada has begun a study to monitor BPA exposure among about 5,000 people to assess any danger to adults.

Really Canada has just *begun* a study to monitor BPA? Funny because an article in the Kansas City Star that came out on the same day said that Canada BANNED PBA on the 18th of April.

But back to the NYTimes,

Virtually every canned product, even those labeled organic, has a liner with BPA.

That’s really scary.

Many of us put our faith in the FDA to keep the bad stuff of the shelves. The FDA’s stance as four days before Canada banned BPA was that they were going to think about it, but don’t stop using it until further notice – unless of course you’re concerned then go ahead and find something that doesn’t contain BPA. Gee thanks. You’re such a big help.

April 19, 2008 By Lyndsey Layton and Christopher Lee - Canada Bans BPA From Baby Bottles

“We have immediately taken action on bisphenol A because we believe it is our responsibility to ensure families, Canadians and our environment are not exposed to a potentially harmful chemical,” Tony Clement, the minister of health, said in a statement.

Clement said the action was based on a review of 150 worldwide studies. “It’s pretty clear that the highest risk is for newborns and young infants,” he said in a telephone interview.

150 worldwide studies seems like a legitimate basis.

The debate over BPA, which has simmered for a decade, grew intense this week after the National Toxicology Program, an office within the National Institutes of Health, acknowledged in a draft report that the chemical might cause cancer and other serious disorders. The chemical mimics estrogen in the human body, scientists say.

Although the office does not regulate BPA, its findings are used by other federal agencies such as the FDA and the Environmental Protection Agency, which set safe exposure limits for chemicals.

On April 30, 2008 By Lyndsey Layton - Senators Propose Ban on Chemical in Plastics

This month, the National Toxicology Program, part of the National Institutes of Health, was the first federal agency to raise concerns about the effect of the chemical on fetuses, infants and children. “The report earlier this month was an eye-opener,” Schumer said. “Now we want to get one final, indisputable ruling, once and for all, on the effects of BPA on adults, and pregnant women in particular.”

But the chemical industry and the agencies that regulate the use of BPA, the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, have deemed the chemical safe.

The FDA’s handling of BPA is being investigated by the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Chairman John D. Dingell (D-Mich.) said he is concerned that the FDA based its safety rating on two studies, both funded by the chemical industry. More than 100 studies performed by government scientists and university laboratories have found health concerns associated with BPA; the industry-funded studies say it is safe.

May 2, 2008 By Susan DeFord - Nutrition Program Spurns Bottles, Cans With Chemical

Talks about the health department of Howard County Maryland not waiting for the federal government to take action.

Beilenson said there is “mounting evidence” that BPA exposure may be linked to conditions including cancer, diabetes and hyperactivity, as well as early onset of puberty, because it mimics the effects of the hormone estrogen. Last month, Canada banned the chemical’s use in baby bottles.

I find it odd that a chemical that’s been widely used in food cans and food storage containers since the 1950’s is suddenly hitting the news with such force. I question when politicians get behind a popular movement even if scientists don’t seem to support it, especially when elections are coming up *ahem* Clinton. But with my already natural tendency to try to keep things natural I’d rather play it safe and get rid of the BPA plastics that are used for food storage. Making my gut feeling stronger, a friend sent me a link to CNNMONEY…

May 14, 2008 - Former FDA Official Says FDA Approval Shouldn’t Bar Lawsuits

Food and drug companies, along with the FDA, have advocated before the Supreme Court a legal doctrine that would bar states and consumers from suing companies for products that have received FDA approval. This legal doctrine is known as “preemption,” and has gained favor during the Bush administration.

House Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D- Calif., said in an opening statement that preemption would take away “one of the most powerful incentives for safety - the threat of liability.”

This has nothing and everything to do with BPA.

American Chemistry Council insists that bisphenol A is safe and urges us to have faith in the underfunded FDA.

While consumers should have confidence in the safety of these products, we have called on the US Food and Drug Administration, as the premier authority on food safety in the US, to re-review the safety of bisphenol A for additional reassurance to the public on the safety of consumer products.

Yeah, uumm I don’t think so! I’m going to make my move away from plastics in my food containers a bit faster. That includes a move to less canned food!

Info on BPA and BPA-free products

In the spirit of Earth Day many newspapers gave earth friendly tips and wrote earth friendly articles on being friendly to the earth. The paper I read most often was no exception. If there’s a bandwagon all media covers the same crap, but because they’re all owned by corporations that are owned by corporations funded by ads of corporations they can’t won’t actually give anyone useful information. It’s like each day they give you a fresh new list of things to be concerned about and then say, “Do your own damned research”. I’m not asking that they bash on certain products - just hand us a freakin’ bone and let us know about the good products damn it!

The Everett Herald wrote an article in which the title questions the “greenness” of our household products. The title actually ends in a question mark, which is a very popular trend these days. I automatically flag it as a sign of poor journalism. Not that I’m any kind of journalist, but I read articles often and I know shit when I see it. Ending a title in a question mark is a cheap way of appearing to have a new critical view of the topic at hand. I can’t emphasize enough how cheap it is. It’s like seeking quality at Wal Mart.

In this article the writer does point out that,

Earlier this year, prominent environmental group the Sierra Club announced that, starting in April, it would lend its name and label to Clorox’s Green Works products line. The environmental group’s endorsement did not come without controversy. The Sierra Club will receive an undisclosed fee, which is based partly on product sales, for its endorsement.

What what what? Clorox isn’t environmentally friendly? - OHMYGOD you’re kidding! I thought it was like lemon juice. I always drink the stuff. Oh give me a break. Who really believed that Clorox Green Works was really “green” just cause it’s in the name?

Clorox, which says its green products work as well as its traditional cleaning goods, markets its new line as 99 percent natural.

Yeah, arsenic is natural too! I’m just sayin’.

Last November, TerraChoice, an environmental marketing group, released findings on “greenwashing” — the practice of misleading consumers about the environmental benefits of a product or service. The group reviewed 1,018 products and found all but one made false or misleading green claims.

Great, which ones are the friendliest? - Nobody says. Which one is the honest one? Give me the damn answer already! I went to the TerraChoice website and didn’t see these “released findings”. I went to their blog which conveniently starts last December not November, so no info there. The article in the Herald has a picture of four products, Mrs. Meyers Clean Day lavender scent surface scrub, Seventh Generation natural citrus scent kitchen cleaner, Country Save biodegradable all-purpose cleaner and Clorox Green Works natural toilet bowl cleaner. We can cross out the Clorox - is one of the other three the honest one? Are any of them?

TerraChoice works for EcoLogo, a government eco-labeling program based in Canada.

I went to the EcoLogo website and I’ve NEVER heard of the cleaning products they list, and I’m familiar with some relatively obscure cleaning products. Maybe they’re only available in Canada.

One of the more recent blog entries on the TerraChoice website mentions the launch of greenyour.com, which looks like a good site. It doesn’t just promote all sorts of products but also gives info on making your own household cleaners - just for example. Unfortunately, they don’t let you know which green product was the most honest and they list BioKleen as a good product. BioKleen uses GSE which makes my ass twitch.

I’ve wanted to get rid of my dependency on plastic bags, but didn’t really know what to use in their place. Well I’m starting to get the hang of it now. I started by buying a couple wet bags for Sophia. I put her dirty diapers in them when I’m out somewhere and no trash can is available or it’s not appropriate to toss the dirties in the can (i.e. the doctor’s office). I also use them for dirty/wet clothes. They’re great for swimming. Grocery stores are pushing their reusable bags now. I haven’t bought any, but it’s probably about time for that. And I just learned about Klutter Katchers from the Seattle Mom Blogs.

After the doctor told us that it sounded like Sophia had “colic”, which I’ve since discovered is an umbrella word used for all overly fussy babies, I started doing mega research to see what I could do to stop said overly fussiness in my baby. I found that totally cutting cow’s milk from my diet help in our case. We noticed the difference right away and it was like night and day. Sophia’s doctor congratulated me on finding the only food that has been found to have any connection with colic. Unfortunately I’m having a hard time staying away from all dairy. I’ve been able to get away with things like cheese cake and the occasional cup of hot chocolate but we went out to dinner a few days ago and I had Chile Relleno (there are many versions of this dish, but in this case it’s a poblano pepper stuffed with cheese). Things didn’t sit well with Sophia, so thankfully I also researched the gripe water suggestion of a commenter.

What is “gripe water”? If it really works, what’s in it that does the job? The brand the commenter mentioned was Baby’s Bliss, so I looked it up and found the ingredient list.

• Deionized Water
• Vegetable Glycerin
• Sodium Bicarbonate (15 mg)
• Organic Ginger Extract (5mg)
• Organic Fennel Extract (4 mg)
• Fructose
• Citrus Bioflavonoid Extract
• Citric Acid
• Grapefruit Seed Extract

Water, Glycerin (A byproduct of the soap making process usually used in cosmetics - Though I don’t usually see it in the things I consume I think it’s pretty harmless), Sodium Bicarbonate (Also known as baking soda), Ginger Extract (Something exotic to make you think it’s an ancient Chinese secret), Fennel Extract (Pleasant smell and flavor), Fructose (Just a teaspoon of sugar to make the medicine go down), Citrus Bioflavonoid Extract (Fancy way of saying pulp and rind of citrus fruits or vitamin C), Citric Acid (Something acidic to react with the aforementioned baking soda - think of the volcano experiments in high school science class with baking soda and vinegar), Grapefruit Seed Extract (A preservative that leaves me with a less than fuzzy feeling).

When I read Sodium Bicarbonate on the ingredient list I thought of the taste of baking soda and it reminded me of the couple of times I used Alka-Seltzer. You know, “plop plop fizz fizz, oh what a relief it is”, Alka-Seltzer. I looked up the ingredients for Alka-Seltzer and sure enough Sodium Bicarbonate and Citric Acid appeared on the list. Gripe water is just baby-seltzer. The big difference between the two is that Alka-Seltzer also contains Aspirin, so don’t think you can get away cheap by using the adult version on your baby. The other difference is that the baby version already has the water added and therefore doesn’t have the fun bubbly fizz that’s created when the baking soda initially combines with an acid (I’m guessing the extra fizz wouldn’t do well with a baby’s immature system), but the babies do get sugar (hardly seems fair).

Because I don’t care to use anything with Grapefruit Seed Extract and Baby Bliss recently had a recall on their apple flavor gripe water I sought out a different brand. We went with Wellements Gripe Water. Here is the ingredient list:

• Agave fructose
• Citric Acid
• Chamomile (flower)
• Ginger extract (root)
• Fennel extract (seed)
• Glycerin
• Sodium Bicarbonate
• Purified water

Agave fructose (Sugar derived from the agave plant - Agave is a succulent plant probably best known for making tequila), Citric acid (The acid that will spark the following sodium bicarbonate), Chamomile (Known for its general soothing properties in tea), Ginger extract (Exotic stuff), Fennel extract (Pleasantly smelly stuff - I call Sophia “Fennel Face” after giving her a dose), Glycerin, Sodium Bicarbonate, and water.

In case you’re not part of the “dirty hippy vegan” club as Kurt calls it, GSE or Grapefruit Seed Extract is this wildly popular “natural” do it all medication/supplement, household cleaner, fruit and vegetable wash, and food and cosmetic preservative. Does that sound odd and maybe a little scary to anyone else?

I discovered GSE though researching parrot diet and nutrition. One thing that kept coming up in bird forums, books, and web sites was using GSE for sprouting to reduce risk of mold and for cleaning their cage because birds are very sensitive to the chemical products many use. I’ve noticed GSE all over the place since my initial search, and because of what I’ve found out about it, that makes me twitch. Some brands of GSE apparently are truly Grapefruit Seed Extract, and they do none of the above listed tasks any better than water. Other brands however, are not what they seem. I’m not saying that ingesting them will kill or maim. It might not even make people sick if used in the diluted amounts recommended by manufacturers as a vegetable wash, but if your goal is to reduce your exposure to chemicals, I’m afraid you may have been duped. Just to be on the safe side I would not add GSE to pet foods, take it as a pregnant woman nor feed it to an infant, but that’s just me.

From the National Center for Biotechnology Information’s site, 1999 tests that revealed preservatives:

Aspects of the antimicrobial efficacy of grapefruit seed extract and its relation to preservative substances contained.

Institute of Pharmacy, Ernst Moritz Arndt University, Greifswald, Germany.

The antimicrobial efficacy as well as the content of preservative agents of six commercially available grapefruit seed extracts were examined. Five of the six extracts showed a high growth inhibiting activity against the test germs Bacillus subtilis SBUG 14, Micrococcus flavus SBUG 16, Staphylococcus aureus SBUG 11, Serratia marcescens SBUG 9, Escherichia coli SBUG 17, Proteus mirabilis SBUG 47, and Candida maltosa SBUG 700. In all of the antimicrobial active grapefruit seed extracts, the preservative benzethonium chloride was detected by thin layer chromatography. Additionally, three extracts contained the preserving substances triclosan and methyl parabene. In only one of the grapefruit seed extracts tested no preservative agent was found. However, with this extract as well as with several self-made extracts from seed and juiceless pulp of grapefruits (Citrus paradisi) no antimicrobial activity could be detected (standard serial broth dilution assay, agar diffusion test). Thus, it is concluded that the potent as well as nearly universal antimicrobial activity being attributed to grapefruit seed extract is merely due to the synthetic preservative agents contained within. Natural products with antimicrobial activity do not appear to be present.

From the United States Department of Agriculture’s site (bold text is my emphasis):

Identification of Benzalkonium Chloride in Commercial Grapefruit Seed Extracts

Submitted to: Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Date: August 12, 2005
Citation: Takeoka, G.R., Dao, L.T., Wong, R.Y., Harden, L.A. 2005. Identification of Benzalkonium Chloride in Commercial Grapefruit Seed Extracts. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 53:7630-7636.

“In this study we identified a new synthetic adulterant, benzalkonium chloride, in commercial GSE samples. This ingredient is a synthetic antimicrobial agent that is widely used in cleaning and disinfection agents. The presence of benzalkonium chloride in a commercial product designated for internal and external use by humans is troubling in light of its toxicity and allergenicity.”

From the Food and Drug Administration’s site (bold text is my emphasis):

Analysis and Evaluation of Preventive Control Measures for the Control and
Reduction/Elimination of Microbial Hazards on Fresh and Fresh-Cut Produce

Chapter VI

Microbiological Safety of Controlled and Modified Atmosphere Packaging of Fresh and Fresh-Cut Produce

“Antimicrobial compounds have also been used with traditional films such as low-density polyethylene (LDPE); for example, the fungicide Imazalil (IM) and the antimicrobial grapefruit seed extract (GFSE) have recently been used with bell peppers and lettuce, respectively (Miller and others 1984; Han 2000)…”

“…Lee and others (1998) investigated the ability of GFSE with LDPE films to inhibit growth of E. coli, Staphylocuccus aureus, molds, yeasts, and lactic acid bacteria, using the plate disk test. Films containing 1.0% GFSE in LDPE film inhibited E. coli and S. aureus as demonstrated by a clear zone; however, molds, yeasts and lactic acid bacteria were unaffected…”

“…Grapefruit seed extract is reported to be inhibitory to a number of human pathogens. There has been evidence, however, that any antibacterial activity of commercial preparations is due to the various preservative agents (triclosan, methyl parabene, benzethonium chloride) contained within the product. Researchers have found that products not containing any preservatives and several self-made preparations had no antimicrobial activity (Woedtke and others 1999). In the aforementioned study by Lee and others (1998), the composition of the GFSE incorporated in the film was not discussed or examined. It is obvious that if pure GFSE is to be used, its antimicrobial properties will have to be fully investigated. If the active antimicrobial ingredients in commercial GFSE preparations are preserving agents, they may be better targets for investigation.”

From the National Center for Biotechnology Information’s site, 2006 tests that again revealed preservatives:

Development and validation of an HPLC/UV/MS method for simultaneous determination of 18 preservatives in grapefruit seed extract.

Institute of Pharmacy, University of Innsbruck, Innrain 52, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria. markus.ganzera@uibk.ac.at

Grapefruit seed extracts are used in cosmetics, food supplements, and pesticides because of their antimicrobial properties, but suspicions about the true nature of the active compounds arose when synthetic disinfectants such as benzethonium or benzalkonium chloride were found in commercial products. The HPLC method presented herein allows the quality assessment (qualitative and quantitative) of these products for the first time. On the basis of a standard mixture of 18 preservatives most relevant for food and grapefruit products, a method was developed allowing the baseline separation of all compounds within 40 min. Optimum results were obtained with a C-8 stationary phase and a solvent system comprising aqueous trifluoroacetic acid, acetonitrile, and 2-propanol. The assay was fully validated and shown to be sensitive (LOD < or= 12.1 ng on-column), accurate (recovery rates > or = 96.1%), repeatable (sigma(rel) < or = 3.5%), precise (intra-day variation < or = 4.5%, interday variation < or = 4.1%), and rugged. Without any modifications the method could be adopted for LC-MS experiments, where the compounds of interest were directly assignable in positive ESI mode. The quantitative results of several products for ecofarming confirmed previous studies, as seven out of nine specimens were adulterated with preservatives in varying composition. The samples either contained benzethonium chloride (2.5-176.9 mg/mL) or benzalkonium chloride (138.2-236.3 mg/mL), together with smaller amounts of 4-hydroxybenzoic acid esters, benzoic acid, and salicylic acid.

In case you didn’t notice, in my apparently shocking baby squeezins diaper post, the great cloth verses disposable diaper war is over and Kurt won out. The issues I brought up in favor of cloth diapers were less diaper rash, faster potty training, and the use of Sodium polyacrylate in disposables. Kurt wanted the ease diapering that comes with disposables and he was thoroughly disgusted with the idea of washing dirty diapers in the washing machine.

The non-issues were:

Environmental - I’m not at all convinced that cloth is anymore environmentally friendly than disposables. Yes, you can use it repeatedly for multiple children but it still has to be manufactured, often using bleached cotton. Polyesters are also used in newer brands of cloth diapers to wick the wetness away from baby, and water and detergent is consumed to wash them. No matter what brand is used detergents are not as friendly to the environment and soap, but soap cannot be used on diapers as it reduces absorbency because it leaves a film that overtime can also cause odors to linger. Cloth diapers also require a cover – usually plastic.

Disposable diapers, obviously manufactured, use wood pulp from trees specifically grown for diaper purposes. So toss aside the deforestation argument. They have a plastic outer layer and collect in landfills. But landfills are changing and they aren’t all as evil as they once were.

Waste Management to tap landfill methane
Garbage hauler to spend $400 million to turn greenhouse gas into power
updated 8:26 a.m. PT, Wed., June. 27, 2007

Waste Management Inc., the nation’s largest garbage hauler and landfill operator, plans to spend roughly $400 million over the next five years building facilities at 60 landfills to convert methane gas to electricity, its most ambitious renewable energy project to date.

Financial – We are not in a financially strapped type of situation. If we were, I would not have been looking at Fuzzi Bunz and Kissaluvs as my main cloth diapering choices. While I did want to do cloth diapers, I also wanted it to be just as easy to change as disposables. For the true economic diapering, the prefold cloth diapers are the award winners. They cost about $1.50 to $2.50 depending on size and fabric type. About 36 diapers and 6 to 8 pairs of plastic pants in three sizes and you’re pretty much all set. Unfortunately, they leak on a much more regular basis than then disposable “blow out”. Depending on how I ultimately went about things my totals would have been somewhere between $750 and $950 and that doesn’t include cloth wipes, and washable dirty diaper bags. The brand of disposables that we chose would cost about $1100 over the course of two and a half years ($29.99 for a box of 234 – rounds up to thirteen cents a diaper, twelve diapers a day for two and a half years). We don’t use twelve a day and the bigger she gets the fewer she uses per day. Fewer diapers come in the box as she goes up in size though so it may even out my padded number.

The Issues I had for cloth/against disposable diapers:

Faster potty training – I don’t have any valid evidence that cloth diapers would lead to faster potty training, but because cloth doesn’t have the wetness wicking powers that the super absorbent disposable diapers do I added faster potty training to my list of benefits with the assumption that most babies wouldn’t want to sit in their own filth. I have heard of many toddlers that could really care less if their pants are wet and/or poopy and will continue happily playing until someone tells them they stink and wrestles them to the ground for a diaper change, so going cloth might simply be adding more work without any benefit in that arena. I hope that my kiddo isn’t one of those.

Diaper rash – Cloth or disposable, no matter how a baby is diapered they’re going to get diaper rash sometime during their diapered years simply because they’re in a diaper. I know this, and I have not found a single piece of credible information that can say for certain that one type of diaper will without a doubt cause fewer rashes on my baby. I was just hoping that with cloth, maybe we would have less rash problems than with disposable. Based on my scouring of the internet I’ve found that the best ways to avoid diaper rash aside from letting the little one run around nekkid (it is good to let them air out a bit, but I prefer not to clean urine and feces off the couch, floor, etc.) is to change her right after she goes. This is the problem I have because there are times that she lets out one more little fart. It’s so little it hardly justifies another change regardless of the type of diaper. The other thing is nighttime. She sleeps for four hours at a time and I’m not about to wake her up to do a diaper check every hour just to make sure it’s dry. At least in disposables it’s wicked away from her skin.

Many sites say that if cloth diapers are used that it’s best to use a cover made of a breathable material and not plastic to “let air circulate”. That’s fine, there are also waterproof pants that are made of “pul” (polyurethane laminate) that are very popular in the cloth diapering community. Seems odd to me to have a community based on the way one diapers their baby but oh well. I also think it’s funny that pul seems to be regarded as a better choice than plastic when both are waterproof and I don’t think either is a breathable material. There are also wool covers, but that seems like it would be too bulky for daytime use, and too hot for indoor summertime use.

Sodium polyacrylate - Up to this point, all issues and non-issues either come to a draw or lean a little more towards the disposable diaper. The one thing that hands down leans towards cloth is the fact that ALL disposable diapers use sodium polyacrylate for super absorbency. sodium polyacrylate is the same stuff that causes Toxic Shock Syndrome in women that wear tampons and don’t change them frequently enough. As I’ve said before, I know there is a difference between the internal use of tampons and the external use of diapers. I have not found incidents where a baby has died or become sick due to the sodium polycrylate in disposable diapers. I know it’s an unrealistic fear, but I still don’t like the idea of sodium polyacrylate in my baby’s diapers. So why are we using disposable diapers despite my fear? Number one, because I know it’s an unrealistic fear and number two, because Kurt said, “I want you to be able to spend time with your daughter instead of cleaning diapers all the time.” He really hits below the belt doesn’t he?

So we are using Costco’s Kirkland brand diapers and their wipes. We went with a store brand diaper not because it’s cheaper but because they don’t add all the dyes and perfumes. I’m really happy with their wipes too because they’re thick, made with cotton, and alcohol-free.

We did use cloth wipes for the first month because in the class we took about newborn care said not to use commercial wipes for the first month. They said that for the first month that the baby’s skin is adjusting to the new waterless environment and to simply use a damp cloth for wiping. I’ve heard that it’s good to go back to damp cloth wipes during diaper rashes as well.

A couple good links for further diaper debate reading…
Among the Earth Baby Set, Disposable Diapers Are Back, By MICHAEL SPECTER, Published: October 23, 1992.
Revisiting the Diaper Debate

I’ve seen this at Babies “R” Us and today I just saw it today at another store. My first thought goes to the name - I know what kind of liquids come from a baby nursery and I want nothing to do with any of them much less buy some of it bottled. My next thought is other than for convenience if your camping or something like that - why the hell are we buying bottled water? We already have to pay for tap. Just use that. It’s the same stuff I promise. Unless you live in a third world country or came from the same town in Alaska that I did where city water smelled like rotten eggs and actually had visibly brown sediment your tap water is at least as good as the bottled stuff.

Back to “Nursery Water”. At the store I saw this brand in it cost about 30 cents more than the surrounding brands. The marketing on the web site of this brand says, “Our water goes through an extensive process of steam distillation” - fancy huh? All that means is it’s distilled. Ok, distilled water usually costs more because something is actually being done to it, but is that really necessary? If you just boil water that will get rid of any bacteria. Distillation gets rid of bacteria and any minerals - What the fuck minuscule trace mineral are you afraid your baby might come into contact with? The marketing team at Nursery Water goes on to say, “We even add minerals such as magnesium, potassium, and calcium for a refreshing taste your child will love!” If you take just one second to read the nutrition label on the bottle none of those things even register as a percentage of the daily recommended allowance, so anything they add to it is so little it’s basically ZERO and they might as well not bother. It’s water - there is no fucking flavor! “Specially formulated to contain the ADA recommended level of added fluoride” The tap water in most communities has fluoride and so do some other bottled waters.

From the EPA:

Bottled water is not necessarily safer than your tap water. EPA sets standards for tap water provided by public water systems; the Food and Drug Administration sets bottled water standards based on EPA’s tap water standards.

From the FDA regarding formula preparation using tap water:

In most cases, it’s safe to mix formula using ordinary cold tap water that’s brought to a boil and then boiled for one minute and cooled. According to the World Health Organization, recent studies suggest that mixing powdered formula with water at a temperature of at least 70°C (158°F) creates a high probability that the formula will not contain the bacterium Enterobacter sakazakii—a rare cause of bloodstream and central nervous system infections. Remember that formula made with hot water needs to be cooled quickly to body temperature—about 98°F—if it is being fed to the baby immediately. If the formula is not being fed immediately, refrigerate it right away and keep refrigerated until feeding.

From the FDA regarding formula preparation using Bottled water:

If consumers use non-sterile bottled water for formula preparation, they should follow the same directions as described for tap water above. Some companies sell bottled water that is marketed for infants and for use in mixing with infant formula. This bottled water is required to meet general FDA quality requirements for bottled water. If the bottled water is not sterile, the label must also indicate this. Water that is marketed by the manufacturer as sterile and for infants must meet FDA’s general requirements for commercial sterility.

By the way - Nursery Water does not meet the FDA’s requirements for commercial sterility they even say so on the FAQ section of their website, which means that according to the FDA you’re supposed to boil it anyway.

Why am I picking on this brand? Because when I passed by it in the store today I thought it’s stupid to market water just for babies, so I wanted to know more because I apparently enjoy torturing myself. It’s just water, and that particular zero calorie beverage doesn’t need to be any different for a baby than for an adult. Then I saw on the label, “specially formulated for babies” and I flew into rant mode. I know that those words tickle the guilt-ridden heartstrings of new moms and I have something very blunt to say about that. I will make no apology for the following sentiments - anyone who purchases this brand of water because they truly believe that it’s not only better for their baby than tap water but because they also think water can actually be “specially formulated for babies”, is fucked in the head. It’s water you stupid drone! You are the reason there are isles and isles of useless crap in stores that prevent me from finding something as simple as a replacement for my broken vegetable steamer basket because there are apparently so many of you out there buying this useless shit that stores don’t bother with actual merchandise. I went to Target, Fred Meyer, and K-Mart looking for one and finally found it at Safeway. I bought two of them!

At Friday’s doctor appointment, Kurt thought it would be funny to step on the scale as the nurse weighed me. When I saw the scale swing up to 190, I immediately flipped around to see “what” was fucking with the scale. I’m now 173 pounds.

This appointment Kurt also decided it was time he start asking the doctor questions and try to get an authoritative figure on his side of our cloth vs. disposable diaper argument. The question he posed was, “Are there any medial concerns for using disposable diapers?” Ass – I know that millions of babies use disposable diapers with no medical problems other than diaper rash, which also happens to cloth diaper wearing babies (that’s pretty much what the doctor said regarding medical “issues” as well). I have already told Kurt I just want to avoid all the extra crap companies put into disposables and I’m hoping that *maybe* we’ll have less diaper rashes to deal with. That’s it! I will clean the diapers, he doesn’t have to touch ‘em other than to change the baby, and the diapers I’m looking at will be just as easy to change as disposables.

Here is the warning on Pampers disposable diapers,

Pampers Swaddlers contain these mild ingredients which are gentle to the skin: Petrolatum, Stearyl Alcohol, Aloe Extract.

If you notice a gel-like material on your baby’s skin, don’t be alarmed. This comes from the diaper padding and can easily be removed by wiping your baby’s skin with a cloth.

By the way Petrolatum is the same thing as petroleum jelly which I was just told in our newborn care class shouldn’t be used on baby’s skin. And that “gel-like” material is Sodium polyacrylate, which is the same stuff that causes Toxic Shock Syndrome in women that wear tampons and don’t change them frequently enough. – Yes, I realize there is a difference between wearing a diaper and inserting a tampon in the who-ha. I just don’t like the idea of my baby wearing diapers 24/7 with that stuff. I also realize that Sodium polyacrylate is used in “feminine napkins”, but I don’t know anyone that uses them 24/7 for two plus years. Generally they’re only used 24/7 for three to seven days out of the month.