FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Children's Wear: Lead Issues
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fashion-Incubator User Forum Forum Index -> CPSIA & Consumer Safety
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ProgressivePete
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 10:07 am    Post subject: Lead, Pthalates in kids' clothes Reply with quote

I see that the clothing industry wants to weaken this law. How predictable: Private profits at the expense of public health.

"Too expensive to test for it," they say. "Let us poison your children so we can make money, and you, poor parents, can pay the medical bills."

Don't let them weaken this law.
Back to top
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11090
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice try Pete. You'll have to do better than that if you intend to bait us. Try throwing a little intellectual rigor into your argument.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Guest






PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm with you Kathleen Wink
I make childrens clothing. I am confused about my role re: having fabric alone tested. They're lowering what's allowed? Isn't my fabric from Hancocks ALREADY tested? I dont use zippers, and rarely even buttons. It's all confusing. I will comply or change my business altogether but I wont pay for testing.
Thanks for all the accurate info you post here.
Back to top
adrienne
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 4:26 pm    Post subject: effect on small business Reply with quote

we are a very small boutique children's clothing manufacturer. all styles are made to order and lots are small. when this law was passed, all of our current product was already in the pipeline and we were unabe to adjust our pricing to accomodate the thousands of dollars worth of testing that were mandated without a sufficient grace period. the commission needs to understand the process of manufacturing and give manufacturers sufficient time to adjust their business models to accomodate these new, very expensive testing requirements. in a time when small businesses are already squeezed, this short timeline is a killer.

most of our garments consist of cotton dresses, shirts, with some wool, cashmere and other fibers. we use the same parts throughout the entire line and it would be much more cost effective to allow for testing of parts that are identical from style to style, rather than test the very same part hundreds of times for each sku.

springing this law with only a 90 day lead time is unfair to small business. i understand the need for strict laws governing toy manufacturers with small parts, and parts that may end up in children's mouths. but for the small boutique manufacturer, this is very difficult, and is further giving the big box, overseas manufacturers the advantage as these up-front costs are making the small boutique lines much more expensive per piece.
Back to top
Guest
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 1:04 pm    Post subject: What about crib bedding Reply with quote

Does anyone know how this law will effect crib bedding?
Back to top
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11090
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It affects crib bedding and mattresses, sheeting etc like everything else.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
emers719
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:01 pm    Post subject: 3rd party testing for lead Reply with quote

can you tell me how the garments will be tested at the facilities? We have unique one of kind garments that are ordered from our customers. we are told have to be tested but that they can be destroyed during testing so we might be exempt cause the item will be destroyed. Any comments on that?
Back to top
Aria
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As is my understanding, one of a kind items still have to be tested. My items are all custom-ordered, and since the fabrics aren't from the same bolts since I buy as needed, they all are supposed to be tested too. So I don't think an item being one-of-a-kind is going to cut it. I've heard nothing at all about exempting an item because it's the only one. This would solve my business's problem, though there are still MANY other problems with this law.
Back to top
Tracy D
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

At one point there were some comments from some official about one-of-a-kind items being exempt which would help me, too. But until I see something in writing, I'll hold off on the clothing end of my business.

Tracy
back to packing
Back to top
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11090
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is no exemption for ooak items. Testing destroys the product. The only hope for ooak getting an exemption rests here:
http://nationalbankruptcyday.com/archive/cpsia-cultural-genocide-another-win-for-congress/

Talk it up people, it's the only chance there is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11090
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Moving more entries...

Aria wrote:
Oh boy, I just had a thought. You know those lead vests and protectors used to cover body parts not being x-rayed to protect the body from unneeded radiation? Are these vests now going to be illegal to use for children? There is no way that these vests will pass the limits on products for use by children. But there's also no alternative to them unless the entire body will just have to be exposed to radiation.

Has anyone thought of this?


Izabela P wrote:
I hadn't thought of this specifically, but I have thought about school buses.


Erin Blanton wrote:
To the best of my knowledge, the CPSC does not have jurisdiction over medical devices or motor vehicles, so this law would not be applicable to those items.

http://www.cpsc.gov/BUSINFO/notcpsc.html


Guest wrote:
Those vests may be exempt as (1) FDA regulated and/or (2) inaccessibility. School buses won't be affected, either (DOT and/or NHTSA). Shoot, you can't even force them to put seat belts in them, how do you think someone is going to force them to take the lead out.


Kathleen F. wrote:
There's actually another use for those vests, by autistic people. These vests are invaluable therapy tools, there really is no replacement. The point for us is those vests are safe with plastic coating (uh oh, phthalates in there?) but they wouldn't pass testing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11090
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deleted here was yet another entry that drug up that old "not a durable good" argument. Sorry, I removed it so we don't continuing flogging this horse that should have died its miserable death long ago. More on the durable good thing is here:
http://fashion-incubator.com/archive/cpsia-denial-and-retailers-liability/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Guest






PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kathleen F. wrote:
Deleted here was yet another entry that drug up that old "not a durable good" argument. Sorry, I removed it so we don't continuing flogging this horse that should have died its miserable death long ago. More on the durable good thing is here:
http://fashion-incubator.com/archive/cpsia-denial-and-retailers-liability/


I really don't see why my post was wrong. I was commenting on a previous post about crib bedding. All I did was quote actual literature from the CPSIA website.
Back to top
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11090
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm saying this whole line of discussion has been brought up over and over and over and over and over and over and over ad nauseum and has been just as often discounted and refuted. The actual literature has been taken out of context and the reasons for which are discussed in that link I left.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11090
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Topics has been moved here.

Last edited by Kathleen F. on Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fashion-Incubator User Forum Forum Index -> CPSIA & Consumer Safety All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group