Strollerderby : Consumer Reports

Consumer Reports Responds to Sling-Hate Outrage

Madeline Holler — Fri, 01 May 2009 20:31:00 GMT

When Consumer Reports issued its warning against five products they thought should never find their way onto a baby registry, the response was one of outrage. Especially with regard to two issues: baby-wearing and co-sleeping.

The venerated watchdog group warned of serious injury and death from both, adding that co-sleeping products pose their own set of risks, but got hammered by co-sleeping baby-wearers. So in a follow-up post to all the angry comments, here's how they defended their findings.

On slings:

Slings can be very difficult for some people to tie, position and wear securely. Not all are intuitive and it’s easy for caregivers to get them wrong. If they do, the consequence can be dire. Many of the injuries associated with slings happen when the baby falls out of the carrier or bangs his head against a hard surface, say a door frame. There’s also a risk of positional asphyxia, which occurs when a baby is curled up in the sling and the head is pushed so far forward that the airway is closed off.

It may be possible to make sling carriers that don’t pose safety risks and that are not as easy to use incorrectly as many currently on the market. We’ll reserve our judgment until an adequate safety standard can be developed for these products.

And on co-sleeping:

... infants younger than eight months old who are placed to sleep in adult beds are as much as 40 times more likely to suffocate than if they are placed to sleep in cribs. Even when researchers provided a more conservative estimate by eliminating all deaths from parents physically overlying an infant and then doubled the estimated number of infants who may be put to sleep in adult beds, the risk of fatality from bed sharing was still 20 times greater than that of infants who sleep in cribs.

The short post (which was startlingly defensive, but OK) went on to recommend that parents put babies in a bare crib to sleep only. (Maybe I'm feelng a bit churlish, but I'd like to point out that the very next post is about the second-round of a massive crib recall).

As for carriers, they recommend only Baby Bjorn or Snugli style carriers. Which, as you can read in comments, just aren't right for people who prefer to sling.

Sling Babies At Your Own Risk

Dangerous Baby Gear: Why Can I Buy It?

Consumer Reports Picks 5 Baby Gifts Never to Buy Again

Sling Babies At Your Own Risk

Madeline Holler — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:31:00 GMT

Consumer Reports released a list of five things too dangerous for you to buy for your babies. I touched on several of them a while ago -- bath seats and crib bumbers -- and Droolicious also has a round-up.

But let's take a closer look at one of the items the non-profit watch dog group found too dangerous: slings. Slings! Who at Consumer Reports wrote up this recommendation? My childless aunt? Those old ladies chasing me down in the airport to tell me my baby might fall out?

What could they possibly have against slings?

According to their blog and the release, in five years, four babies have died in slings (they don't specify how) and "many" have been injured (they don't specify the number) by skull fractures, contusions, head injuries and abrasions.

Most occurred when the child fell out of the sling. As slings grow in popularity, so do the number of serious injuries. No safety standards exist for slings. We think you should skip the sling and opt for other types of infant carriers, which have safer track records.

Fine. I'm all for government oversight and consumer protections and more regulation. So, sure, bring on the safety standards.And falling babies is a serious, serious matter for sure. But a sling is the one baby item -- the one! -- I actually couldn't live without.

Am I being a jerk when I say babies falling from slings is totally avoidable?

I'd love to know which slings these babies fell out of, because not all slings are alike. The kind they have pictured I used with my youngest -- and hated it. Once he got to be a month or so old, I could see how he might slip out the back. But that's a problem, in my opinion, with so-called pocket slings -- not the entire genre of wearable carriers. They're made to hold the baby as if she's in a purse, not an extension of your body.

Ring slings, though? They rock. And if used properly -- that is cinched up so baby is smushed against you, not swinging low in front of your thighs like a pendulum with every step you take (and you see this sometimes) -- there's just no way baby's falling out.

We make big babies in my family so carrying them in infant carseats is torture. There's no other way to grocery shop until the baby can sit up in the cart. Plus, I Iike having my hands available for something other than holding a baby. My husband's also a big fan.

Consumer Reports says to stick with other infant carriers -- I'm guessing Baby Bjorn- and Ergo-types -- but I've never managed to make those work for us.

What do you think? Has your baby ever fallen out of the sling? Do you agree with Consumer Reports? They also take on sleep positioners and co-sleepers. Do they just have it in for "attachment parents"?

Dangerous Baby Gear: Why Can I Buy It?

Consumer Reports Picks 5 Baby Gifts Never to Buy Again

Image: seoullife.net

Dangerous Baby Gear: Why Can I Buy It?

Madeline Holler — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:01:00 GMT

A recent press release for the May 2009 issue of ShopSmart, by the publishers of Consumer Report, lists some safety tips and includes many of the usual: don't turn your back even for a second while baby is in the tub; keep bouncy seats off tables; and actually buckle the straps on the stroller.

And then there's this tip: don't use bath seats.

And also this one: don't put your baby in a walker.

Okay, I have heard those last two safety tips -- along with don't use crib bumpers -- since I signed on to this whole mothering thing eight years ago. Every parenting magazine I read, every website I checked, every "safety tips" list in the OBs office always included those three tips among the others.

Yet I spent last weekend watching our hosts' nine-month-old zip around his house full of stairs in a brand new walker.

I've been given a number of bath seats over the years (my experience: indeed, they tip, and even if they didn't, they're too much of a bother). You can't swing a registry gun in BabiesRUs without hitting a crib bumper.

So here's my question: why can one still buy bathseats, walkers, and crib bumpers in a wide array of fabrics -- even though they make the dangers Top 10 every time? Why? Are they actually fine and these safety people are just looking for filler tips? Or do these manufacturers get some kind of pass?

I'm not 100 percent Safety Tips adherent. For example, ShopSmart recommends changing tables have four walls around the pad, yet we've always set up our changing pad on a dresser. We can see the possibilities so we're careful. We don't have a baby monitor. I've let my toddlers roam while I take a (quick!) shower. Still, it's weird to me that walkers and bath seats are not only sold ... but also bought ... even though their benefits hardly outweigh their danger.

Any hardcore baby seat users care to explain the appeal? Anybody else confused by the availability of walkers? I thought exersaucers took care of all that. And crib bumpers? Are we seeing a lot of bruising from reckless baby rolling? What banned and/or dangerous/"dangerous" baby gear are you still using?

Photo: naturescrib.com

Things Fall Apart: Simplicity Bassinets Recall Still Expanding, Awkwardly

Miriam Axel-Lute — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 20:30:00 GMT

Amazing how complicated it can be to identify an unsafe bassinet and get kids out of them. It was late August when the Consumer Products Safety Commission first issued a safety alert warning caregivers not to use Simplicity 3-in-1 or 4-in-1 "close sleeper" bassinets, because when the fabric is detached to place it in "cosleeper" mode and not reattached properly, there is a gap under a metal bar that babies can slip under and strangle.

This was a clear danger, directly responsible for two infant deaths (one of which ocurred nearly a year before the safety alert, which has also raised some eyebrows). So you get them off the market pronto, right?

Enter the complications: First, Simplicity went out of business, and SFCA, the company that bought it, get this, bought only its assets, but not its liabilities. Sweet deal, huh? Sound like a certain Wall Street bailout to you? Anyhow, SFCA assumes no responsibility, and won't issue a recall, so the CPSC has been having to do it piecemeal with retailers.

Meanwhile, it took until late September for someone to figure out that the exact same products were being sold under the Graco and Disney brands as well, and those ought to be included in the recalls.

And then they realized that it was only older models that had the problem, and newer ones have the fabric permanently attached and are fine. Oy vey. Consumer Reports has a video that shows the difference if you're not sure. And the news is still spreading, with one news report just yesterday.

In amongst all this, the ongoing bias against cosleeping (I'll have more on that in detail in a few days) rears its head again: This dangerous product got to market because no one has bothered to set specific safety standards for cosleeping products. And even Consumer Reports disappointingly turns around and in its video uses that as an excuse to recommend the use of regular cribs over cosleepers at all times, even though other cosleepers, and even the later models of this one, don't have this dangerous flaw. The problem here was, in the CPSC's words "metal bars spaced farther apart than 2 3/8 inches, which is the maximum distance allowed under the federal crib safety standard," not being a cosleeper.

Two lessons for safe sleeping: Follow instructions carefully, and if something looks dangerous, don't wait for a manufacturer or the CPSC to tell you it really is.

More by this author:

10 Names to Give Your Under 5 Daughter for Her . . . You Know

Crocs: Ugly AND Dangerous?

Jen Chaney — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:02:00 GMT

At least, that's what a lawsuit filed by one Kentucky mom suggests. Okay, not the ugly part, but really, don't we all already agree on that?

Alison Cox Pregliasco of Louisville has filed a lawsuit against Crocs that holds the company responsible for injuries sustained by her three-year-old daughter. The girl was wearing a pair of Crocs while riding an escalator at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport when one of her shoes got caught in the gears. The shoe got shredded, the skin on the girl's big toe was torn off and two of her toes got broken. Pregliasco is seeking $4 million in damages and accusing Crocs of marketing the shoes to kids even though they are aware of the dangers posed by the rubbery, holey clogs.

This isn't the first time Crocs have been deemed hazardous. Numerous similar incidents have been reported during the past couple of years, prompting the Consumer Product Safety Commission to issue a warning in May against wearning soft shoes on escalators. Consumer Reports also notes that Japan's Trade Ministry asked Crocs to redesign their shoes after complaints about -- Woah! Deja vu! -- children getting their feet caught in escalators. So this problem isn't unique to Pregliasco's daughter, which may add creedence to the suit.

Ultimately, though, it seems like this will come down to a question of who is really at fault. If Crocs are widely known for causing problems on escalators, who bears the responsibility for the girl getting hurt: The company who made them or the parent who lets her kids hop on to the moving stairway while wearing them? Guess a judge will have to decide.

Let's hope he also finally rules that adults should never, ever be seen in public while wearing Crocs because it violates all standards of aesthetic decency.

Budget Baby: Cutting Corners on Baby Stuff

Amy Kuras — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 01:52:00 GMT

There's some ridiculous figure out there about how much it costs to raise a baby to adulthood. Of course, that seems to assume that you buy everything new, for yourself (no showers or hand me downs or whatever), disposable diaper and bottle feed, have your little darlings in every activity known to humanity and so forth.

Still, even with generous friends and families and an eye for resale, it can be breathtaking how much it actually costs to have a little baby around. We've been out of babyland for a couple years and now are horrified at how much money goes out of this house on a weekly basis, and we mostly cloth diaper and only supplement with formula here and there (he's four months old and we're still on the free cans from the hospital). And he's not even eating solids yet.

Consumer Reports, a.k.a bible of the thrifty dork, is on the case.There's some ridiculous figure out there about how much it costs to raise a baby to adulthood. Of course, that seems to assume that you buy everything new, for yourself (no showers or hand me downs or whatever), disposable diaper and bottle feed, have your little darlings in every activity known to humanity and so forth.

Still, even with generous friends and families and an eye for resale, it can be breathtaking how much it actually costs to have a little baby around. We've been out of babyland for a couple years and now are horrified at how much money goes out of this house on a weekly basis, and we mostly cloth diaper and only supplement with formula here and there (he's four months old and we're still on the free cans from the hospital). And he's not even eating solids yet.

Consumer Reports, a.k.a bible of the thrifty dork, is on the case. They actually have a baby and kids blog, and this post talks about tips on saving on baby stuff. For example, sign up for every "new parent club" out there. They'll send you good coupons ($2 off diapers is par for the course) and formula "checks" (which has baffled every cashier at every store I ever used them at, but whatever).

They also suggest buying a warehouse club membership, which I can also vouch for – I've even given Costco memberships as baby gifts. They not only have good prices on whopping packs of diapers and wipes, but I've even seen fancy jogging strollers and bike trailers there, and really good deals on Carter's pajamas and cute dresses.

What are your tips to save on baby shopping? Any hidden coupon deals out there or good places to pick up bargains?

Consumer's Union Withdraws Infant Car Seat Report

Karen Murphy — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 02:16:00 GMT

According to ConsumersUnion.org, Consumer Reports is withdrawing its recent controversial report on infant car seats "pending further tests of the performance of those seats in side-impact collisions." Apparently a "substantive issue that may have affected the original test results" was discovered with the submission of new information from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) that puts into question the accuracy of how speeds were simulated in the Consumer Reports testing.

The NHTSA applauds Consumer Report's withdrawal of their report, stating that "Consumer Reports was right to withdraw its infant car seat test report and [we] appreciate that they have taken this corrective action" and that they were "troubled by the report because it frightened parents and could have discouraged them from using car seats."

A new report will be published along with any necessary revisions in findings as soon as new testing is completed. Until then, Consumer's Union urges parents and caregivers to "remember that use of any child seat is safer than no child seat, but to suspend judgment on the merits of individual products until the new testing has been completed and the report re-published."

So that leaves us...where? If you're at all unsure about the efficacy of your child's car seat, check here for installation assistance or here for recall information or here for some general information and tips about child car seats. And be safe.

Consumer Reports Says Your Infant Car Seat Is Crap

Stefania Pomponi Butler (CityMama) — Fri, 05 Jan 2007 13:32:00 GMT

[Editor's Note: An update to this article can be found here.]

Consumer Reports recently tested 12 infant car seats and declared that most "failed disastrously." In fact, they could only recommend two (I'll wait while you get a pen and paper to write this down): the Graco Snugride with E-P-S and the Baby Trend Flex Lock, both retail for under $100.

That's right, the hundreds of bones you just spent on a fancy Peg Perego, Maxi-Cosi, or Britax were a big waste of money. Eeeeh, not really, according to Estelle and Jean of Faggots on the Third Floor:

Your seat is fine. Don't worry. Consumer Reports is full of shit, as always. Trust me, know one who knows car seats puts a lick of faith in anything CR ever says about car seats. The onslaught will begin all over the internet tonight. Stores will sell out of the seats they recommended. People will be scared that their child is destined to die in a crash because CR said their seat failed. As one tech so politely put it, "roll up the magazine and use it to start a fire."

As is to be expected, Britax responded by saying that they'd need to see details of the testing methods and results in order to address the article. Yadda x 3. They're using the classic "Deflection Defense" which I supposed I'd do too, if I were the de facto standard for safe carseats.

Whatever you think about the report, infant car seats are often installed incorrectly and babies are placed in them improperly. I highly recommend you contact your local highway patrol, police department, or fire station to get your seat inspected. Information is available here.