The Washington Times reported on March 26, 2008, that the US Government is outsourcing the production of Passports overseas to save money.
WHAT?
The same administration that preaches the value of saving American jobs and the need for increased security on our borders has sent the production of the documents that allow people to enter the USA to people OUTSIDE the USA???
The most charitable thing I can say about this unbelievable story is that this is the most hypocritical act I've heard in a long time ... not to mention bordering on the line between gluttonous greed and insanity. I think that most people who travel internationally have a certain amount of money available to spend and I for one would certainly be willing to spend more of it to have my passport made here in the USA by United States citizens.
I have written both of my Senators and my Congressional Representative on this matter. I have written them before on other matters and fully expect to hear back from at most one of them. I'll post whatever I get.
FOLLOWUP ...
Weeks later, I received one response (out of the 3 I sent). The response was insulting. I'll paraphrase it as to not waste anyone's time:
Blah-blah-blah it was cheaper to go abroad, blah-blah-blah and they promised us that they would guard all of our national secrets very carefully, blah-blah-blah I'm sure it will all be fine because we here in the government are smart.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Monday, March 17, 2008
Disposing of Fluorescents
A few months ago, I had talked about the totally unpublicized downside of Fluorescent lights, including the trendy new Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFLs): the disposal of the MERCURY in them.
This is a followup tale of two disposal scenarios: one of hope and one of despair ...
First, the DESPAIR ...
I've been saving two large fluorescent tubes in my garage for two years, meaning to eventually find and take them to the local recycling center for such things. My father-in-law was visiting for a week and volunteered to deal with these for me.
I felt that we had to drive them somewhere, but he decided to call our trash/recycling service that picks up paper and glass: Trash Away (who supposedly holds all appropriate permits and does things properly). The woman on the phone said to set them to one side and that the pickup crew would set them aside for special recycling.
Based on experience, I never believe anything that comes out of the mouth of HQ of our trash/recycling service. I figured that one of 3 things would happen when we tried this:
A) They would actually do what they said; the recycling truck would pick up the tubes and set them aside. This would be AMAZING and would restore my faith in humanity, or at least in our pickup service.
B) They would leave the tubes on curb
C) They would simply toss the mercury-laden tubes in with all the other garbage on the garbage truck.
So, pickup day came. I was nursing my newborn and watching from the window when the trash/recycling trucks came rolling into my court.
Drumroll please: the answer was: C (of course)
They tossed the mercury-laden tubes into the trash truck, where they will now leak mercury into a landfill or even worse into the air via incineration. Now just imagine mercury coming from every home in the country due to CFLs. Scary.
Now, the HOPE, to counter that sadness ...
After speaking to some of my friends at the Food Marketing Institute (FMI), they are going to talk to some of their action committees about having supermarkets pick up the torch and setup bins for CFL bulb collection and disposal/recycling. That would be excellent.
And in fact, it looks like some markets are already doing it! My friend Joanna reported that MOM (my organic market) in Northern Virginia is already doing it. Hurrah!
Hopefully we'll see some bigger markets follow suite ... Wegman's, Hannafords, Bloom, etc. (I won't hold my breath for Giant. My list of peeves against Giant just grows daily.)
This is a followup tale of two disposal scenarios: one of hope and one of despair ...
First, the DESPAIR ...
I've been saving two large fluorescent tubes in my garage for two years, meaning to eventually find and take them to the local recycling center for such things. My father-in-law was visiting for a week and volunteered to deal with these for me.
I felt that we had to drive them somewhere, but he decided to call our trash/recycling service that picks up paper and glass: Trash Away (who supposedly holds all appropriate permits and does things properly). The woman on the phone said to set them to one side and that the pickup crew would set them aside for special recycling.
Based on experience, I never believe anything that comes out of the mouth of HQ of our trash/recycling service. I figured that one of 3 things would happen when we tried this:
A) They would actually do what they said; the recycling truck would pick up the tubes and set them aside. This would be AMAZING and would restore my faith in humanity, or at least in our pickup service.
B) They would leave the tubes on curb
C) They would simply toss the mercury-laden tubes in with all the other garbage on the garbage truck.
So, pickup day came. I was nursing my newborn and watching from the window when the trash/recycling trucks came rolling into my court.
Drumroll please: the answer was: C (of course)
They tossed the mercury-laden tubes into the trash truck, where they will now leak mercury into a landfill or even worse into the air via incineration. Now just imagine mercury coming from every home in the country due to CFLs. Scary.
Now, the HOPE, to counter that sadness ...
After speaking to some of my friends at the Food Marketing Institute (FMI), they are going to talk to some of their action committees about having supermarkets pick up the torch and setup bins for CFL bulb collection and disposal/recycling. That would be excellent.
And in fact, it looks like some markets are already doing it! My friend Joanna reported that MOM (my organic market) in Northern Virginia is already doing it. Hurrah!
Hopefully we'll see some bigger markets follow suite ... Wegman's, Hannafords, Bloom, etc. (I won't hold my breath for Giant. My list of peeves against Giant just grows daily.)
Friday, March 7, 2008
The Baby Bottle Dilemma
You'd THINK that buying and using baby bottles would be easy? OH NO.
As I've discovered, that cute plastic bottle you are buying MIGHT (or might not) contain a chemical called bisphenol-A (BPA) which MIGHT (or might not) start to leach out when the bottle is heated/cleaned/sterilized and that MIGHT (or might not) be dangerous to your baby in terms of promoting cancer, etc.
The "mights" are what make this scenario really stressful. Depending on who you talk to and what you read, you get totally different messages, like ...
"Bottles MUST be boiled to sterilize them"
vs "Bottles CAN'T be boiled ... it will release the bisphenol-A"
UGH.
The only thing I know for SURE is that GLASS BOTTLES are ok, so my mom dredged up 2 of my bottles from 35 years ago (thank goodness my family is a bunch of pack-rats) and luckily EvenFlo still makes some glass bottles (Evenflo 4-Ounce Classic Glass Nurser 3 Pack, unfortunately no longer Made in U.S.A. but Hecho en Mexico) with the awesome product description of "Why risk having your baby ingest chemicals when you don't have to?" I am not the only one to have thought of glass, by the way; there is an article from April 2007 talking about the run on glass bottles after California released a toxicology report on the baby bottle issue.
However, even EvenFlo admits that plastic bottles are better as baby gets older and wants to carry/hold the bottle themselves. So, I set about researching plastic bottles. I found a good article that was originally written by Consumer Reports and is now on the Ecomall.com site, talking about the bisphenol-A bottle issue; here are the highlights:
* The FDA does not believe there is an issue with bisphenol-A, so these bottles are still on the market
* BPA leaches from bottles made of polycarbonate (clear, shiny) when they are exposed to heat (microwave, dishwasher, boiling, etc). Bottles made of glass or polyethylene (dull/opaque) don't have the issue
* As you may already have some bottles, and not know what they are made of, the advice given in the article is this:
---- Dispose of: All clear, shiny plastic baby bottles, unless the manufacturer tells you they're not made of polycarbonate.
---- Replace with: Bottles made of glass or an opaque, less-shiny plastic (the plastic bottles are often colored).
The Angry Toxicologist (my favorite blogger) has had a few comments on the BPA issue over the past year that I found enjoyable and interesting, too.
In the meantime, as I wait for my wonderful glass bottles to arrive from Amazon, I am left pondering my NUK starter set, which is 3 cute, clear plastic bottles. I wrote Gerber to confirm what the bottles were made of -- hoping that I could still use them -- and here is their response:
Well, thanks for the note, Gerber. And I'm sure there are a lot of people who agree.
However ...
It took my husband and I three years to finally make our little boy. If there is a chance that he might be hurt by these plastics, we simply can't take a chance on them. So I'm going to go out and spend the oodles of money for a few of these new non-BPA plastic bottles (e.g. Medela makes some that match the breast pumps, and Born Free makes some as well) and a couple of glass ones. And, some lucky person on Craig's List -- a person who thinks that the BPA scare is a bunch of tree huggin' crap -- is going to get a great deal on a lot of plastic bottles.
As I've discovered, that cute plastic bottle you are buying MIGHT (or might not) contain a chemical called bisphenol-A (BPA) which MIGHT (or might not) start to leach out when the bottle is heated/cleaned/sterilized and that MIGHT (or might not) be dangerous to your baby in terms of promoting cancer, etc.
The "mights" are what make this scenario really stressful. Depending on who you talk to and what you read, you get totally different messages, like ...
"Bottles MUST be boiled to sterilize them"
vs "Bottles CAN'T be boiled ... it will release the bisphenol-A"
UGH.
The only thing I know for SURE is that GLASS BOTTLES are ok, so my mom dredged up 2 of my bottles from 35 years ago (thank goodness my family is a bunch of pack-rats) and luckily EvenFlo still makes some glass bottles (Evenflo 4-Ounce Classic Glass Nurser 3 Pack, unfortunately no longer Made in U.S.A. but Hecho en Mexico) with the awesome product description of "Why risk having your baby ingest chemicals when you don't have to?" I am not the only one to have thought of glass, by the way; there is an article from April 2007 talking about the run on glass bottles after California released a toxicology report on the baby bottle issue.
However, even EvenFlo admits that plastic bottles are better as baby gets older and wants to carry/hold the bottle themselves. So, I set about researching plastic bottles. I found a good article that was originally written by Consumer Reports and is now on the Ecomall.com site, talking about the bisphenol-A bottle issue; here are the highlights:
* The FDA does not believe there is an issue with bisphenol-A, so these bottles are still on the market
* BPA leaches from bottles made of polycarbonate (clear, shiny) when they are exposed to heat (microwave, dishwasher, boiling, etc). Bottles made of glass or polyethylene (dull/opaque) don't have the issue
* As you may already have some bottles, and not know what they are made of, the advice given in the article is this:
---- Dispose of: All clear, shiny plastic baby bottles, unless the manufacturer tells you they're not made of polycarbonate.
---- Replace with: Bottles made of glass or an opaque, less-shiny plastic (the plastic bottles are often colored).
The Angry Toxicologist (my favorite blogger) has had a few comments on the BPA issue over the past year that I found enjoyable and interesting, too.
In the meantime, as I wait for my wonderful glass bottles to arrive from Amazon, I am left pondering my NUK starter set, which is 3 cute, clear plastic bottles. I wrote Gerber to confirm what the bottles were made of -- hoping that I could still use them -- and here is their response:
Safety is our top priority at Gerber Products Company. We have a history of helping parents raise happy, healthy babies, since 1928.
We are aware of recent media reports focusing on polycarbonate and Bisphenol-A (BPA). Bisphenol-A is a key component used to make polycarbonate plastic.
We would like to help consumers understand why leading manufacturers of baby bottles, including Gerber, have concluded that polycarbonate is safe.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has considered relevant data available regarding the use of polycarbonate and has concluded that products made with polycarbonate are safe for use as intended. Additionally, other leading scientific and regulatory authorities in Europe have concluded that the use of food contact polycarbonate for baby bottles is safe. In a recent letter to FIT Pregnancy magazine, the FDA stated that it sees no reason to ban or otherwise restrict the currently authorized food contact applications of polycarbonate.
The following Gerber Bottles are made of polycarbonate:
NUK® Orthodontic - 5oz
NUK® Orthodontic - 10oz ComfortHold® - 5oz with Slow Flow
ComfortLatch® Nipple ComfortHold® - 9oz with Slow Flow
ComfortLatch® Nipple Preemie - 2.5 oz
The following Gerber Bottles are not made of polycarbonate:
Gerber Clear View
Gerber Fashion Tint Gerber Gentle Flow
Best wishes from your friends @ gerber.com
Well, thanks for the note, Gerber. And I'm sure there are a lot of people who agree.
However ...
It took my husband and I three years to finally make our little boy. If there is a chance that he might be hurt by these plastics, we simply can't take a chance on them. So I'm going to go out and spend the oodles of money for a few of these new non-BPA plastic bottles (e.g. Medela makes some that match the breast pumps, and Born Free makes some as well) and a couple of glass ones. And, some lucky person on Craig's List -- a person who thinks that the BPA scare is a bunch of tree huggin' crap -- is going to get a great deal on a lot of plastic bottles.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Back to Sophistication for Victoria
Up until about 4 years ago, it was a treat to browse through Victoria's Secrets stores or catalogs, looking at the sleek items for sale. Colors were dark and rich, making you think of robust wines, candlelight, romantic evenings, etc. Six years ago, in fact, my husband bought me a beautifully lined, satin black robe that I absolutely adore. In fact, I treasure it so much that at this point I handwash it and only wear it on special occasions.
Why?
Because since about 4 years ago, the stuff that Victoria's Secrets has been selling has been trashy pink GARBAGE. As my husband commented "Who is their target market, now? First grade girls? Clearly they aren't targeting women old enough to want to impress men, because men are not impressed by cutesy pink panties with polka dots on them."
So, I was delighted to read that the CEO of Victoria's secrets has decided that it is time to go back to more sophistication and quality. It is refreshing to see an industry leader who has decided to blame lackluster sales on the product line rather than the sub-prime housing market issues or the general economy.
I wonder how much market research lead up to this completely obvious decision. I imagine that the marketing meeting went something like this:
***
Highly Paid Marketing Guru: Based on our extensive research, we've discovered that working aged women in their mid-twenties and older have more disposable income and a greater desire to purchase expensive lingerie items than primary-school aged girls.
VS Executives: Amazing! What do you suggest we do?
Highly Paid Marketing Guru: We suggest you sell products that the women with more money will want to buy
VS CEO: Let's go for it. Here's your million dollar paycheck for such incredible market insight.
***
Sarcasm aside, I am looking forward to the possibility that the predominance of pink trash will slowly be replaced by more appealing choices.
Why?
Because since about 4 years ago, the stuff that Victoria's Secrets has been selling has been trashy pink GARBAGE. As my husband commented "Who is their target market, now? First grade girls? Clearly they aren't targeting women old enough to want to impress men, because men are not impressed by cutesy pink panties with polka dots on them."
So, I was delighted to read that the CEO of Victoria's secrets has decided that it is time to go back to more sophistication and quality. It is refreshing to see an industry leader who has decided to blame lackluster sales on the product line rather than the sub-prime housing market issues or the general economy.
I wonder how much market research lead up to this completely obvious decision. I imagine that the marketing meeting went something like this:
***
Highly Paid Marketing Guru: Based on our extensive research, we've discovered that working aged women in their mid-twenties and older have more disposable income and a greater desire to purchase expensive lingerie items than primary-school aged girls.
VS Executives: Amazing! What do you suggest we do?
Highly Paid Marketing Guru: We suggest you sell products that the women with more money will want to buy
VS CEO: Let's go for it. Here's your million dollar paycheck for such incredible market insight.
***
Sarcasm aside, I am looking forward to the possibility that the predominance of pink trash will slowly be replaced by more appealing choices.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)