It's that time of year again: the temperatures are rising, you're starting to feel the faint whisper of the ocean shores calling your name, feeling the urge to be outside and run and play like a child, all the while wanting to reach up to the sun and give it a big "thank you" hug for bringing you so much joy and brilliance because- at last!- you can emerge from your cave dwellings and join the rest of the outdoor world.
But just as all of these ecstatic thoughts and images are running through your mind as you mark up your calendars for July and August, another more sinister thought reaches you, and you realize that it is inevitable: that same sun who brings light and warmth and summer activities into your life also wants to kill you, and you need an arsenal of SPF this and that to keep its harmful UVA and UVB rays at bay.
But it gets worse. Like many consumer products making health claims, the sunscreen industry often tells lies about just how effective its products really are, making the choices for protecting yourself and your children that much more difficult than they should be. And the FDA, which is trusted with the duty of regulating these health claims, has just decided after 33 years of deliberation that yeah, maybe they should do something about regulating those sunscreen company's claims! Something like, oh, regulating a sunscreen with a true SPF protection of about a 10, packaged in a bottle that advertises it as a 50. Or, sunscreens that claim to be waterproof but really aren't. Oh, and also, those sunscreens that contain dangerous chemicals related to tumor development and other health problems. Yeah, those. The FDA decided they were going to do something about them. And it only took them just over 3 decades!
The truth is that these new regulations aren't going to be going into effect until the summer season of 2013. Which leaves consumers in a difficult position of having to navigate through the screen-washing health claims on their own. And unlike nutritional/environmental health claims, which are becoming easier to spot, the sparse presence of sunscreens in our daily lives makes them even harder to comprehend. Luckily for us, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) has put together a list of top sunscreens in terms of safety and effectiveness. The lotions on the list contain minimal chemical content, and are more honest about the level of protection they actually provide, and how waterproof they really are.
So unless you see yourself as cave-dwelling while the rest of your friends enjoy all of the pleasures of the sun, it's probably a good idea to check out that list, and to get yourself a safe and reliable sunscreen for the season. It's also a good idea to remember other dangers associated with sun and heat, and to follow safety recommendations related to summer weather in your area. And for those of you who are interested, the EWG has also put together a Hall of Shame- a list of the absolute worst sunscreens in terms of the false health claims they are making. Be sure to steer clear of those, and you should be alright. Happy sunning, everybody!
Showing posts with label Greenwashing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Greenwashing. Show all posts
17.6.11
14.10.10
Very Scary, Very Real
An Editorial from Green America: Keep Child Slavery out of the Cocoa Supply Chain
Sorry to scare you, but on Halloween, much of the chocolate Americans will hand out to trick-or-treaters will be tainted by the labor of enslaved children.
Hershey's, Nestlé, and the other big chocolate companies know this. They promised nearly a decade ago to set up a system to certify that no producers in their supply chains use child labor. They gave themselves a July 2005 deadline for that, which came and went without meaningful action. A second voluntary deadline sailed by as well in 2008. There's a new deadline for voluntary action at the end of this year. Don't hold your breath.
Few Americans had heard of this problem before reporters Sudarsan Raghavan and Sumana Chatterjee exposed the scandalous conditions under which most U.S. chocolate is made, in the summer of 2001.
In one of their articles, a slave described his 13-hour work-days on the 494-acre plantation as brutal, filled with harsh physical labor, punctuated by beatings, and ending with a night of fitful sleep on a wooden plank in a locked room with other slaves.
“The beatings were a part of my life,” said the boy, who was sold into slavery at not yet 12 years old. “Anytime they loaded you with bags and you fell while you were carrying them, nobody helped you. Instead, they beat you and beat you until you picked it up again.”
The reports shocked some members of Congress into action. That fall, Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) and Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) prepared bills to require U.S. chocolate companies--by force of law--to certify their products as slave-free. Engel’s bill passed the House, but before Harkin’s bill could pass the Senate, the chocolate industry had announced a voluntary four-year plan to clean up its own supply chains, without legislation.
Meanwhile, evidence that child slavery still bedevils the chocolate industry isn’t hard to find. For example, in late September, a research team from Tulane University (specifically charged by Congress with oversight of the voluntary supply-chain efforts) reported that “the industry is still far from achieving its target by the end of 2010 … and the majority of children exposed to the worst forms of child labor remain unreached.”
The just-released documentary The Dark Side of Chocolate, by filmmakers Miki Mistrati and U. Roberto Romano takes a less detached tone, going undercover and exposing child slavery in the cocoa supply chain from the inside.
And if that’s not enough, the State Department’s own 2010 Trafficking in Persons report lists several West African countries where children are traded and taken to work cocoa plantations.
All the while, the biggest chocolate companies cavil that because they don’t own the cocoa plantations outright, cleaning up their supply chains is too hard. But some of them aren’t even trying. The biggest cocoa company in the country, Hershey’s--even after nine years to get started--has no certification system in place whatsoever to ensure that its cocoa isn’t tainted by labor rights abuses.
Here are three things you do this Halloween to ensure that your chocolate isn’t tainted by the exploitation of children overseas.
* You can look for chocolate from companies that do certify their supply chains, via labels such the Fair Trade label and the IMO Fair For Life label. Green America offers a scorecard explaining these labels in detail, and ranking the chocolate companies.
* You can contact conventional chocolate companies like Hershey’s – call them, write to them, write on their Facebook pages – and tell them you expect them to prove their supply chains aren’t tainted.
* You can contact your representatives in Congress. If after a decade the chocolate companies can’t monitor their own supply chains, we need to go back to the drawing board, and demand, by law, that slave-produced chocolate has no place on the shelves of stores in the USA.
The people who produce the raw materials for our chocolate treats deserve fair wages and safe working conditions. African children shouldn't have to suffer unspeakable horrors so that our children can have a happy Halloween
--Andrew Korfhage
Find our report on Hershey's cocoa sourcing here, and click here to send a message directly to the Hershey company.
Sorry to scare you, but on Halloween, much of the chocolate Americans will hand out to trick-or-treaters will be tainted by the labor of enslaved children.
Hershey's, Nestlé, and the other big chocolate companies know this. They promised nearly a decade ago to set up a system to certify that no producers in their supply chains use child labor. They gave themselves a July 2005 deadline for that, which came and went without meaningful action. A second voluntary deadline sailed by as well in 2008. There's a new deadline for voluntary action at the end of this year. Don't hold your breath.
Few Americans had heard of this problem before reporters Sudarsan Raghavan and Sumana Chatterjee exposed the scandalous conditions under which most U.S. chocolate is made, in the summer of 2001.
In one of their articles, a slave described his 13-hour work-days on the 494-acre plantation as brutal, filled with harsh physical labor, punctuated by beatings, and ending with a night of fitful sleep on a wooden plank in a locked room with other slaves.
“The beatings were a part of my life,” said the boy, who was sold into slavery at not yet 12 years old. “Anytime they loaded you with bags and you fell while you were carrying them, nobody helped you. Instead, they beat you and beat you until you picked it up again.”
The reports shocked some members of Congress into action. That fall, Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) and Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) prepared bills to require U.S. chocolate companies--by force of law--to certify their products as slave-free. Engel’s bill passed the House, but before Harkin’s bill could pass the Senate, the chocolate industry had announced a voluntary four-year plan to clean up its own supply chains, without legislation.
Meanwhile, evidence that child slavery still bedevils the chocolate industry isn’t hard to find. For example, in late September, a research team from Tulane University (specifically charged by Congress with oversight of the voluntary supply-chain efforts) reported that “the industry is still far from achieving its target by the end of 2010 … and the majority of children exposed to the worst forms of child labor remain unreached.”
The just-released documentary The Dark Side of Chocolate, by filmmakers Miki Mistrati and U. Roberto Romano takes a less detached tone, going undercover and exposing child slavery in the cocoa supply chain from the inside.
And if that’s not enough, the State Department’s own 2010 Trafficking in Persons report lists several West African countries where children are traded and taken to work cocoa plantations.
All the while, the biggest chocolate companies cavil that because they don’t own the cocoa plantations outright, cleaning up their supply chains is too hard. But some of them aren’t even trying. The biggest cocoa company in the country, Hershey’s--even after nine years to get started--has no certification system in place whatsoever to ensure that its cocoa isn’t tainted by labor rights abuses.
Here are three things you do this Halloween to ensure that your chocolate isn’t tainted by the exploitation of children overseas.
* You can look for chocolate from companies that do certify their supply chains, via labels such the Fair Trade label and the IMO Fair For Life label. Green America offers a scorecard explaining these labels in detail, and ranking the chocolate companies.
* You can contact conventional chocolate companies like Hershey’s – call them, write to them, write on their Facebook pages – and tell them you expect them to prove their supply chains aren’t tainted.
* You can contact your representatives in Congress. If after a decade the chocolate companies can’t monitor their own supply chains, we need to go back to the drawing board, and demand, by law, that slave-produced chocolate has no place on the shelves of stores in the USA.
The people who produce the raw materials for our chocolate treats deserve fair wages and safe working conditions. African children shouldn't have to suffer unspeakable horrors so that our children can have a happy Halloween
--Andrew Korfhage
Find our report on Hershey's cocoa sourcing here, and click here to send a message directly to the Hershey company.
2.8.10
From Where?
You've heard of brainwashing, brandwashing, and even greenwashing. But just as the corporate world never ceases to come up with ways to lead us on and deceive us, out comes a new form of eco-hypocrisy: localwashing. You see, Corporate America is very clever, and they begin to pick up on things when grassroots movements start growing organically within communities- then they hijack our ingenuous principles, beat them and pulverize them, turn them into some public relations vomit, and- voila! You have a warped, vaguely familiar message that leaves you feeling confused, slightly disturbed, and somehow taken advantage of.
So, in one way or another, these marketing behemoths have caught word that buying local is apparently a good thing, and they've jumped on that bandwagon with guns blazing, ready to take over our minds and use our own good intentions against us. McDonald's, of all companies, is now touting boastful ads that give the impression that the poisonous entity actually cares about our environment- and that they use local ingredients. Ahem... excuse me... what? McDonalds?! Local?? It's as if our brains cannot digest such a blatant oxymoron. But this, dear reader, is what they would like us to believe.
The "From Here" Campaign is in full effect now in the greater Seattle area and in most of Washington state which, interestingly enough, was already the primary supplier of most of McDonald's industrial-grade "food" products. So, in order to boast a local initiative, McDonald's choose the one place in America where their "food" production is already most concentrated. Wow! How convenient.
Not to appear fully benevolent however, each of McDonald's new ads feature a lovely little disclaimer at the bottom: "participation and duration may vary." Oh! Excellent. So not only has McDonald's chosen its most convenient location for localwashing, but they also can't guarantee that what you're buying is local- even there. So the billboards all contradict themselves, and the conscious consumer is left feeling... a bit confused at best.
The truth is that most companies spend more time, money, and energy into creating an eco-friendly facade than they do to actually support environmental movements. There are some who genuinely strive to improve their business to reflect an environmentally stable future, and those that do deserve recognition. But a savvy consumer must learn how to weed out the fradulent actors from the honest ones, and unfortunately I think we can all discern on which side McDonald's falls.
It really is quite appalling, but I'm sure the fatburger corporate executives are sitting around a table somewhere, chuckling and patting themselves on the back for once again foiling the intentions of good-hearted Americans trying to make the world a better place. And I'm sure that after they do that, they break out into a chorus of evil-villain inspired laughter: "mwa-ha-haaa!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)