Saturday, August 11, 2012

Toxic Stroller

Yes, you read that right.  For awhile now, I have been looking to replace our stroller.  There are a multitude of reasons why, most of which I won't get into right now except for one and that is the fact that it contains toxic flame retardants in the fabric.  Now, if you've read my previous posts on the subject, you know I am really infuriated by the fact that flame retardants are found in so many baby items.

I didn't know about this stuff when I purchased the stroller and hadn't even thought about it after.  That is until I flipped up the tag to find the washing instructions and came across the fabric meeting not just one, but all three California Technical Bulletins regarding fire safety.  Clearly, this company does not want this thing going up in flames.

In my current search, I had narrowed down my options to two strollers.  But the fact that one had a stain resistant fabric peaked my curiosity.  What was in this exactly?  Are there any strollers out there that are chemical free?  And so I came across a slew of blogs from other non-toxic mamas out there and to them I am truly grateful. 

Non-Toxic Kids give a few options in the world of chemical free baby rides.
Non-Toxic Mama gives a big thumbs up to both Graco (phew) and Maclaren.  Though this was in 2009, I'm hoping that it still reigns true since the Maclaren Triumph is on my list.  After reading their CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility), I am definitely on board with giving them a try!

In regards to rain covers, I believe it was Orbit Baby who came up with the 1st PVC-free option. And now Baby Planet and Baby Jogger both offer the PVC-free option as well.  I'm happy to see the initiative from these companies in offering safer options for our little ones.  Let's hope the stroller companies follow suit... a baby buggy is not a good place for toxic chemicals.  The end!

*Correction:  The stroller we have actual meets the requirements of TWO Technical Bulletins, not three.   When I was researching the two, I mistakenly convinced myself it met TB 133 for furniture, but it actually does not. 

For more information on California Technical Bulletins, please visit

No comments:

Post a Comment