Diaper Service: Environmental Benefits

< back | more >

Misleading Claims By Single-Use Diaper Manufacturers
There has been an emergence of single-use diapers that are making misleading claims of being environmentally friendly and healthier for baby than the mainstream single-use diapers. These brands are Nature Boy & Girl, Seventh Generation, Tendercare Plus and most recently Whole Baby. These diapers all contain “super absorbent gelling materials” (AGM) which are linked to an increase in childhood asthma and a decrease in sperm count among boys. Environmentally, these diapers require as much water, energy and fuel to produce as any other single-use diaper. These diapers are all 100% garbage, just like every other paper diaper. The bottom line is they offer NO ENVIRONMENTAL or HEALTH benefits.

Unfortunately, health food stores, including Whole Foods, carry these diapers. The package of Seventh Generation states, ‘In our every deliberation, we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations.’ It is deceptive to print this statement on a product that represents the 3rd largest consumer item in our landfills, has a useful life of a few hours and contains chemicals!

Note: The only single-use diaper on the market today that doesn’t contain super absorbent gelling chemicals (AGM) is Tushies. They are a healthier single-use diaper than the diapers mentioned above and the mainstream brands, but they offer no environmental benefits. There is no such thing as an environmentally friendly single-use diaper.

“...it’s become increasingly apparent that some of these advances have come with hidden price tags, particularly where the production and use of synthetic chemicals is concerned. As our use of these compounds in our homes and workplaces has grown over the last 60 years, the incidence of diseases like cancer and asthma has grown dramatically as well, and many experts see a clear connection between the two.” Quote from Seventh Generation's website which leads consumers to think they care about our health and the environment, when their product contains chemicals and is 100% garbage

Cotton Diapers are Preferred Among Environmental Experts
From the Sierra Club to the Environmental Defense Fund, environmental experts and activists agree that cotton diapers are the better environmental diapering choice.

So if you're skeptical about environmental claims from manufacturers (and even from the diaper service industry), you can believe the environmentalists. They've seen all the data and heard all the arguments. They have nothing to gain, yet they clearly support cloth diapers.

For them, and for us, it's still a basic idea: Reusable products that have a long life span are a better environmental choice than single-use products with a short lifespan. Always have been. Always will.

Compostable Paper Diapers?
Is composting disposable diapers a good environmental solution? Compost created with disposable diapers is called mixed solid waste (MSW) compost, or "dirty" compost. It should not be confused with the nutrient-rich humus of your backyard composter. Dirty compost is not a good soil enhancer. In fact, staff scientist and solid waste expert Jackie Prince of the Environmental Defense Fund says MSW compost is a "low quality, contaminated material with uses limited to landfill cover, for example."

The claim that certain diaper brands are made from "compostable" materials does not alter the reality that they are still just as 100% garbage as brands that do not claim it. The "compostable diaper" claim is merely bait to help consumers feel like they are making a good environmental choice, when in reality they are not. Also, there aren’t any compost facilities in California that accept single-use diapers thus they continue to be sent to landfills.

The more you look into the "recycling" of disposable diapers, the better you'll understand that composting is not an environmental solution for this single-use, plastic product. Cotton diapers are a much better alternative. Reusing a product is recycling in the purest form.

< back | more >

health • environmental • enjoyment