It would be a nice Saturday morning … But then I read on that children’s shoes turned out to contain contaminants. It was the son’s winter shoes the worst, three times over the limit for the chronically toxic and toxic substance PFOS. Other footwear brands tested contained PFOA that is also toxic and carcinogenic.

Plucky has organic shoe models, this is not one of them. The times we do careful searches so it strikes back. Just before his son was born, we bought a changing mat, which later turned out to be of PVC (previous post). And now we bought a couple of expensive winter boots from a Swedish brand that asserts itself with the quality, sustainability and the environment. Although the shoe is not environmentally friendly, it bloody well not contain prohibited levels of hazardous chemicals!

I went last Saturday down to B shoes where I bought the shoes. They had not been reached by the news, which was a little odd because Plucky had stopped the sale of the shoe while waiting for further tests. Later that day they called me up and said that I had to complain about the shoe if I requested it; a big plus to the SBL vaccines for its way of handling the issue.

So yesterday I went and the son to leave back to his first pair of shoes.

It will be interesting to see what Misternuros’s own research shows. They have saved the material from each party to conduct tests after the fact on these situations. They received many angry and disillusioned comments on their Facebook page when the test was published and they generally answered them in a good way. The exception to this response that they published on facebook:

According to the information we have today, it is only a small part of Yxhult in the color black, which may contain PFOS, no other colors are affected. We are investigating right now which supplies that are affected and which stores had these. We will inform you of this at the beginning of next week.

Why should it just be “a smaller portion of the Yxhult in the color black, which may contain PFOS”? Test facts analyzed two pair of black Yxhult, a featured PFOS, the other does not. How can one conclude from this information that there is a smaller part of the black Yxhult who’s affected? How can you then say that “no other colours are concerned”, when no other colors were analyzed in the survey? Why should it not also exist in other shoe models from Plucky?

I like the Plucky and their focus on environmental sustainability, and quality labels. Therefore, I hope very much that they handle this in a good way and not as badly as companies often do. In addition to check all the batches of Yxhult XC, who was the shoe that was tested, they should check out the other shoe models. If PFOS was present in this shoe model, there may be in the others who have the same type of material.

How do we do with the shoes to his son? Well, last night we ordered a new pair of winter shoes by brand Plucky. This time from their organic line (marked with the EU Ecolabel), a model named Aspa EP. On the ecological shoe models are carried out more tests and a better choice but I do not think that we can do.