To not understand common attitudes to disposable personal hygiene products?

[hooochycoo]

I'm confronted by this again and again on MN, and I confess I don't understand why it's OK to justify using disposable nappies, wet wipes, sanitary protection etc? Why is it OK to add so much rubbish to the world on the justification of convenience when there are alternatives that are still easy but generate less or no waste? Use a flannel, use a moon up, put/hold your baby regularly over a toilet/ potty, use modern easy quick drying cloth nappies. Why's it OK to recoil in horror at the hippyness of such things? But it's ok to continue buying disposable rubbish from huge corporations and throw them into landfill? Apart from an argument of "each to their own", aibu to not get it?

I have no desire to shove a plastic cone up my vagina, fill it with blood, then waddle out with my knickers round my knees to wash it out, waddle back and reinsert it.

But somehow I tend to think mooncup users don't work in offices with rows of cubicles and basin.

Yes you aren't supposed to throw any poo away so if you use a disposable you have to tip poo down toilet, if you use reusable nappy you have to tip poo down the toilet. Surely that's the same 'grossness'

I actually do work in an office. As do many of my friends who use mooncups. I used to have that attitude and then I tried one. I have extremely heavy (like tampons and pads at the same time and still leaking heavy) periods and the mooncup freed me from a week of constant worry that I was leaking each month. And it doesn't make me cramp like tampons do. It's a stupid name I'll admit, it sounds icky, but for me it was amazing.

When I'm in a loo without a sink, I tip it down the loo and shove it back in. It's fine. Carry a teeny pack of wet wipes if you're fussy.

You see, it's actually the attitude that those of us using mooncups and cloth nappies and resusable pads don't go out much and can therefore spend time etc on this sort of thing, but if you work outside the home, you're too busy. That's bullshit. You can have different priorities, so that you don't want to use reusables, or you can just not want to do it, and that's fine, but don't claim that only people who don't work can do it. I didn't find it took any more time, pads go in with nappies, nappies go on to wash three times a week, had enough that I didn't have to worry about drying overnight. I work over an hour away from my house, full time. I have two children. But then I'm sure other people have different demands on their time and don't want to do it, or don't want to do three extra loads of laundry a week. That's fine. I'm not using cloth nappies now because I can't get them to work for DS and I'm not prepared to put the time and money into it as he'll be potty trained soon.

And yes, that report was based on fallacious assumptions. And funded by the companies who produce disposable nappies. Worked out well for them didn't it, as it gets shoved in everyone's faces whenever this argument comes up.

I liked disposable nappies and rarely, if ever, got covered in shit. As a new mum, completely overwhelmed and knackered, the last thing I needed was to be washing and drying nappies (seriously would anyone iron them?) I can see that disposal of these nappies must be a massive problem and that needs to be addressed by the manufacturers - I really cant see unless there is a blanket ban on them that we will ever go back to a time where everyone uses cloth nappies...its just not going to happen.

Some people have the time, and the inclination, to spend more time on environmental alternatives and some of us do the bits we can...which is way better than doing nothing.

I use the tumble drier less

I no longer buy individual bottles of water (although reusable sports cap bottles nearly always leak)

I have massively cut down on my use of kitchen rolls and wipes

I rarely ever buy a magazine or book (yay for kindle)

Heating is only put on if its actually "cold" rather than as a habit

Im not going to beat myself up about the bits I dont do and I agree with bohemian totally about mooncups.

Here is the updated version, assuming moderate tumble dryer use, reusing the nappies for a second child and washing at 60 degrees. Basically the conclusions state that the carbon footprint of reusable nappy use is almost totally dependent on how you launder them and reuse them.

a0768b4a8a31e106d8b0-50dc802554eb38a24458b98ff72d550b.r19.cf3.rackcdn.com/scho0808boir-e-e.pdf

What strikes me from this thread is that everyone thinks that their method of doing things is most convenient for them.

So maybe convenience is a bit of a pointless argument.

laughing my face off at the idea that someone with more than one child could possibly be aiming for the moral high ground on environmental issues.

The mountain of tampons I will use in my life is a drop in the ocean against the environmental impact of actually having children.

I honestly cannot understand why a mooncup filled with blood is any more disgusting (and it is a bit gross let's face it) than cotton filled with blood? My ultimate desire would be to not shed the lining of my womb every 27 days, but sadly I have another fifteen years or so of this shit to put up with, so may as well make it as cheap and painless as possible.

And it's silicone. Not plastic. You can also get organic rubber ones if you like.

So should nobody have any children then? Save the planet, kill off the species?

And yes, that report was based on fallacious assumptions. And funded by the companies who produce disposable nappies. Worked out well for them didn't it, as it gets shoved in everyone's faces whenever this argument comes up.

Absolutely and categorically not true. The only 'evidence' you will find supporting that claim is from vested interests - or do you think that all companies selling 'green' products do so purely out of a sense of altruism, or maybe it's because they think there is a market there? It was funded by the EA who are govt funded, DEFRA and WRAP (Waste & Resources Action Programme), who were set up to promote recycling.

A couple of points, the environmental agency report assumed that people boil washed their nappies and ironed them, when the vast vast majority of people using reusable don't do that.

The assumptions made in the report are based on data that comes from sound research (the sources are there if you want to look them up - see Defra's MTP project). The figures are based on average laundering practices. By all means challenge the report but please back up your opinion with some evidence - anecdote does not equal data and all that.

I'm not trying to promote disposable nappies here btw, but it is important to understand that just because you may belief that something is environmentally better, that may not be borne out by the evidence when all factors are taken into account.

If the assumptions came from such sound research, why was the report updated, with the laundry factors changed?

Which set of data was correct?

MummytoMog - the updated report is what i had already linked to. And as i already stated, reuseables can have a lower carbon footprint if they are air dried, reused for more than one child etc. If you boil wash and tumble dry they are worse. The figures quoted are based on average laundering practices, and ON AVERAGE there is very little difference. If you want to use reusables you can reduce their carbon footprint, whereas if you use disposables the impact, while lower ON AVERAGE is fixed.

AAAAAaaaaaargh. Read the report. It was updated because of changes in manufacturing processes that affected the environmental impact of disposable nappies, because of the introduction of shaped nappies, and because of improvements in energy efficiency of domestic appliances. That is what science does - revise it's conclusions as new evidence comes to light or changes occur. It does not stick dogmatically to it's opinion regardless of what the evidence says.

I also fail to see why a cloth nappy is more "yuck" than a disposable... they're both full of shit that you have to empty down the loo. I found cloth nappies more sturdy and I was less likely to get covered in shit

Yes you aren't supposed to throw any poo away so if you use a disposable you have to tip poo down toilet, if you use reusable nappy you have to tip poo down the toilet. Surely that's the same 'grossness

'Have to'?

That must be a new thing, I used disposables with all 3 of my babies and never emptied the poo down the loo. I never ever saw or heard of anyone else doing that either.

YABU.

Although I do a lot of the things I do on the basis of sustainability, eco-friendliness etc, it's not reasonable to lay ecological crisis at the doors of women who use disposable sanitary pads and tampons. In 2013, women have better things to do than wash their menstrual blood off stuff, and it's because of innovations like that that they are able to.

I'm not going to be told that I'm selfish or causing ecological meltdown because I use tampons: of all the things that are causing that, the way I deal with my periods is not the most important.

I resent the fact that most of the stuff on your list comes under 'woman's work' - as though if we all got our hands a bit dirtier with shit and blood, and could spend all day holding our babies over the toilet, everything would be ok.

By applying Caitlin Moran's rule of Sexism; which is, 'are the men worrying about this?' To your point about sanitary products, to which I think the answer is 'hell, no!' I think you're being incredibly sexist OP. They couldn't give a damn what we shove up our fanjo's at that time of the month to keep things roughly under control.

Do you think all the politicians in Westminster are chatting amongst themselves; "now, if we could just get more women to use reusable sanitary products, put their children in cloth nappies, and breast feed, then our problems are OVER!"?!

No. They're not.

If you want to take half measures like taking public transport, use flannels, air dry and use reusable sanitary ware, then go for it. But they are half measures, designed to make people feel better. You think you're making a difference? You're not. The damage has been done, and unless the government actually make Eco alternatives (renewable energy etc), a viable and cost effective alternative, things will get steadily worse. Alright?

What you are doing is a tiny, insignificant drop in the ocean compared to what needs to be done.

Elimination communication, although a stupid name, is not that stupid. It's also not abusive to children. I did not, at any point, terrify my children into urinating or defecating.

I simply took note of reality, which was that when you change a dirty nappy, babies urinate straight away or soon after. So I got a nice small plastic bowl, and I caught the urine in the bowl, instead of being martyrish thing about it.

And babies' muscle control must vary by baby. I have identical twins. One was dry all night, every night by 18 months, and would wake up and tell me if he wanted the potty. Other one took another two years to be completely reliable.

Considering the real child abuse I've seen justified on MN, some radars need a bit of a repair.

Can I ask if the train you're travelling on is third rail, or diesel? It makes a huge difference to the environment, you know.

I think that it is daft to pick on disposable sanitary products specifically. We all have a negative effect on the environment in one way or another. I wonder if those of you who are so focused on the environmental effect of disposable nappies/tampons/sanitary towels go on holiday by plane? Do you own a car? Do you buy food with packaging on? Do you ever buy non locally produced food? Do you live in a home with more bedrooms than necessary ( I'm thinking that the living room should be used as a bedroom and kids share otherwise it is a waste of energy).

I used reusable nappies for the 1st 6 months, the only ones we got on with were little lambs. Ds is extremely active and he would become hysterical with every change, we now use disposable pull ups ( 3 a day ;) ) I am not willing to make my ds upset for the sake of my nappy principles.

We are however very conscious about our use of resources in other ways. We live in a 1 bedroom apartment which is very well insulated so our energy use is not very high. We buy local food as much as possible, we collect food from the forrests near by. We buy clothes and toys 2nd hand, I don't drive.

Yes we add 3 nappies a day to landfill but I don't think our overall effect on the environment is greater than average.

If you feel you want to avoid using disposable nappies that is your personal choice but I find it offensive to say that people who don't make the same choice as you arelazy. I could say people who insist on having their own bedroom are selfish and people who drive cars are lazy but that would be very short sighted and rude of me as they may well be minimising their effect of tge environment in other ways.

seff there are far too many humans....that is the biggest crisis facing the environment. So yes! for a while we need to have fewer children. Certainly having more than 1 is massively environmentally reckless.

Not read everything as it's far too long

But do people actually hold babies over toilets? How old are these babies?

And why can you not throw poo away?

Does this also apply to animal poo?

Well there we have the real issue at the heart of all this. Environmentally, we should be having less children, but economically, we need more people in the world to support the ageing population etc etc.

That's a whole other debate though, I think adding politics into this thread as well could get rather messy :)

Interesting, though! Something to think about :)

Poo is human waste. It has to be disposed of properly. Hence at hospitals they have proper disposals for anything covered in poo/ blood/ vomit etc

Does this view stretch to those with severe learning, physical or medical needs that may require incontinence products, or just small babies
Because I have not seen any acknowledgment to this