I am a bit confused about this. One of the main things I wanted from the more eco-friendly nappy was for it not to contain the gel in it that, when wetted, crystalises and can occassionally be seen on DD's bottom as this has been linked to toxic shock syndrome and all sorts of horrid things. I wonder if years later we will find out that this gel has been able to do some really awful things against our babies wet (and sometimes raw with nappy rash) skin. This substance has been banned from use in Tampax - yes these are internal, but when a child has nappy rash this substance can get into open sores and so is effectively the same. Why is it still allowed in nappies? Anyway, on the Moltex site it says they are made with:
unbleached wood pulp
recycled plastic material
no perfumes
no brighteners
no lotions
no antioxidants
However, it doesn't say anything about not containing this gel. Does anyone know of a good alternative????
I found this quite disturbing in the following article - sorry it's so long!
"The super absorber (sodium polyacrylate) that makes disposables so absorbent was removed from tampons in 1985 because of its links with toxic shock syndrom (TSS). It is believed that TSS could occur if the baby has an open lesion such as the kind that occurs with nappy rash. The chemical is lethal to cats if inhaled and death has occurred from ingestion of just 5 grams of this chemical. Paediatric journals contain reports of the chemical sticking to babies genitals. When the baby's skin gets wet, this super absorber can pull fluids from baby's skin.
Concern has been expressed about the strong superabsorbent qualities of the gel in disposables; it is possible that it may reach to the baby's internal organs if it is not contained in the liner.
Following test results, WEN issued a press release on 30 July 2000 with the results of chemical analysis of 5 types of newborn size nappies. Tests were carried out on disposable nappies for the chemical tributyl tin (TBT) following the tests made by Greenpeace Germany. Greenpeace found TBT in various nappies on sale in Germany. An excerpt from WEN's press release is as follows :"Five types of newborn size nappies showed the presence of TBT. Although the amounts are tiny, babies could be in contact with up to 3.6 times the estimated tolerable daily intake. TBT is a long-lasting toxic chemical which is a known endocrine disruptor. It has caused shellfish to change sex and recent research suggests it could act in a similar way in humans. It is used in antifouling paint on ships and in the manufacture of certain plastics.. WEN is extremely concerned that a product is being sold for use on newborn babies even though the manufactures know it contains a chemical which, in tiny amounts, can disrupt hormones. They are concerned that it may leach out of materials it is in. The chemical can be absorbed through the skin and as babies' skins are much thinner than adults it is a cause for concern".
Released on the BBC news website on 25 September 2000. Nappy link to infertility. Scientists believe disposable nappies could be linked to both male infertility and testicular cancer. Research carried out in Germany suggests that disposable nappies may have an adverse affect on the development of a boy's reproductive system. Scientists found that the plastic lining in these nappies increased the temperature of the scrotum by one degree, High scrotal temperatures are known to reduce sperm counts in adults. The scientists tested the scrotal temperatures of 48 baby boys over two 24-hour periods. Each of the babies wore either disposable plastic lined nappies or cotton nappies. They found that the disposable nappies impaired normal testicular cooling while the reusable nappies had no effect on temperature. The scientists added that the temperature of the scrotum in boys with disposable nappies could be expected to increase further when they suffered from fevers.
The chemicals used in disposable nappies are not subject to government controls or independent testing. No one knows the long term effects of having such chemicals next to a baby's skin for 2 1/2 years.
Evidence suggests that babies who wear real nappies potty train 6-12 months earlier than babies that wear disposables. They become more aware of their bodily functions sooner because they can feel that they are wet.
Other problems reported to the Consumer Protection Agency have been chemical burns, reports of babies pulling disposables apart and putting pieces of plastic into their noses and mouth, choking on tab papers and linings, plastic melting onto the skin and ink staining the skin.
It has also been reported in the Lancet that hip problems have increased over the last 20 years with the widespread use of disposable nappies, as they provide little support for correct hip development for crawling and walking. Cotton nappies gives more support holding a new-borns legs in the optimum position for good/correct hip development. Increased instance of coccyx bone damage has also been reported in toddlers wearing thin disposables, cotton nappies provide more padding and protection for tumbling toddlers when learning to walk.
A report published in the Lancet in August 1998 linked close proximity to landfill with congenital abnormalities, finding that pregnant women living within a 3KM radius are one third more likely to have babies with birth abnormalities, e.g. spina bifida and heart defects.
A study from America published in October 1999 linked disposable nappies to asthma. Laboratory mice exposed to various brands of disposable nappies suffered increased eye, nose and throat irritation, including bronchoconstriction similar to that of an asthma attack. Six leading cotton and disposable nappies were tested; cloth nappies were not found to cause respiratory problems among the lab mice."