Safety recalls needed for what we eat, wear?
By Beth Teitell
Thursday, June 1, 2006
Speaking as an American consumer, may I ask why corporations define ‘‘safety problems” so narrowly when it comes to recalls? It’s always about brakes or small parts ripe for swallowing or sharp, eye-poking corners - and never about the real malfunctions that plague us all.
Year after year, ‘‘faulty” products make our knees look fat or feet appear enormous, or make consumers addicted to the rich flavor of trans fats. Where are the whistleblowers?
Even as Toyota is in the midst of recalling 1 million vehicles worldwide because of faulty parts that could cause drivers to lose control of the steering wheel, ‘‘city shorts” are still being sold in stores nationwide. Think of the emotional damage from walking around in a garment that makes wearers look ‘‘stubby,” at best. Are the warnings on the tag advising ‘‘not suitable for women under 5-feet-10-inches with a BMI above 20? No, they are not. We’re on our own, people.
Sure, let’s protect 2-year-olds from ingestible Legos and tiny high-heel Barbie shoes, but let’s not forget their moms. They’re the ones buying Crocs, unprotected. Those bright pink and lime green rubber sandals are selling like hotcakes across America. Their unimaginable comfort masks their clinical hideousness. Warning: May cause spousal mocking.
Furthermore, given the number of ‘‘100 calorie packet” products on the market - Oreo Thin Crisps, Just Right Pecan Sandies, etc. - I’d say the FDA is dropping the ball. Sirs and Madams, either pass a federal law limiting purchases to one package per consumer, or get those multipack boxes off the shelves ASAP before we get any further into bathing-suit season. Warning: May trick you into eating as much as you usually do while convincing you you’re on a diet.
If it sounds like I’m in favor of a Nanny State - I am. It’s better than the current state of denial.
