Teething sos amber necklaces recall

taxus_baccata

http://www.nca.ie/index.jsp?p=103&n=127&a=994

Hi all, just heard about this today. Need to have proof of purchase for refund though which is making my blood boil! Who keeps receipts for such small items!?


anyhow just thought I'd pass on the news

Chucken

What about necklaces bought elsewhere I wonder?:(

taxus_baccata

I think from now on teething amber bracelets etc are no longer advisable for those under 36 mths. I don't know if other companies will follow suit and recall products, I remember when I bought the necklace reading the blurb that assured me that the product was totally safe, I feel so foolish now

RubyGirl

Did u pay by visa/laser. My sister has them but she put's them around her daughters ankle under her baby grow. She did swear by them aswell.

pwurple

Let an adult wear them as a bit of jewellery maybe if you don't have the receipt. Or bin them and forget about it.

liliq

Im leaving my sons necklace on him.
From what I've read they are categorised by regulators as toys and as such (with the small parts etc), can't be sold for use in under 3 year olds.

How Strange

My sons is staying put too and I've got one for our next baby when he/she starts teething too.

NextSteps

I'm leaving my son's on too - he's never even noticed it. I took it off briefly a few weeks ago and he got a horrible nappy rash, for nearly the first time ever (and he's 2).

annamcmahon

Leaving them on my two as well

Hobbitfeet

My son is keeping his too. You have to use your common sense with things like this. He never wears his at night, if your child is always pulling at it then take it off because then there is a real chance of it breaking. My lo is totally oblivious to it I never once seen him touch or notice it so I'm not worried about him breaking it. I don't see a huge choking hazard, I see people all the time with bottles propped up on blankets in their child's mouth, now that's a real choking hazard yet there are numerous products available for 'hands free feeding' and not a word about them. I think the nca need to get their priorities right or maybe it's just preferred that parents medicate their children instead I using a natural product

Ms2011

I emailed teethingsos to get clarification on this & this was there reply:

We have been requested by the NCA to recall out Honey Bean products.  It is not an issue over the amber itself, or the colour, but an issue with the make up of the product of small beads.  In the absence of a directive to deal with these products speciffically, the authorities have tested this product under criteria devised for toys and if they are treated as a toy, they can break and may give rise to a potential choking hazard.  You can read the details here.  Having heard the advice from the NCA, and seeing it in use, a parent needs to make their own decision regarding it's use.   

As Liliq said there was no catagory to test the necklaces so the criteria used was the same as what would be used for a toy & therefore recommended for children over 36 months.
I took my son's amber beads off while I await a reply to my email. I walked the floors with him that night as he screamed crying with burning cheeks, I've NEVER in 11 months had to do that, it took 3 hours to get him to sleep & he only fell asleep through sheer exhaustion. I put the beads back on the following day after reading the above email reply & my son slept that night for 13.5hrs straight.
My OH & made an informed decision after that that his beads were staying on!!

taxus_baccata

Hi all,

Thanks for all the replies. I've decided that we are keeping them too! Baby loves them and to be honest, I really hadn't considered what we'd do without them. Thinking logically I wouldn't ever have allowed baby to play with the beads. I think pride is my problem at the moment, I came under a bit of criticism for putting beads on my baby boy- I really hope the inlaws don't hear about the recall!

Neyite

I have it under his sock around his ankle. In a few months when he gets a bit more adept at taking off his socks I'll figure out where to put it that he cant get at it. (tights?? lol)

I dont think they are safe around the neck - day or night though.

pwurple

taxus_baccata wrote: »

Hi all,

Thanks for all the replies. I've decided that we are keeping them too! Baby loves them and to be honest, I really hadn't considered what we'd do without them. Thinking logically I wouldn't ever have allowed baby to play with the beads. I think pride is my problem at the moment, I came under a bit of criticism for putting beads on my baby boy- I really hope the inlaws don't hear about the recall!

At least put them somewhere away from his neck. I cringed when I saw this fad starting with celebs. At least this ban should stop them being sold for a while... The fashion will hopefully pass before some child gets strangled.

Cienciano

Got them for my child, to be honest they don't make a bit of difference at all. Any child that seems to be in better form after them is pure coincidental.
Got ours on teethingsos but don't have the email from them.

taxus_baccata

Cool, I had bought the necklace and had it wrapped around his ankle, no fear of strangling my poor dude!

Chucken

I told my daughter about this thread. Her little guy is nearly 5 months. She had the necklace around his neck but with dribbles etc his little neck was getting sore, so she has it around his ankle for the last week or so.She doesn't leave it on when he's in bed.

dublinlady

They DO work for my daughter and she's keeping them. I put them on her ankle as I am afraid shed pull at them or something get caught on them when around her neck but that's my decision. Def staying on tho!

How Strange

The owner of teething SOS told me that it works on skin contact so it doesn't matter where they're placed. We always wrapped them around my sons ankle at night and at nap times until he got so big that we couldn't wrap them around twice anymore.

He knows he has a necklace but he never bothers with it. It's just there.

pwurple

How Strange wrote: »

The owner of teething SOS told me...

What profession is that person, out of interest? I am wondering what qualifies them to make that statement about how they work. I assumed they were some kind of jeweller, rather than a scientist or medic.

Hobbitfeet

Does anyone know what tests were carried out in this product? How did they determine that the beads could crack and break easily?
Also I've been trying to find out if there has actually been any cases of choking, swallowing, beads breaking or strangulation but I haven't been able to find anything.

How Strange

They got a hammer and applied brute force to see if the beads would shatter. Then an adult pulled the necklace apart until it broke. The beads did not separate from the necklace but they deemed it a sufficient enough risk.

As liliq said it was categorized as a toy so they based their assessment on the fact that a baby/toddler would have it in their hands all the time and would put it in their mouth.

There was one case in the UK over the last few years but the choking was due to the metal clasp not the beads. The necklaces I have don't have a metal clasp but a screw in type of bead.

There have been no incidence of either because of the beads (thankfully as no one wants a child to choke or strangle) in UK, US, Canada, Australia or Ireland.

Cot bumpers and baby wakers, on the other hand, have been the cause of serious injuries and even deaths but neither are banned.

pwurple

Hobbitfeet wrote: »

Does anyone know what tests were carried out in this product? How did they determine that the beads could crack and break easily?
Also I've been trying to find out if there has actually been any cases of choking, swallowing, beads breaking or strangulation but I haven't been able to find anything.

There are hundreds of cases of strangulation and choking on various objects of that size and shape. Blind chords are the most recent notable one. There are size and shape laws and regulations for objects that are regulated for sale to under 3's. the pieces have to be above a certain size. That's why you see 3+ on so many things in toy shops. See the EU General Product Safety Derective and EN71 safety standards.

They prefer to ban and recall the dangerous products BEFORE a child is harmed.

pwurple

How Strange wrote: »

Cot bumpers and baby wakers, on the other hand, have been the cause of serious injuries and even deaths but neither are banned.

I know, this is madness too. I often wonder how they are still sold.

mariebeth

How Strange wrote: »

They got a hammer and applied brute force to see if the beads would shatter. Then an adult pulled the necklace apart until it broke. The beads did not separate from the necklace but they deemed it a sufficient enough risk.

I work in a baby room of a creche, and we've banned the amber necklaces after two of them broke apart while being worn by babies in the room, so brute force and a hammer do not need to be used to break them.

MrCreosote

Wow! Tiny coloured beads on a flimsy string wrapped around an infant's neck, and there's a choking hazard! Inconceivable!

They don't work. Best just to throw them in the bin.

dollybird2

It's a generalisation to say "they don't work". For me the proof is in the pudding, and I was a total cynic when I heard about amber necklaces.

I have a bracelet on my daughters ankle. When I took it off & left it at my mam's accidentally, my little one developed an angry, red and blistering nappy rash that used to wake her at night resulting in a nappy change and tears. I put the amber bracelet back on and hey ho the nappy rash cleared up and we both got our nights sleep again.

I know of babies that these haven't worked for also so I wouldn't call them a necessity for every child, but they work for mine so she'll be keeping hers on where she cannot pull at it.

Jesus Christ

*koff* coincidence *pardonme*

Ericaa

How Strange wrote: »

Cot bumpers and baby wakers, on the other hand, have been the cause of serious injuries and even deaths but neither are banned.

Walkers are banned in Canada. I wonder why no one sees that as a serious warning light for getting one here.

dollybird2

Jesus Christ wrote: »

*koff* coincidence *pardonme*

I hope your "koff" clears up soon. A coincidence is something that occurs simultaneously to a change as a one off. When a change is noted on more than one occasion that is a result.

Ericaa

dollybird2 wrote: »

I hope your "koff" clears up soon. A coincidence is something that occurs simultaneously to a change as a one off. When a change is noted on more than one occasion that is a result.

Have you taken it from her more then once?