Our system works for us.
Works for you, screw the environment eh MF?*
* This is a deliberate troll 
Oh and btw when they have super runny poo it leaks out of disposables too, just as much ime.
Chat Forum
[closed]
Nappies, disposable or reusable?
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
Works for you, screw the environment eh MF
But of course, as has already been proved above, the benefits of one system over another is, at best, marginal. So we took the route which was best for us.Posted 2 years ago # -
Oh and btw when they have super runny poo it leaks out of disposables too, just as much ime
but not just as much ime...
I'm not saying our disposable didn't occasionally leak, but it was the odd one, rather than twice a day, every day...
Posted 2 years ago # -
How do you explain the fact that you seem to do 10 times more laundry than we do? I'm saying you could maybe be more efficient with your clothes changing that's all
My baby - he's a greedy boy with a strong stomach, what goes in stays in. probably 1 extra load per week, 2 max.
My Sister' baby - Delicate little girl with a weak stomach - I reckon 3/4 of what goes in comes out again. Multiple changes of clothes for baby, mum, sister and sometimes dog as well.
1 or 2 extra loads A DAY in the early months (my sister objects to smelling of baby sick)Don't assume all babies are like yours.........
Posted 2 years ago # -
But of course, as has already been proved above, the benefits of one system over another is, at best
That's not how I read it.. and there's no proof of any kind up there for that matter.
Don't assume all babies are like yours.........
I'm not.. just wondering what the deal was. I've known people make tons of work for themselves, which could be reduced by changing their practises. But I guess MF feels got-at so he won't want to get in to a chat about parenting tips..
Btw it's also worth mentioning to the OP that some brands of re-usables are much much better than others. Hardly had a leg leak from tots bots/little lambs despite plenty of runny poo. I think they're pretty good.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Don't assume all babies are like yours.........
Very good point.
But I guess MF feels got-at
Not at all - I am used to the rounds of 'what I do is best and everything that anyone else does therefore must be wrong' that is par for the course on here. At the end of the day I really couldn't give a damn if someone on here thinks what we are doing for our babies is wrong.Posted 2 years ago # -
Oh and btw when they have super runny poo it leaks out of disposables too, just as much ime
Interesting read. Disposables for our 20 month old. Luckily he's not really had many in the way of super runny nappies but he did this weekend and I can report that despite him having run all over the place while it was full, there was zero leakage. Pampers active fit FYI.
I think in the 20 months he's had less than 10 nappy leaks (and I reckon mainly down to us fitting them badly in those instances). Maybe we've been lucky?
Posted 2 years ago # -
MF I'm not telling you you're wrong really. Just a) wondering really why you do so much washing and b) trying to correct people who think re-usables necessarily mean tons of work. And also c) pointing out that they are better for the environment.
b) is a fact, c) is pretty convincing and a) is curiosity.
Posted 2 years ago # -
= loosing sight of reality completely. Teh babygro pic tells it all - thats a babygrow per child every couple of hours.
Classic
TJ, are parents who use disponsable nappies all just a bunch of nazis?
Posted 2 years ago # -
A: We do as much washing as necessary for our circumstances (ie, how much the clothes/bedding gets soiled by OUR babies).
B: I don't think that re-usables are tons of work - we simply decided they would be too much work for us given *our* situation. I have already stated that I initially wanted to use them.
C: The link I have provided shows that any benefits of one system over the other is, at best, negligible and the subsequent research was done assumed that it would be possible to dry all the nappies without using a tumble dryer.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Not at all - its just the attitude MF shows is rather extreme and as far as he is concerned his attitude and methods are the only valid ones.
It has come up a few times on threads discussing children. Hence what molgrips is saying.
Disposables / reusables eco argument is not totally obvious and it depends what bits of pollution you consider most important. Reusbale shade it just about
Posted 2 years ago # -
Not at all - its just the attitude MF shows is rather extreme and as far as he is concerned his attitude and methods are the only valid ones.
Is that right?
My original reply...
Whatever works best for you - sound arguments for both ( environmental v convenience etc). We use dispoable but only because we have twins and can barely keep up with the washing/drying of clothes as it is.Posted 2 years ago # -
We're also having conversations around disposable/non at the moment whilst bump#1 uses its mum as kicking practice...
ISTR some research being done by Procter & Gamble BITD about disposables being about the same environmentally as non-disposables? Something to do with the extra energy of washing machine on hot-ish cycle plus detergents being washed to sea, vs the more "visual" impact of pampers.
<goes and googles>
Oh, turns out the best solution is to use a laundry service.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Ok, my tuppence worth. We have a 5 month old and use Nature babycare “eco biodegradable” disposable nappies AND reusable Motherease washables. When Junior Bakes was small we stuck to disposables due to the washables being too big (‘one size’ doesn’t quite fit all) but since he passed one month old the washables have been used during the day, with disposables (usually only one needed) overnight and when out and about. We feel this is the perfect compromise between ease, cost, environmental benefits and comfort for him.
The disposables are 100% biodegradable and will in theory break down much quicker then ‘other brands’ in landfill. They are however more expensive, but this is offset by also using washables. We’ve declined from putting them in the compost bin as there are still a quite a few used every week but certainly the wheelie bin is not over loaded so far.
The washables were bought second hand (much cheaper and no further costs (environmental or otherwise) of manufacture) and will be passed on in due course. As has been described they’re barely any more trouble than disposables to use when about the house and rather than emptying a lidded bin of them into the wheelie bin periodically, we empty them into the washing machine. I’d guess it results in 2/3 extra loads a week at most and takes no time to hang on the rads/ drier to dry at ambient temperatures.
Personally I’m pretty dubious of the 2005/2008 study that found in favour of disposables which, from memory, was based on boil washes, tumble drying and ignored the issue of disposal to landfill. I’m not saying it was, but bear in mind a lot of this research may be funded by those with a vested interest in one result or another. Those that bring up the waste in water and energy in using washables could start with reducing their usage for cleaning bike & bike kit way before the three extra nappy loads it takes us. However, there are times when a disposable is much more convenient and they are also more absorbent for overnight or long journeys so we’ll use them accordingly.
That’s our experience so far and it may well change when Jnr moves onto solids and we start needing liners etc. However I’d say don’t rule out washables on the grounds of ease and certainly not on environmental grounds.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Personally I’m pretty dubious of the 2005/2008 study that found in favour of disposables
It didn't find in favour of either which has been my point all along - there really doesn't appear to be a clear winner in terms of which is best so the best bet is to do what suits your own lifestyle and/or values and don't worry about it too much. After all, if a carbon footprint is that much of a concern, what are you doing having a baby at all in the first place? Posted 2 years ago # -
research being done by Procter & Gamble BITD about disposables being about the same environmentally as non-disposables?
Research carried out by a disposable nappy manufacturer shows that there is no additional environmental impact when using disposable nappies over reusable ones?
No surprise there then.
NB. not arguing one way or the other, just suspicious of research carried out by companies/ people with an specific interest in seeing the research turn out a particular way.
Posted 2 years ago # -
ISTR some research being done by Procter & Gamble
That's Procter and Gamble, manufacturer of Pampers?
Dr Bakes - similar experience to ours except we hated Motherease. They always seemed to leak. Do you not have this problem?
As for solid poo - we've not had a single leakage with solid poo. It seems to be (for us) a lot less mobile, and a lot easier to clean up from the arse, but it really really stinks like.. well.. sh*t. Hhugely less pleaseant than milk poo
After all, if a carbon footprint is that much of a concern, what are you doing having a baby at all in the first place?
It's all about mitigation innit.
Posted 2 years ago # -
It's all about mitigation innit.
I was being facetious there though really!Posted 2 years ago # -
M-F, it's all about compromise I'd say. However if the manufacturers of, among other brands, Huggies, Snugglers and Pull Ups (Kimberley Clark), are putting that report on their website it’s a fair bet that those results lie firmly on their side of the argument’s mean? Disposable nappies contribute 4% of landfill volume which is quite a bit when you think of the size of those responsible! I’m not in your situation but what I’ve outlined above seems the best compromise for us.
Molgrips: The Motherease seem fine for Jnr and the only really serious leakage (top of neck!) we’ve had has actually been from the disposables!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Used reusable including having two kids in nappies at the same time.
Babies on reusables tend to be toilet trained faster than those in disposables.
As for the is it greener I suspect anything reusable is better than anything we use once and then throw away - is the disposable nature of our lifestyles one of the major issues? Use it once and then discard it? Research is mixed on the issues - I agree with that- but they are certainly cheaper assuming you use them for more than one child.
IIRC the energy saving is put at the same as driving 1000 miles less over 2 years for reusable. This assumed a variety of questionable assumptions though including buying a washing machine - as if only people with nappies use one.
I doubt the environmental impact will sway you as it is not massive -Posted 2 years ago # -
Think about how they make disposable things.. not just nappies, but anything - say a waxed paper cup.
Someone in say Sweden gets into a truck and drives out to the woods where they plant a load of saplings.. then for the next 50 or so years people drive about checking on them, spraying pesticides and what not, then someone else comes along in a massive machine and fells it, drives it to a pulp mill where a big machine uses loads of leccy to make it into a paper material which is then shipped somewhere else to make paper, from where it's shipped somewhere else again to make a cup. Meanwhile, somewhere in the middle east someone's sucking oil out of the ground, sending it to a refinery where someome makes finer chemcicals out of it and someone else gets into a truck, drives it to a port and puts it on a ship. Then it's shipped around the world to the cup factory, the cup's coated, packed up and driven to another port where it gets shipped to our shores and driven to a warehouse. Then it gets unpacked and re-packed into a smaller box (made from cardboard from trees from say.. norway.. where someone felled the tree and ....) then it gets driven to a retailer, then driven to your office.. using diesel extracted from the ground in the middle east and refined using lots of power and so on and so on.
All so that you can grab one, take two swigs of cold water then toss it in the bin - without even thinking about it.
WHEREUPON someone has to come round and collect it along with the rest of your rubbish in a big truck powered by more diesel, and drive it somewhere discrete where they bury it in the ground.
Later that afternoon, you grab another, two swigs, toss it away. Then the next day, and the next.. meanwhile oil is being pumped, trees planted, felled, driven all over the place.. and so on.
Crazy isn't it?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Crazy isn't it?
Good for the economy though
[retires to a safe distance]
Posted 2 years ago # -
And that, jon1973, is precisely why we are all so f*cked
Posted 2 years ago # -
Stopping all this cycling in bad weather is probably a good way to save on all that detergent/power/pollution when washing kit
Me? - I don't like polar bears so I'm not bothered
Posted 2 years ago # -
My brother did some business recently with a big landfill company.
The majority of landfill is sealed and actually doesnt rot at all. This firm regularly re-open landfills which are up to 30 years old...even the newspapers haven't rotted after 30 years so all this worry over nappies is a load of old shit, literally.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Are you sure it doesn't rot at all? I'd check with your brother's business colleagues on that one if I were you? That company isn't doing a good job if that is the case? They're not designed to be hermetically sealed, just controlled so that the gases released are controlled and contaminants don't leach into the groundwater. Not rotting at all is very different to rotting slowly. If it rots slowly that is even more of an argument for throwing less into a site.
Unfortunately the quickest way to break down rubbish would be to warm it up and get it wet. Surprisingly the prospect of warm wet rotting rubbish is not that popular?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Posted 2 years ago #
-
Yep, they're sealed to the point you can graze cattle on top!
The only decomposition is anaerobic and they siphon off the methane that's produced.
I imagine in 2000 years time there will be a neat pile of bio-degradable nappies and an archeologist will burn his lips on a McDonalds apple pie
Posted 2 years ago # -
Like I say, that is not the same as 'not rotting at all' and even more of an argument for reducing the amount of waste to landfill.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I imagine in 2000 years time there will be a neat pile of bio-degradable nappies and an archeologist will burn his lips on a McDonalds apple pie
And they both taste about the same...Posted 2 years ago # -
Er, P&G also make Ariel, Fairy, Daz, Lenor and Bold (among others).
Point being that they should be pretty impartial between which one was "best" - apart from what's in it for the shareholders.
Posted 2 years ago # -
They must make far more from Pampers tho Rich? I mean it's what, £4-6 for a week's supply of pampers isn't it? Not really sure
Against £5 or whatever for 4-6 weeks' worth of powder...
Posted 2 years ago # -
They must make far more from Pampers tho Rich? I mean it's what, £4-6 for a week's supply of pampers isn't it? Not really sure Against £5 or whatever for 4-6 weeks' worth of powder...
Depends - the margins might be much greater on the powder...Posted 2 years ago # -
Unlikely there's much margin on either of those super high volume high competition product lines imo.. but then I know naff all about grocery retail
Posted 2 years ago # -
"Nappies, disposable or reusable?"
i grew out of them 22 odd years ago sorry.
reckon you probably should have by now too?Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
