I was looking through some knitting blogs before, and came across articles about court cases over false claims about milk protein content in certain types of yarns, and the absence of cashmere in the Debbie Bliss Cashmerino yarns (acrylic being the real component). Am I the only person who wasn't aware of all this, all of which started about 3 years ago?! I feel so out of the loop! I guess the Australian media doesn't feel the need to report these sort of cases, as yarn is not as big an industry as it is overseas. Fortunately, I am not a big fan of Debbie Bliss yarns and have only ever used two types, both of which aren't 'cashmere' blends - and both of which I didn't enjoy using at all, the horrible stuff. This court case - be the allegations true or otherwise - has reaffirmed my decision to never touch this line of yarn again.
I think I have used yarn with - or claiming to have - milk content before, but not in any of the brands named in the court cases. I was wondering why Rowan Milk Cotton was being discontinued, after releasing so many patterns specifically for this type of yarn. Uh oh - does that mean that they have false label claims too? Just the other night I was thinking of buying a few balls of Milk Cotton Fine to knit the vest in the Mist pattern book by Kim Hargreaves. Oh well! I never liked knitting with cotton yarns anyway, which I find too splitty.
I think there was also some talk about other natural fibres in some yarns being imaginary, like alpaca and the like.. hope they're not true! I have thus far bought most of my alpaca yarn in the Classic Elite and Blue Sky Alpacas brands, or from Purl Alpaca Designs, which are all 100% alpaca. Being from an actual alpaca farm, as the case is for the latter, I'm confident that that lot at least is the real deal.
Who knew that there would and could be so much drama in the knitting world? I know it's still a business, but I associate hand-knitting and yarn with all things homely, natural and real - an ancient art that transcends time and place. I guess that doesn't really carry my meaning across; but the bottom line is that I didn't expect such dishonesty in the yarn industry. One of the reasons why people choose to knit - one of the reasons why I knit - is because I like to be able to control the physical and textural properties of the garment I create. It's also the closest we'll ever get to working with the raw fibres, unless you like to dabble in fibre spinning as well. So it feels so awful that we, as consumers, who promote this handcraft and support the yarn industry, are being deceived by manufacturers. Some people on the Ravelry forum were saying stuff like consumers aren't really being ripped off, because KFI/Debbie Bliss were undercutting the costs of other cashmere yarn-selling companies, so the usual cashmere price wasn't being paid anyway. To me, that makes no sense, because I most certainly would not pay $10 for a ball of wool/acrylic yarn blend (or however much they're charging for it). And anyway, costs aside, the point is, they are deliberately misleading consumers to believe there is a luxurious fibre in the yarn, which is wrong in principle and is illegal besides! The things people would do for money. Unbelievable.
If we are being lied to about fibres in balls of yarn, by big, well-known, expensive brands like Debbie Bliss as well, I wonder how many ready-to-wear items that we pay premiums for in department stores and boutiques contain fake natural fibres too? And there I was thinking that we only have to be careful with fake leather and brands for cosmetics and handbags out there. Speaking of which, be very, VERY careful when you shop for Ted Baker bags. I bought a very pretty patent leather baby pink clutch earlier this year from David Jones, and have since been in love with the brand. I was recently at the department store again to look at their handbags, and was going to buy one in the same shade of shiny baby pink as my clutch; BUT, upon looking at the label for another TB bag and finding that it said it was made of PVC, I checked the pink bag in my hands and found, to my disbelief, that it was also made of PVC and polyester! Needless to say, I did not get it - there was no way I was going to pay $310 (or whatever it was) for a PVC bag! I had a look online, on the House of Fraser website, and noticed that for a lot of the TB products, they actually don't list the materials the bags are made of, which is a bit unsettling. If it wasn't because I saw the label on that bag, I would have assumed that all the TB bags are patent leather, as you would, seeing as some of their products are, and because you would expect genuine leather from that sort of brand and for the price. I wouldn't say they're being deceptive, because they don't have leather claims on those PVC bags, but it is a bit sneaky, especially in the case of online retailers who don't disclose the composition details. I know the wallets are all leather though, and am very glad for that, because I love them so much! So there you go - make sure you check the labels in the bags before you purchase!
In case you're interested in reading about all the kerfuffle that's going on with the yarns (the Debbie Bliss court case is still ongoing, apparently), here are some links I found:
Milk fibre yarns:
http://cascadeyarns.com/milkproteinfiber.asp
http://www.ravelry.com/discuss/yarn/1771136/176-200
Debbie Bliss Cashmerino:
http://www.cascadeyarns.com/lawsuit.asp
http://www.kgw.com/news/business/Wash-kniting-firm-accuses-rival-of-spinning-yarn-105875253.html
http://www.ravelry.com/discuss/yarn/333168/551-575
My conclusion: must get a spinning wheel one of these days, so I can buy fleece directly from the farms and spin them into yarn myself!
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment