Wanted: Angel

Happy New Year!

Solveeczema has always been a hobby for me — an important one, but nevertheless, something I was never able to devote enough time to.  Getting the site going took over a year and very real personal sacrifice.  I had a lot of help, too.  But once I’d written the initial articles about our experience, I felt a responsibility to the hundreds of people who wrote asking for more information.

The feedback I’ve gotten since then has been amazing — there is nothing like hearing you have helped to suddenly and dramatically make a child’s life better — which has kept me thinking about how to take this endeavor beyond this simple amateur web site.

Just keeping the site over the years has been more than I bargained for.  Beyond the costs, I haven’t been able to keep up with email, I have had perpetual problems with updates because the site is published on Comcast, and making updates and changes has been an exercise in extreme patience (and sometimes futility).  This past year, Comcast changed its home page and along with its “improvements”, I lost the ability to log on to my accounts using a browser, any browser, at all.  I have been unable to check my spam folders or to update the Solveeczema site since.

A Solveeczema user recently made a donation large enough for me to consider a real web hosting package through Network Solutions for a year.  I am hopeful I can do this in January or February.  This will significantly help when I have updates to the site, but it won’t improve my time or my ability to reach or help more people by much.   My ultimate goal is a study, scientific support for a solution.

I haven’t written about that much because there are still many hurdles, but I have over the years been slowly taking concrete steps toward this goal.  A number of people early on offered (indeterminate) financial support for a study, but I wasn’t in a position to take them up on it.  That’s changing.

If you have benefited from Solveeczema and are in a position to be an angel — of the beneficent winged type as opposed to the early venture capital type — please contact me through the Solveeczema web site for a proposal.  (Click on the “feedback” link under “Questions and Feedback” on the Solveeczema home page.)

Rates of eczema, allergy, and asthma continue to rise worldwide, and I believe I can pinpoint why.  If you have used this site to good effect, you know I am serious.  Rates of eczema in some towns in Sweden have now topped 40% (researchers determined it to be something about the indoor home environment…)  The amount of effort and money going into developing, testing, and evaluating just “measurement instruments” for eczema severity and quality of life is staggering.

I hope somewhere out there is an angel who sees the promise of demonstrating a true solution as worth a small fraction of that.

Off Topic Post: Joshua Bell Strikes Again – Virtually

The story of violin virtuoso Joshua Bell playing incognito in a Washington DC subway — where virtually no one stops to listen — is circulating again by email.

The story is true.  I couldn’t help writing about it on this blog’s first “Off Topic” post.

But as with most experiments, especially medical ones, people must take care to separate the experiment from the conclusions that can (or can’t) be drawn from them.

People love an incredible story —  in this case, especially the observation that every child who went through the station tried to stop and listen.

But here’s the problem with it:  it was a set up.  Whether by deliberate design or not, the outcome was a foregone conclusion.  In Malcolm Gladwell’s bestselling book The Tipping Point, he discusses research that speaks to this, that the most important factor in whether people stop is if they have a few moments to spare.  It’s not about beauty or character, need or greed.  It’s just about whether people are pressed for time.  And these people in the DC subway were chosen because of their time vise.

In The Tipping Point, Gladwell discusses a study by Princeton psychologists on a group of seminary students.  Researchers asked each aspiring theologian to prepare a short talk on a Bible-based theme, then to give the talk at another building a short walk away.  On the way to their presentations, each student came across a sick man in an alley.  The psychologists wanted to find out who would stop and help, and what factors (especially of character) would predict who would take the time to lend assistance.

In some cases, the researchers even gave the seminary students the topic of the Good Samaritan to talk about!  To some, he’d say they were late and expected to start already, and to others he’d say they were early but might as well start heading over.

It turned out that none of the factors they studied (such as talking about the Good Samaritan story from the Bible right beforehand) had any effect.  The only thing that did was whether the student was in a hurry or had time.  There the difference was huge. Other research has backed this up.

I have trouble believing the Washington Post reporter who set up this “experiment” with Joshua Bell didn’t know any of this when he designed it — and it’s not really an experiment if you already know the outcome.  Even if he didn’t know to start, he should have done his homework.  (And if he didn’t do his homework, was it really an experiment from which to draw such sweeping conclusions, or just a stunt with a predetermined outcome?)

He proposed it as a test of whether people would recognize beauty out of context, but if he had been genuine about it, he would have gone to, say, a park near where poor day laborers gather, or asked Bell to play anonymously and out of the way at a picnic for underprivileged kids or at a garish amusement park or in disguise at a farmer’s market.  He didn’t do any of these things, because he likely knew or suspected he wouldn’t get the outcome he wanted for this story, i.e., Bell would have drawn crowds.

In the Bell subway “experiment”, the only people who stopped were the ones who perceived themselves as having a few moments, just as research would predict.  Young children, one must note, live in the time warp of childhood and always think they have time for something interesting.  To make it a test of whether people recognize beauty out of context, the reporter should have put Joshua Bell in a jarringly different context, where people had maybe other (less “beautiful”) diversions, but had at least some time to stop if they wished to.

Just to put this in context:  There is an orphanage in Cambodia that educates and supports Cambodia’s garbage dump children.  The rescued kids were so grateful, they organized a program to bring books and a day of happiness to children at the dump from which they had come.  I was not surprised to hear that the children at the dump treated these books like wondrous, precious treasures.  They don’t need an education to recognize or be hungry for beauty in the midst of squalor and despair.  I’m willing to bet Mr. Bell’s violin playing would be received with equal gratitude and wonder by these most destitute of the poor.  (But you’d have to design such a visit with the same circumstantial sensitivity as by these children who returned.)

The subway story filled me with cynicism about the reporter rather than people’s capacity to recognize beauty.  Shame on him.

It’s still a good story, though.  But poor Joshua Bell!

Blog Rules and Sponsorship

I just heard a news story on the radio that the FTC has approved new rules applying to blogs that review or recommend products in relationship to commercial activity and potential sponsorships.

I don’t know if I have to make a statement if I DON’T have any sponsorships, but I’ll restate it just in case:

Solveeczema.org and Solve Eczema’s Blog are entirely volunteer and non-profit.  I have never received any payment for listing, suggesting, reviewing, or linking to any product.  I have never even received any product samples, despite their having been occasionally offered!  (Wait, I have received some free samples at the local farmer’s market, but I have not listed that vendor’s products on my site or blog — though I may, once I have a chance to properly try them out.  If so, I will comply with rules to state that they were samples, but it will not affect my review in any case.)  All of the soaps on Solveeczema’s Blog Master List, for example, were purchased by me prior to my trying them.

Although, Jill Schoff credits Solveeczema.org as the inspiration for her book Green Up Your Cleanup,  I did not receive a free copy of the book (and I haven’t asked for one, small press authors have to pay for copies they give out from their own pockets — but I will unapologetically hint that I would happily accept one if offered!)

To be absolutely nitpicky about disclosure:  one of the soap flake makers I list on Solveeczema.org made a donation when I asked on Solve Eczema’s Blog to help defray expenses to keep my site online — which helped and for which I was grateful — but it did not in any way change my recommendation for the product or my site.  It was a similar order of magnitude as private donations from parent-users.  I had been recommending that maker for years already, without any contact with them and I personally actually use a different brand of soap flakes (which is clear on my site).  To this day, I have not tried that maker’s products, but based on the underlying issues outlined on Solveeczema.org, I will continue to recommend them — especially since I have heard from parents who have used that maker’s soap flakes in their eczema removal process and I have heard only good feedback about them.

Not that I haven’t considered monetizing the site.  There is a lot of money to be made from Google ads and sponsored links, especially where allergy and eczema are concerned.  I frankly still mostly pay for the expenses of this endeavor out of my own pocket and have thought a lot over the years since it began how I could monetize it so I could afford to do more with it to help far more people.  If I ever monetized in any way, it would be clearly announced and spelled out on my site — regardless of the FCC and their rules.

Lastly, in case people aren’t aware, per WordPress rules, WordPress.com bloggers are not even allowed to have sponsored links or ads, it’s a condition of getting the benefit of their free blog software.

Persistence of Detergent Residues

I think this research paper by Horiuchi Utako from Gunma University in Japan speaks for itself — the translation of the abstract isn’t perfect, but the meaning is perfectly clear:

1)  A lot of detergent remains in clothing even after excessive rinsing.

2)  A significant amount of those residues can migrate onto other surfaces that come into contact with the clothing, including skin.

The abstract is short and is well worth reading.  The interesting conclusion to Solveeczema users:  ”wash the diapers for the babies with hypersensitivity using soaps in stead of synthetic detergents.”

The paper appears to have been published in 1983.

Update on mattresses: Avoiding dust

Here’s an interesting development.  In a previous post, I wrote about our experience choosing a mattress that wouldn’t be an allergy source for this specific detergent problem.   In trying to find something that wouldn’t shed detergent-laden dust or introduce potential allergens such as latex, we chose an organic cotton mattress with a food-grade polyethylene dust-mite barrier from Naturepedic, on a solid maple platform bed from Pacific Rim.

With some months of experience behind us now, I have to add a wonderful observation.  Not only have we had no problems with detergent dust, we have had no problems with dust of any kind!  In my experience, the space under mattresses is a breeding ground for large dust bunnies.  Under this mattress, there have been no dust bunnies to speak of, and almost no dust at all.

I don’t know if the dust-mite barrier is entirely the reason, or if it is a combination of the barrier and the higher-than usual space under the bed (good air circulation) — but the rest of the room has remained quite low-dust as well, with no dust bunnies around the bed, either.

In contrast, the traditional mattress in the other room begets as many dust bunnies as ever, as I have come to expect is normal under a bed.

Quite apart from the allergy issue, it’s wonderful not to get those piles of dust under the mattress.  I never realized shedding from the mattress could be such a source — especially since we vacuum our traditional mattress every time we change the bedding.

No More Toxic Tub Report

Although my site is narrowly focused, this might be of some interest to solveeczema.org users:

A new report by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics discusses toxic contaminants in children’s bath and personal care products.

“Despite marketing claims like ‘gentle’ and ‘pure,’ dozens of top-selling children’s bath products are contaminated with the cancer-causing chemicals formaldehyde and 1,4-dioxane, according to the March 2009 Campaign for Safe Cosmetics report, ‘No More Toxic Tub.‘”

Of most interest to users of solveeczema:

“The chemicals were not disclosed on product labels because they’re contaminants, not ingredients, and therefore are exempt from labeling laws.

Formaldehyde contaminates personal care products when common preservatives release formaldehyde over time in the container. Common ingredients likely to contaminate products with formaldehyde include quaternium-15, DMDM hydantoin, imidazolidinyl urea and diazolidinyl urea.

1,4-dioxane is a byproduct of a chemical processing technique called ethoxylation, in which cosmetic ingredients are processed with ethylene oxide. Manufacturers can easily remove the toxic byproduct, but are not required by law to do so. Common ingredients likely to be contaminated with 1,4-dioxane include PEG-100 stearate, sodium laureth sulfate, polyethylene and ceteareth-20.”

Read the entire report at safecosmetics.org

Talk of Pillows

Someone asks me recently if I could suggest pillows that would work, a question I have been asked before, but I really cannot answer in relation to the material on Solveeczema, at least with any degree of certainty.

We still mostly do without.

At one point, I ordered several very expensive organic pillows (cotton, wool, etc.) that were supposed to have been formulated for people with allergies.  All caused congestion (but no eczema).

I did wash all of the pillows, which turned out to be pretty difficult — especially with cotton, any agitation at all would ruin the fill.  I did a lot of machine soaking and spinning out with no agitation.  There’s no way to know if the congestion was because of the materials or a failure of the washing technique.

In desperation, I did finally pull some old boudoir-sized 100% goosedown pillows out of the closet, and toss them in the washing machine.  At least I didn’t have to worry about lumps forming from agitation.  I wasn’t sure they would survive the washing, though.  I washed several times, including a soaking with oxygen-based bleach, followed by soap and including hot water washes, followed by lots and lots of plain water washes and rinses.

The pillows came out of the front-load washer as flat as pancakes.  They looked ruined.  But I put them in the dryer by themselves, and dried until they were thoroughly dry.  They came out beautifully normal in the end, like I had never washed them.

I can’t recommend this to other people, because down is expensive (and we were probably lucky we didn’t ruin ours), and I suspect a great many people will still be allergic to something like down even after thorough washing.  But it was the only thing in our case that we were able to wash thoroughly — and in the end, surprisingly, it didn’t cause any congestion or eczema.  (Though it did become clear that if we wanted the pillows to remain so, we would have to keep them pretty clean, i.e., wash them again on a fairly regular basis.  Who knows how long they will last this way.)

Web Site Renovations

I am taking an online web design class and making long-overdue updates to Solveeczema.org.

The changes have taken a lot more time than I anticipated — among other things, making any file changes with my current web host is a nightmare — so the web site (and the content) will be something of a construction zone for the next several weeks.

After that I hope to go back and answer some long overdue emails for the site.

Elephant Pharmacy closes doors

With all the business shakeups and closings of this financial crisis, I suppose no one is immune.  I will miss Elephant Pharmacy the most.   Yesterday they closed their doors and declared bankruptcy.

Where are the angel investors?  This is an amazing business concept.  Very loyal customers, judging by the local buzz.

I found most of my bar soap products here, including the one we use now for showering, unscented Sappo Hill.

And it was a great traditional PHARMACY, too.  If the pharmacy side couldn’t keep the business afloat, we are indeed in hard times…

Avoiding Detergent “Dust”: The Mattress Problem

For us, the crib mattress was never a problem because it had a waterproof surface that could easily be washed.  Many, if not most, crib mattresses seem to have waterproof surfaces.

Finding a safe twin mattress when the time came (per the issues on solveeczema) was more of a challenge.  Most mattresses are covered with fabric of some sort.  Many mattresses are filled with potentially problematic materials.  Even natural and organic bedding contained cottons and wools that were certainly washed along the way.  Latex was a potential allergen in our case.  Even if we did risk it with a “natural” mattress, the cost of most was prohibitive.

After much research and cost comparison, we ended up ordering a “No Compromise Organic Cotton Ultra – Twin” from Naturepedic.  We ordered it directly from the manufacturer, who was able to match the usual free shipping deal everyone else was offering on the web.

The mattress cover is organic cotton, coated with a waterproof dust-mite barrier of food-grade polyethylene on top, sides, and bottom.  It’s pretty inert.  We have had no congestion, eczema, or other allergy issues with it.  (Note:  When it arrived, it had a slight smell – not significant compared to most mattresses – which was gone after a week or so.  Not all of this manufacturer’s products are entirely covered by this barrier, this is the only one that seemed a pretty sure bet for us.)

We considered an inexpensive metal bed frame from Ikea, but at the time we were buying, they didn’t have a design we liked.  It was tempting, though.  They had one all-metal bed frame for under $40.

We ended up getting a solid maple bed frame from Pacific Rim.  It had the option of no finish or an oil-based finish.  We took a chance on the finish, and let it air out for a few weeks before using it.  We have had no allergy issues with it either.  (The model we chose also had fairly sharp corners – a problem for us in a very small room – so we simply sanded the corners.  It wasn’t difficult, it looked fine, and we no longer had problems when we bumped into the frame.)

Prices for this same bed varied wildly on the web.  We got the best price and terms from Satara Inc online store.

All told, the mattress and frame together were, for us, a big expenditure.  However, the quality is great and they should last for decades.  Having no allergy issues was priceless.