North Face Could Pay $1M for Alleged ‘Pesticide’ Shoes
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently filed suit against the parent company of the North Face, VF Corp, for the alleged sale of unregistered pesticides in over 70 styles of shoes, according to a statement by the EPA.
The shoes, sold during the first quarter of 2008, were discovered by the EPA at the North Face flagship store in San Francisco. North Face advertised the shoes as having anti-microbial properties, creating “unsubstantiated public health claims regarding unregistered products, and their ability to control germs and pathogens” according to the EPA.
Before you pick up a new pair of boots for your next excursion, make sure to look for the EPA's registration number on all anti-microbial or pesticidal claims. Photo: Flickr/Adventurejournalist
“Unverified public health claims can lead people to believe they are protected from disease-causing organisms when, in fact, they may not be,” said Katherine Taylor, associate director of the Communities and Ecosystems Division in EPA’s Pacific Southwest region.
According to Reuters, the 162 counts involving the sale or distribution of the products could cost VF over $1 million.
Reuters also noted that VF disputed the EPA’s assertions, “but said it had immediately stopped making the claims the agency found objectionable, removing them from tags and changing product packaging.”
The company added that the EPA has not made any claims that North Face products are unsafe.
The EPA noted that the specific claims by North Face over which there is dispute are:
- “AgION antimicrobial silver agent inhibits the growth of disease-causing bacteria”
- “Prevents bacterial and fungal growth”
- Continuous release of antimicrobial agents
EPA standards entail that products that kill or repel bacteria or germs are considered pesticides, and must be registered with the agency prior to distribution or sale. Additionally, the EPA will not register a pesticide until it has been tested to show that it will not pose an unreasonable risk when used according to the directions.
Consumers should be careful to look for the EPA registration number printed on product labels, and to follow the directions for proper use.
As of June 17th 2011 we have upgraded our comment system to use Facebook comments. The below comments are closed and are listed for historical purposes.
Amy
posted on October 1st, 2009 at 6:38 am
How stupid is that? I suppose sterling silver teething rings and baby cups have to be registered with the EPA now. The germ repelling factor is a major benefit of choosing sterling…
That’s like the FDA saying that “only drugs can cure disease”. That’s why supplement companies can’t legally claim that supplements can treat and prevent disease.
Too much government.
Jen
posted on October 1st, 2009 at 11:46 am
We don’t have too much government – we have had 8 years of corrupt and incompetent government. Supplement companies can’t legally claim that supplements can treat and prevent disease because they have NO DATA that their supplements can treat and prevent disease. That is a very good thing. Why should any company, particularly a supplement company, be able to make claims that have no basis in fact? Why should any company be able to LIE to get money from people? There is no upside to lying and dishonesty except for money made by the liars and dishonest people. Government is SUPPOSED to regulate, inspect, and oversee the greedy, dishonest, despicable, and soulless business people who work all the time to pillage and plunder our society. If North Face wants to sell shoes based on these properties, they need to be able to prove the claims are true, that’s all. If they have no data, they shouldn’t be lying about the properties of the shoes. Who in the world would be on the side of the LIARS??!??
Amy
posted on October 2nd, 2009 at 5:17 am
Jen-
Are you saying that it is a lie that silver repels germs and that vitamin supplements can be used to treat and prevent disease?