Oh no! Not another book by eco- nuts who think they have a monopoly on the word green! Nope. When I first purchased Method products, I did so for their clean, simple, tasteful design. I'm not suprised they turned out to be non-toxic and organic, however, because as with Apple computers, with Method, less is more. The majority of industry seems not to believe so, however, in either software or soap, resulting in more (that) is less.
I gave this five stars after first leafing through a lot of it in a store that doesn't follow the Method manner at all. Then I ordered it from Amazon. A huge plus is the flip- book, loose leaf, graphics-packed format, although that has a predictable downside. While the ideas in this book range all throughout the house, they necessarily focus in certain areas, those taken from the sources and studies named in the back (which allows readers to track them down). It would take a review as long as this book to mention everything in it, so I'll merely hit a few points.
The authors pinpoint problems in the home related to cleaning, and then give a few suggestions. The obvious one, which they resist saying outright, is switch to Method products. A strength of this book is that each chapter ends with a brief checklist, and one can make a change in five minutes. It's a bit more difficult to throw away a bottle than to simply litter, but not much harder to recycle it. A small difference over time, or made by a lot of people, equals a big change. This book arms the reader to make such decisions.
How? Often by just reading the label of a product. The authors list what they consider to be bad ingredients and why. Nearly always this depends on the studies listed in the back, so the lists are uneven. Surprisingly, some items you think have those ingredients may not, and others in which you'd not suspect them, do.
One ingredient they say is bad in dental products is triclosan. Guess what? It's not in Aim. Another chemical they're against in personal products is paraben, although they're not clear if polyparaben is worse than methylparaben or if they're all bad. That is in a lot of stuff. Can stuff be made without it? One thing it's not in is Gillette Foamy shave cream (which also contains no CFCs). I know; I looked.
Another thing they're very against is EDTA (that's spelled out somewhere in the book, so you can look for it in the ingredients list). Some cleaning products have "endocrine or hormone disruptors" which mimic estrogen, causing early puberty in girls, and reduced organs in males. What I don't find in this book, although I haven't read it all, is that early studies linked this to ingredients in clothes detergents. The extra brightners are actually ultraviolet dyes, and enzymes eat your clothes rather than clean them, which is why I switched to a brand called Planet that contains none of the above.
Another bad thing is PBDEs, in mattresses to make them flame-retardant. California is supposed to ban them this year, and Ikea stopped using them in its mattresses years ago. The authors have all sorts of suggestions here, including using a HEPA filter vacuum.
One way to check out your home is simply to breathe in. The shower curtain smells like plastic. The paint smells like paint. The cleaning products smell toxic. That's called off-gassing, say the authors, and you breathe that in. The heart and strength of the book is devoted to finding alternative solutions to these common problems, and here the authors excell.
This is the only book I've come across that is even slightly honest about CFLs (compact flourescent lamps). "Lots of people complain that CFL bulbs are too harsh, too white, and way too bright." Their solution is silicone covered CFL bulbs that "mimic the yellow light". Anyone concerned about the chemicals in their body ought to be slighly concerned about the quality of light. CFLs are always rated against incandescent bulbs, which are only 40 per cent efficient and haven't changed since Edison. What they're never rated against is halogen, which has the spectrum of natural light, and gives two to four times as much light and heat per watt. CFLs are literally propping up a bad idea from the Dark Ages: flourescent lamps (don't ever try to read by a CFL). Why? Philips has taken leaps and bounds with halogen in Europe, while the largest electronics company in America is behind the flourescent light lobby. How surprising eco-activists would side with them (and flourescent lamps are toxic), instead of giving a green light to a new method in energy conservation: halogen light.