20 Clothing Brands Such As Armani, Customer Service And So On, Were Found To Be Harmful Residues.

Sports brand and outdoor

After the brand, the latest survey by Greenpeace International Environmental Protection Agency (Greenpeace) found that 20 of the world's fashion brands

Toxic and harmful substances were used in the production process.

The 20 brands contain both

(Armani), Victoria 'sSecret (Vitoria's secret), CalvinKlein and other international brands also include the mainland's Vancl brand.

The toxic substances detected include nonylphenol polyoxyethylene ether, o-phthalic acid two carboxylic acid ester and carcinogenic aromatic amines released by azo dyes.

The survey shows that toxic and harmful substances can be released at any stage of the life cycle and eventually enter rivers and lakes. "With the rise of" fast fashion ", a lot of clothing is produced and sold, and the impact on the environment has been magnified, especially from toxic and harmful substances.

Greenpeace appealed to the global fashion brand survey of toxic and hazardous substances residues.

The company should make a credible "detoxification" pledge, which includes the elimination of all toxic and hazardous substances in its global supply chain and all products before January 1, 2020.

The 20 brands are "toxic".

Compared to Adidas, which was revealed in 2011,

In a survey of clothing suppliers using and releasing toxic and harmful substances, Greenpeace said the survey was "regrettable" because "more toxic and harmful substances were found in the survey."

During the April 2012, Greenpeace purchased 141 garment samples in 29 countries (regions) of the world (the 141 samples were produced in 18 different countries, including men's, women's wear and children's clothes).

Of the 141 samples, 4 of the samples were detected high concentrations of toxic and harmful substances - o-benzoic acid two, and 2 samples were detected from carcinogenic aromatic amines released by azo dyes.

89, nearly 2/3 of the samples were detected with environmental hormone nonylphenol polyoxyethylene ether.

In addition, many different kinds of industrial chemicals with potential hazards have been detected in most samples.

Greenpeace said, "as a toxic and harmful substance, any use of nonylphenol polyoxyethylene ether, o-phthalic acid two carboxylic acid ester, or the use of release of carcinogenic aromatic amine azo dyes, should not be allowed."

It is reported that the 20 brands tested include: Armani, Benetton, Blazek, C&A, CalvinKlein, Diesel, Esprit, Gap, H&M, Jack&Jones (JACK&JONES), Levi "H&M,", ",", ",", ",", "fan".

The above findings show that "all brands in this study have one or more products detected nonylphenol ethoxylates."

In this survey, 12 samples of residues of nonylphenol polyoxyethylene were over 1000ppm, including brands including C&A, Mango, Levi 's (Levi's), CalvinKlein, Zara, Jack&Jones (JACK&JONES) and Marks&Spencer (Marsha).

Greenpeace data show that as a toxic and harmful substance, nonylphenol polyoxyethylene will be degraded into a stronger toxic nonylphenol in the environment. It has persistent and bioaccumulation nonylphenol. Nonylphenol is not only toxic, persistent and bioaccumulative, but nonylphenol is also an environmental hormone, and it can be accumulated through the food chain and gradually amplified.

Greenpeace said, "the use of nonylphenol ethoxylates is unacceptable."

It is reported that nylphenol polyoxyethylene has been restricted in industry for nearly 20 years. Although there are no regulations to limit the sale of products containing nonylphenol ethoxylates, the EU is making relevant laws and regulations.

Greenpeace also said that no scientific research has shown that the detection of nonylphenol ethoxylates in all garment samples will pose a direct risk to the health of the wearer.

Greenpeace has carried out the detection of o-benzoic acid two formic acid for 31 samples of clothing samples with plastic soles (printed separately with patterns, symbols or characters).

It was found that o-phenyl two formate was detected on all 31 samples printed with plastic sol.

High concentration of o-benzoic acid two formic acid was detected in 4 samples, up to 37.6% (mass fraction).

The detection results showed that the 4 samples were detected with o-phthalate two formic acid esters with higher contents of DEHP, DINP and BBP.

DEHP and BBP are recognized as toxic and harmful substances with reproductive toxicity. They are listed as highly concerned substances by the EU's REACH regulations and have been eliminated.

DINP is also toxic at high doses and has a certain endocrine disrupting effect.

Carcinogenic aromatic amines released from azo dye were detected in two samples of Zara.

Greenpeace said, "although the concentration is below the sales quota, it is still hard to detect carcinogens on clothing."

It is reported that aromatic amines are used to produce azo dyes, but then when aromatic dyes are decomposed, aromatic amines will be released.

The aromatic amine - ortho anisamine detected here is a carcinogen and may also cause cancer in humans.

In the European Union and China, there are relevant laws and regulations that restrict the use of azo dyes that can emit carcinogenic aromatic amines in direct contact with skin.

Residues in products.

"Not all aromatic amines released from azo dyes are carcinogenic," Greenpeace also said in an investigation report.

Fast fashion: more and more pollution?

Fast fashion brands in order to meet the needs of customers, on the one hand, constantly shorten the production and sales cycle to launch the fashion that follows the trend of the times, on the other hand pressure on suppliers to shorten the time limit.

Greenpeace believes that this will, to a certain extent, "force" suppliers to act irresponsibly on the environment and labour.

Greenpeace said Zara, H&M, GAP and Benetton are committed to shortening the production cycle of their products and striving to bring the most fashionable garments to consumers at the fastest speed.

Nowadays, many fashion brands usually launch 6 to 8 fashion seasons in a year, rather than the traditional 2 to 4 fashion seasons.

In order to achieve this, clothing brands need to constantly shorten the turnaround time from design to clothing shelves, and place parts that involve more fashion design elements in places not far away from the sales place. At the same time, clothing brands are developing in developing countries including China.

Pattern production, printing and dyeing and wet process.

An important part of the huge turnover of clothing is the one-time consumption of clothing.

Some consumers imitate some stars, wear clothes once, and then throw them aside.

Greenpeace data show that a large number of discarded clothes enter the landfill or burn.

In Germany, 1 million tons of clothing are discarded every year. In the United States, 5.3% of urban refuse in 2010 came from 13 million 100 thousand tons of discarded clothes; in Britain, about 1 million tons of clothing were turned into garbage every year.

Huge and growing clothing production has increased the impact of clothing on the environment.

From the cotton production to the textile dyeing and printing process, we need to consume a lot of water and pesticides, and use a lot of chemicals.

Greenpeace said that with the use and release of persistent and bioaccumulating toxic and harmful substances, the impact of fast fashion on the environment has been going on for many years.

These pollutants can exist in the environment for a long time, or accumulate in sediments, or accumulate in organisms, while others can migrate over a long distance.

In addition, there are also substances that can cause significant damage to the environment even at very low concentrations.

"Even if clothing residues are within the law's limits, substances like nonylphenol ethoxylates will still have an impact on the environment and will gradually spread around the world."

Greenpeace said that the source of pollution is not just the sewage discharged from factories. There are billions of clothing trade all over the world, and these clothes may contain residues of nonylphenol ethoxylates. When these clothes are washed, nonylphenol polyoxyethylene ether will be washed away and enter the water environment, or when the clothes are discarded, the residual toxic and harmful substances may also enter into the environment.

Some brands did not make "zero emissions" commitments.

Greenpeace said that toxic and harmful substances will enter the water environment in the process of garment production and clothing washing. The only way to solve such problems is to eliminate these toxic and harmful substances at the source as soon as possible.

Greenpeace appealed to world-renowned fashion brands to drive the world to eliminate toxic and harmful substances through its global production line.

"As a leader in the industry, a crucial step is to make a commitment to achieve zero emissions of toxic and hazardous substances by January 1, 2020."

"These brands treat our rivers and lakes as private sewers to discharge their sewage, threatening people's lives and health, so we have the right to know what chemicals they are discharging."

Greenpeace said that this commitment must include a series of positive plans to eliminate toxic and harmful substances, as well as information on all chemicals that are currently being used and discharged by the public brand.

It is reported that at present, Puma, Nike, Adidas and Lining have made these commitments, while H&M, C&A and Marks&Spencer (Marsha) have made a more detailed commitment to disclose the toxic and harmful substances emission information of some of their suppliers online in the next three months.

In other words, Esprit, Victoria 'sSecret (Vitoria's secret) and other brands were listed as "negative brands" by Greenpeace, "there are almost no chemicals management related policies or projects, and no brand of zero emission commitments has been made."