My husband has a tendency to go overboard. But times like these, even when he might be less than professional in his approach, he’s passionate and gets the point across.
So when he told me the CEO of SIGG personally responded to his email that blasted SIGG for its poor disclosure of the contents of their bottles, I was sure it was a form letter, generated by the powers that be at SIGG, but it appears that he’s right. So I’ll give Steve Wasik credit for a personal response, but nothing more for deceiving parents that his products were “safer” than others on the market. It came down to semantics…”no leaching of BPA” versus “BPA-free.”
Sorry Mr. Wasik, but that’s why most publications have corrections. If you see a write-up that’s inaccurate, you correct it with the reporter or source, not let it go because it sounded better.
I’m a business owner specializing in safer educational toys for young children. In fact, the business was a result of skepticism with the toy industry after numerous toys belonging to my daughter made it on the lead recall list. (Thanks China.)
So when it comes to products for children, I’m naturally cautious. Before my initial purchase of a better sippy cup replacement for my daughter, I researched SIGG bottles and was puzzled when I couldn’t get exact information about the materials used. I remember thinking that a “proprietary” recipe for bottle making had no place in products touted as “safe,” especially during the climate of lead toys, toothpaste and pet food recalls. But like so many others, I bought some.
In gives me no peace of mind to know Mr. Wasik and his family are still using their old SIGGS, but I appreciate his personal apology. I’d like to appeal to him to take it a step further though; to not charge return shipping fees to those of us who were deceived, not that I even want their “BPA-free” version now.
I’m probably not the only one with a Whole Foods bag at my front door filled with 6 brightly colored SIGG kid bottles with holders, a $130+ value! Hhmm, landfill or pay to return the bottles? That choice really sucks!
From: Wasik Steve <Steve.Wasik@sigg.com>
Date: September 2, 2009 8:05:12 PM EDT
To: my “real tru” husband
Subject: FW: FYI
First off, thank you for taking the time to write to us – the team
forwarded your email to me.
I understand your point and recognize that there is a lot of discussion
about BPA out there right now. To my knowledge, we at SIGG have never
advertised our old liner bottles as being BPA free. Sometimes SIGG
retailers or journalists will hear the “no leaching of BPA” message and
inadvertently shorten that in their communications to “no BPA”. We did
our best to correct this but it was usually after the fact.
Back in April 2008, the popular website Tree Hugger ran a story, “Are
SIGG Aluminum Bottles BPA Free?” The story ended with: “Conclusion: We
are not sure if the lining of SIGG bottles is made with BPA or not, but
we like the results of the testing, which is what really matters.” The
testing of course showed that SIGG bottles did not leach any chemicals,
which we too thought, “is what really matters.” But based on the
outpouring of emotion from our consumers on the topic, we were clearly
That being said, I am sorry and certainly do regret that we were not
more clear about this topic. I realize now that despite the fact that
our bottle liners were leach free and extremely safe, people like you
wanted to know more. For the record, my family and I are still drinking
from SIGG bottles with the former non-leaching liner which I have
complete confidence in.
Sorry to hear that we have lost your faith in SIGG. I hope that someday
we can regain your confidence in the quality and safety of SIGG
products. I appreciate your email.