The latex has its own page, the cotton has its own page, the wool has its own page,
the coil springs have their own page, and even the 'wood' has its own page,
but the synthetic Polypropylene is buried on the FAQ page.
Why doesn't the synthetic Polypropylene component have its own page and why isn't it
even mentioned on the coil springs page where it is pictured three times covering the coils?
Could they be minimizing the exposure of the synthetic material from their readers and potential customers?
Bury, buried: to make inconspicuous, cause to appear insignificant, to put out of ones mind.
Here's what happened when I left my review on Berkeley Ergo's FB page
On April 29th, 2016 I left my one-star review on Berkeley Ergonomics Facebook page. I noticed that the only other review they had was a
4-star review from November 2014. By the end of this same day, Berkeley’s Facebook page suddenly had an additional five reviews and they were all 5 star! With a few minutes of research, I learned that three of the new 'reviewers' were affiliated with Berkeley Ergonomics.
One was an intern, Phillip Prinz, and two were Berkeley Ergonomics employees, Annika Hunter & Katherine Nosrat.
The same thing happened in Google reviews a few days later. Initially there was only one, 2-star review from about 7 months ago, then after I left my review, a bunch of additional reviews immediately followed and they were of course all 5 star. The way the reviews are written is also a clue that they might be scripted by Berkeley Ergo because they sounded really fake and forced.
If you want to find the disclosure of the synthetic Polypropylene on Berkeley Ergos web site,
you'll need to read through their FAQ page, even though they have an page dedicated exclusively to the mattress coils that are covered in the synthetic material. http://www.berkeleyergo.com/pocketed-coils/
Why wouldn't Berkeley discuss the Polypropylene on the pagewhere it is pictured three times?
It is my opinion they want to minimize the synthetic material to their readers.
What other explanation could it be?
Interesting question to consider;
If the coils in the Berkeley Ergonomics beds were covered in SILK, instead of synthetic Polypropylene, do you think the Berkeley dealers would gladly list the SILK along with the other components or do you think they would still omit it, like they omit the Polypropylene?
I think they would gladly list it simply because it sounds better than "Polypropylene".
I absolutely love my bed! After having to stay in a recliner during my pregnancy which was very difficult. When I was able to go back to my bed, I loved every minute of it. In addition, my adjustable made it easy for me to breastfeed!
You can see them for yourself here;
Unfortunately, synthetic Polypropylene IS the name of the material covering all the coils, but sadly most Berkeley Ergonomics dealers omit it when they are listing, describing, and praising the components.
Click to see false organic claims by Berkeley Ergonomics & their dealers
"I've never found a Berkeley Ergonomics mattress customer who knew
Margery Koveleski is wife to Mike Koveleski who owns Berkeley Ergonomics dealer, Design Sleep in Ohio. This is the dealer who uses the false claim of "almost organic mattress" and "organic mattress".
Did you hear about this class action law suit for false organic toothpaste claims? Interesting. And this is just for a $3.00 item.
Berkeley Ergonomics claims they;
"Strive to operate a business successfully with no compromises on truth, ethics, integrity & fairness".
Want to file a complaint about any firm making false organic claims?
Here's where you can do so;
GOTS Wins Civil Action in False Organic Claims Case
The Global Organic Textile Standard doesn’t want consumers tricked into thinking they’re getting organic when they’re not.
In hopes of protecting the sanctity of its certification trademark and keeping consumers from being misled by false advertising, the voluntary global standards organization filed a complaint with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documenting the inaccurate and widespread use of the term “organic” for textile goods.
“The lawsuit and FTC complaint should send a clear message to the textile sector that unauthorized and unsubstantiated claims that textile products are ‘organic’ or GOTS-certified will not be tolerated,” GOTS managing director Herbert Ladwig said. “To serve our certified operations and provide fair competition in the market for certified organic goods, we welcome market participants to notify both us and the FTC of any perceived misuses of the term organic or the GOTS logo.”
Just one week before the FTC filing, GOTS won a civil action in the U.S. District Court of Virginia against mattress companies, Serta Simmons Bedding, Delta Enterprises Corporation and Dreamwell, that were using the GOTS certification trademark on their products without permission. The companies were putting the GOTS marking on mattresses, particularly those for infants, but now each has a permanent injunction prohibiting unauthorized uses of the trademark.
GOTS is the global standard for all of what it calls post-harvest processing (spinning, knitting, weaving, dyeing, manufacturing) of apparel and home textiles made with organic fiber. The standard’s key provisions include a ban on using genetically modified organisms (GMOs), highly hazardous chemicals like formaldehyde, and child labor.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Organic Program (NOP) released a Policy Memorandum in 2011 clarifying that only textile products in full compliance with the NOP regulations can be labeled NOP certified organic and don the USDA organic seal.
But since most of NOP’s allowed inputs don’t apply to textile processing, NOP pointed to GOTS as an alternate option.
“As a practical alternative, NOP’s policy memo explicitly confirms that textile products produced in accordance with GOTS, such as apparel, mattresses, or socks, may be sold as ‘organic’ in the U.S., without reference to NOP certification or the USDA organic seal,” GOTS said.
In its complaint, GOTS asked the FTC to acknowledge GOTS as a recognized globally applicable standard, refer to NOP’s policy on textiles and monitor and enforce use of the term “organic” on textiles that are not certified under either program.
“Such steps would significantly help prevent misleading organic claims and ensure consumer confidence in the term ‘organic,’” GOTS said.
If your considering the Berkeley Ergonomics on-line reviews, BEWARE!!!
At least four of the 5 star reviews on Berkeley's Facebook page are from people
employed or affiliated with Berkeley Ergonomics;
Katherine Nosrat, Phillip Prinz, Margery Kovelski, and Annika Hunter.
What is especially alarming, is that Annika Hunter, an employee of Berkeley,
and perhaps the owners daughter, wrote a review saying that she;
"liked that when I bought it, the sales man unzipped it and showed me the inside".
I do not believe that Annika Hunter BOUGHT her Berkeley bed from a retail sales man.
PRODUCT CERTIFICATE #
Wool Cotton Knit 95.0.2251
Cotton Knit 93.0.3463
Talalay Latex 30007
Polypropylene 64930 & 10.0.81778