dancing james-
Simply that I was under the impression (as a result of being in product meetings and discussing product names) that it is against trading standards to include in a product name a sole material if it contains less than half of that material in the final composition. However, I have found this:
What is lacking from the legislation and does require a healthy clean up, are the misleading titles retailers use for textiles. It is legal to call a jumper a Wool jumper even when wool accounts for only 30% of the textile. I feel the title of a textile should only be called by a fibre type if the fibre percentage is 50% or more of the finished textile. What strikes me as the worst culprit in this laxness around percentages is that manufacturers can put a completely pointless 5-10% of a fibre into the textile just so that it can be called by that fibre name. 7% Alpaca doesn’t make an Alpaca Jumper!
Which is sad I guess.
@hoefla yeah I meant the deep winter versions. I forgot to specify as I didn't realise there was a 3 season version.
You are reading a single comment by @dancing james and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
monkdagola
Well that's a shame, they must have been updated / cheapened since I bought them last. Ugh.
Edit::: Could I ask where you got that info from? I can't seem to find any product materials information for them, and I would think that being called 'Merino' that they would legally need to be at least 50% merino wool.