David Suzuki Foundation

Did you take your nature pill?

2012-05-27T07:00:01Z

Nip “nature deficit” in the butt like Lauren Smith! Get outside for 30 minutes for 30 days. (Credit: Melanie Smith)

Pop quiz: What's your preferred view--the ocean, a forest, a pond, or trickling creek?

Twenty years of research reveals that people prefer familiar landscapes. First choice is where they grew up. Second is savannah, where we all evolved.

Think back to the forests, fields, or streams you loved as a child. (My childhood nature retreat has succumbed to urban sprawl--a 7-eleven and giant, single-family homes with an SUV per person in each driveway.)

You might not realize that time outdoors (even a view of nature) can:

reduce obesity, stress, and the incidence of clinical depression
decrease blood sugars
improve impulse control and boost immune functions
improve cognitive function, self-discipline, and resilience under stress
improve performance in the workplace and increase job satisfaction
improve academic performance in children
moderate the effect of stressful events in children
make you more generous
build a strong sense of community, mutual trust, and a willingness to help others
lower rates of aggression including violent and property crimes
combat loneliness

What pill, vitamin, or energy drink can do all that?

Join our June 30×30 Challenge! We're asking Canadians to spend 30 minutes a day in nature for 30 days to improve their lives. It's that simple.

Stop treating time outdoors like it's dessert, something only to indulge in once the chores are finished and the homework's done. Vitamin "N" (for "nature") is essential for human function. And, it's more important for children than adults, for the poor more than the rich, and the elderly more than the middle-aged.

How will you get at least 30 minutes a day in nature for 30 days?

Sincerely,
Lindsay Coulter, Queen of Green

Hey! Want more DSF? Join David Suzuki on Facebook

A big cheque for Canada's first urban National Park

2012-05-25T18:53:32Z

By Faisal Moola, Toronto-based director of the David Suzuki Foundation

I was getting a bit worried this spring when the feds made their third announcement in a row about establishing Rouge National Park, yet had still failed to put up any money to get the ball rolling.

That changed this morning, when they sent two ministers and a seriously big cheque for a photo opp on the boardwalk in the Rouge. The effort to establish Canada's first urban National Park - and one of the biggest urban parks in the world - will now get more than $140 million over the next ten years.

Creating an urban National Park in the Rouge is an amazing opportunity to permanently protect a surprisingly intact 6,000-hectare green swath of wetlands, fields, farms and forests straddling the border of Toronto, Scarborough and Markham. If all goes as planned, Rouge NationalPark will be one of the biggest urban parks in the world - 18 times bigger than Central Park. It will follow the Rouge River from its source in the OntarioGreenbelt, down to the shores of Lake Ontario.

Making the Rouge a National Park will help protect theregion's rich cultural, agricultural and ecological history and also connect local residents to an amazing green gem accessible by public transit. This is key, as more than 20 per cent of Canada's population lives within 100kilometres of the park.

The David Suzuki Foundation cautiously welcomes today's funding announcement. Rouge National Park will provide immense health and economic benefits for communities throughout the Greater TorontoArea for generations to come.

However, we remain concerned that the federal government is at the same time weakening environmental laws and laying-off key scientists and technical staff whose expertise will be necessary to ensure that Canada's protected areas don't become merely "paper parks."

But for now, we should all savour this turning point in keeping a big, awesome chunk of nature in the backyards of millions for generations to come.

Hey! Want more DSF? Join David Suzuki on Facebook

Prescription for health and happiness: a daily dose of nature

2012-05-24T20:30:42Z

With more than 80 per cent of Canadians now living in urban settings, many of us lack a meaningful, regular connection with the natural environment that sustains us. (Credit: evilpeacock via Flickr)

Do you want to be happier, healthier, and smarter? I have just the prescription for you: add a daily dose of nature to your routine.

Over the past decade, researchers from fields as diverse as biology, psychiatry, engineering, horticulture, neuroscience, and medicine have realized what most of us know intuitively: nature is good for our health and wellbeing. These experts have discovered countless links between time spent outdoors and cognitive, physical, and emotional development.

Studies show that enjoying a natural setting - like a park, beach, wetland, or forest - can reduce blood pressure, anxiety, and stress levels. Exposure to nature can help you sleep well and increase vigour and liveliness. It can even boost your immune system.

In their new book Your Brain on Nature, naturopath Alan Logan and Harvard physician Eva Selhub cite dozens of studies that demonstrate the health benefits of the natural world. They even refer to outdoor physical activity as "exercise squared" because it can increase energy and fitness levels while reducing fatigue, depression, and obesity.

Melissa Lem, a family doctor and member of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, says exposure to nature is vitally important for kids. She suggests that time spent with flora and fauna is essential for healthy psychological and physical development in children. In a recent Docs Talk column she points to studies that show daily doses of "green time" can be used to prevent and treat conditions like attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, hypertension, and diabetes. Ailments like myopia, asthma, and depression have also been linked to inadequate nature exposure.

While this scientific body of evidence is fascinating and growing quickly, most of us remain unaware of the full range of health benefits that nature provides. And with more than 80 per cent of Canadians now living in urban settings, many of us lack a meaningful, regular connection with the natural environment that sustains us. Getting in touch with the outdoors has another great benefit: those who know and love nature work harder to protect it.

This is why the David Suzuki Foundation is about to launch its first ever 30×30 Challenge. Starting June 1, we're inviting Canadians to spend at least 30 minutes in nature each day for 30 days. By encouraging people to get a regular dose of fresh air we hope to help participants take advantage of the many health benefits nature has to offer. They might even make it part of their continuing daily practice.

With the busy lives that many of us lead, taking time to get outside may seem difficult. But it's easier than you think. Green space is as close as your local park or backyard garden. Trails, ravines, and community gardens are often a short distance from the daily grind. And birds, bees, and other critters are usually nearby; you just have to take time to slow down, breathe, watch, and listen.

Are you curious about how you can get your daily dose of nature? Ditch the indoor gym and go for a run or walk in a park or on a trail instead. Use your lunch break to get out of the office and visit a nearby green space. Find a nice leafy tree and read a book in the shade. Brush off your green thumb and spruce up your garden. And on June 15, make plans to get outside with your favourite little ones on Nature Play Day in Canada.

For the young at heart, a British organization called the National Trust has put together a fun list of 50 activities all children should do before they are 11¾ years old. While playing conkers (a game involving chestnuts on strings) might not be among the top 50 Canadian pastimes, the list includes cool activities that are worthwhile for any age. The joys of rolling down a big hill, eating an apple picked fresh from a tree, and hunting for bugs are truly timeless.

Join the 30×30 Challenge beginning June 1 and incorporate small natural diversions into your daily routine for a month. Add some green to your commute, lunch break, workout schedule, or playtime. And remember, a daily dose of nature is good for your head, heart, and health.

Hey! Want more DSF? Join David Suzuki on Facebook

A David Suzuki Foundation moment in history: David Suzuki guest edits the Vancouver Sun

2012-05-23T22:51:10Z

David Suzuki plans the May 5, 2007 edition of the Vancouver Sun with editorial staff.

Five years ago, on May 5, 2007, the Vancouver Sun published its first guest-edited newspaper. The editor was none other than David Suzuki.

Suzuki's journey toward greening the paper had begun three months earlier, when he received an invitation from the Sun's publisher, Kevin Bent, to be editor for a day. He didn't hesitate to accept. Along with Foundation staff, he met with Sun editors to discuss potential stories, which would appear in several sections, from Business to Arts and Life. Suzuki edited each one.

The day before publication, Suzuki joined newsroom editors to select breaking news stories, discuss story angles and leads, and review articles and pages. The front page led with a feature titled "The State of our World: how climate change affects people and economies around the planet," which highlighted 16 global hotspots on six continents. Each Suzuki-edited article was accompanied by a green footprint, a graphic image of Suzuki's sole.

In her op-ed, Editor-in-chief Patricia Graham wrote that Suzuki's "ideas and personality have enriched today's paper."

Articles in the paper included "How a plate of sushi treads on our planet's resources," "Cleaning up the world of pro sports" and "Greening up B.C.'s building code."

Hey! Want more DSF? Join David Suzuki on Facebook

Pacific Underwater: Seabirds in May

2012-05-22T22:27:51Z

Tufted Puffin (Credit: Buzz Hoffman via Flickr)

As you read this, a cool Pacific breeze is blowing through the tufted hair grass that covers tiny Triangle Island, Northwest of Vancouver Island. Just below the grasses and the wind, hundreds of thousands of birds have just laid hundreds of thousands of eggs in hundreds of thousands of burrows.

If you are like most Canadians, you have never heard of the rhinoceros auklet, Cassin's auklet, common murre or tufted puffin, but these seabirds are an integral part of British Columbia's incredibly rich coastal water ecosystems. Triangle Island is part of the Scott Islands group, a globally significant home for seabirds.

These birds have developed many parallel evolutionary strategies. Like penguins--their seabird cousins to the south--a mating seabird pair on Triangle Island lays just one egg in a year.

Both parents help to protect and incubate their egg, each taking a 24-hour shift while the other takes the day off to eat. They all share a long incubation period, with the rhinoceros auklet taking up to 45 days to hatch. (That's more than twice as long as a chicken.)

Most of these birds have similar nest structures as well. If you were to reach down one of the long and narrow burrows of an auklet or puffin, it would be a tight fit for your hand. It's long enough that your outstretched arm wouldn't reach the bird nesting at the end. An inexperienced hand would likely hit an unwelcome surprise--the birds keep a "latrine" near the mouth of the burrow that has repelled many a researcher.

Although these burrows are great protection against predators like gulls and eagles (and invasive species introduced by humans), the remote location of the Scott Islands offers the greatest relief.

The common murre has developed a different strategy for its nest, laying its eggs directly on the cliff faces. But it's not just the island's remoteness that makes it a great nesting ground for these birds; it's the availability of food in the surrounding ocean.

Ocean currents in the spring create upwellings that carry billions of tonnes of plankton toward the surface, feeding the billions of fish that feed the millions of birds. With all that available food, the birds wisely spend 90 per cent of their lives on the ocean, having adapted to the environment with the unimaginable ingenuity of the evolutionary process. Most of these birds are far better swimmers than they are fliers. The common murre has the uncommon ability to dive deeper than 100 metres to catch its prey.

Don't expect to visit Triangle Island anytime soon. It's an ecological reserve, so you need special permission to set foot there. But how much protection does that provide for birds that spend 90 per cent of their time on the water? The nesting habitat is well protected, but tankers are still allowed to ply the adjacent waters, and there are no special restrictions on fishing.

The federal government has proposed to make the Scott Islands a marine protected area but has shown little will to restrict any industrial activity in the surrounding waters.

On top of the threats from tankers and fishing, global climate change looms ominously over these seabirds. In 2005, fewer than one in 10 Cassin's auklets chicks survived. Scientists believe that climate change delayed the timing of the upwelling currents that start the cascade up the food web.

The seabirds huddled in their narrow burrows on this far-flung island can't hide from global warming any more than we can. But us humans, we can do something about it--we can reduce our carbon emissions; we can limit shipping lanes near the islands; and we can stop fishing in this biological hot spot. Let's do it. Now.

For more information on the Scott Islands candidate National Wildlife Area, contact the Environment Canada regional office:
Environment Canada - Pacific Yukon Region
Canadian Wildlife Service
Protected Areas & Stewardship
5421 Robertson Road
Delta, BC
V4K 3Y3
Toll Free: 1-800-668-6767 (in Canada only)
Email: enviroinfo@ec.gc.ca

Hey! Want more DSF? Join David Suzuki on Facebook

What a river's health means for our own

2012-05-22T16:48:03Z

(Credit: John McGarvey via Flickr)

Lise Parent is a professor of environmental health at Télé-université in Montreal. Her research focuses on the ecotoxicology of heavy metals in the aquatic environment and on endocrine disrupters in the everyday environment. She is also involved with the "Réseau des femmes en environnement" (Network of Women in Environment) and is a member of CINBIOSE (an interdisciplinary research centre on biology, health, society and the environment) and CIRÉ (Interinstitutional Centre for Ecotoxicology Research). Docs Talk asked Dr. Parent for her opinions on the connection between the health of the St. Lawrence River and our own health.

Docs Talk: How can the state of the St. Lawrence River affect the health of those who live in its vicinity?

Dr. Parent: The St. Lawrence, which flows from the Great Lakes, is a complex ecosystem of fresh and salt water. Its water quality is affected by the tributaries that contribute to its flow, the diverse environments it crosses, climatic and hydrographic changes and the multitude of purposes it serves. Despite such complexity, we can identify three ways in which the St. Lawrence can affect health: drinking water drawn from the river and treated; consumption of fish, molluscs and other organisms; and recreational activities associated with the water, such as swimming, sailing, hunting and fishing.

So, it's possible that some pathogens (virus, bacteria, protozoa) will remain in drinking water after sub-optimal treatment or that persistent and bioaccumulative contaminants will be transferred down the food chain to humans by way of aquatic organisms (fish and molluscs) and their predators (carnivorous fish, birds and mammals).

Docs Talk: What are the main sources of contamination in the St. Lawrence River?

Dr. Parent: The main sources of pollution in the river are, ironically, the municipal water treatment facilities. But industrial effluent, deposits from atmospheric discharge, municipal effluents containing complex chemical compounds and agricultural runoff also contribute, and not only to water contamination but also to soil erosion and consequently to the eutrophication (nutrient overload) of the river. There are also the cumulative impacts of other pressures such as invasion by non-native species.

So, we're talking about conventional pollutants like suspended solids, biological oxygen demand and phosphorus that contribute, among other things, to eutrophication and the presence of biotoxins. But we're also talking about so-called toxic pollutants like pesticides and their residues, heavy metals, nonylphenols, polychlorinated biphenyls, PBDEs, etc.

Docs Talk: How can these contaminants have an impact on our health?

Dr. Parent: Certainly, in most cases, we're not talking about acute exposure; and if there were effects, we wouldn't see them immediately. The type of chemical contamination to which we're being exposed is the kind with effects that will only be seen in the long term. When it comes to bioaccumulative contaminants found in the flesh of fish and molluscs, we can expect different kinds of health effects similar to those attributed to some emerging pollutants like endocrine disruptors. These have been linked to chronic illnesses like hyperthyroidism, Type II diabetes, hyperactivity and fertility problems, among others. Possible effects from exposure to these substances, though not directly attributable to exposure from the river itself, include effects on the immune system that lead to increased incidence of infection, some allergies, effects on the nervous system that lead to neurological and developmental delays and cancer.

Docs Talk: Is the situation in the St. Lawrence similar to other river systems in Canada?

Dr. Parent: When it comes to sources of contamination it's about the same as you'd find in other river systems in Canada. However, the St. Lawrence stands out by virtue of receiving one of the largest municipal effluents in North America.

Docs Talk: In your opinion, what are the main challenges that need to be addressed to achieve an effective environmental health policy for the St. Lawrence River?

Dr. Parent: We need to monitor the input of these substances at the source and where they're released, and apply the precautionary principle whenever we have indications of toxicity.

We should also monitor sewer overflows and ensure adequate treatment to avoid releasing toxic substances into the river. Also important is the improvement of municipal and agricultural wastewater treatment to reduce input of pesticides and fertilizers to rivers and streams.

Docs Talk: If you could write a "prescription" for the St. Lawrence River, what would it be?

Dr. Parent: We should continue the activities of the St. Lawrence Plan: to better understand pollutants that change in composition, to evaluate user exposure and to determine health effects in concert with the environmental and public health authorities and civil society. As with the previous question, we must try to act before problems occur. Disinfecting wastewater at purification stations and better management of sewer overflows from combined sewers in times of heavy rain would limit degradation of bacterial quality as well as limit the input of nutrients and metals into the river.

Docs Talk: As individuals, what steps can we take to protect the health of our rivers like the St. Lawrence?

Dr. Parent: We should both reduce and maximize the use of potable water from a quantitative and qualitative point of view. We should always be aware of our consumption and what we throw down the drain, recognizing that these releases will have effects on fauna and flora. That's why it's so important to pay careful attention to the chemical ingredients in products we buy. We need to make good shopping decisions and minimize the use of products that are harmful to the environment. Public education is the key to achieving that and it's encouraging to see an evolution in that direction.

Finally, I think that the best thing for us to do is to demand accountability from our government to ensure safe and enjoyable access to the great treasure that is the St. Lawrence River.

Hey! Want more DSF? Join David Suzuki on Facebook

Host a green cleaning party

2012-05-20T07:01:00Z

Host a green cleaning party and receive a copy of my green cleaning stickers for your homemade products! (Design and photo credit: Erika Rathje)

Real change happens at the local level. Why wait for it to come to you?

Take initiative and make a difference in your community by organizing a clothing swap, block party, e-waste drive or my favourite--a green cleaning workshop!

Here's how:

Plan your event as part of an evening with friends, baby shower or a lunch n' learn at the office. Invite your family, neighbours, friends, co-workers, the parents at your kids' school, or the book club.

Make these three green cleaning recipes

1. Borax-free liquid laundry soap
2. All-purpose cleaner spray
3. All-purpose cleaner scour

Download a copy of my green cleaning recipes for each participant.

Supplies

Stainless steel bowls
Spatulas
Measuring cups and spoons
Ask each guest to bring three empty containers to reuse (glass pickle jars or plastic yogurt containers); have extras on hand

Ingredients

Baking soda (buy in bulk)
Salt (buy in bulk)
A box of borax (check your laundry aisle)
1 – 2 L of liquid castile soap (scented or unscented)
White vinegar
Warm tap water

Divide people into groups of three or four to make a big batch of each recipe they can split up to take home. Or, each individual can mix a small amount directly into a reusable jar. (For example, to make the laundry soap, add one scoop of salt and two scoops of baking soda to a 500 ml jar ¾ full of warm water, then stir. Once the solution is dissolved, top it up with liquid castile soap and voila!)

Will you host a green cleaning workshop?

If you commit to one, comment on this blog before June 25th and I'll send you a sheet of green cleaning recipe stickers for each participant to label his or her homemade products.

Sincerely,
Lindsay Coulter, Queen of Green

Hey! Want more DSF? Join David Suzuki on Facebook

Committee passes the buck on pesticide-free B.C.

2012-05-17T23:12:03Z

(Credit: gribley via Flickr)

The long-awaited report from B.C.'s special legislative committee on cosmetic pesticides was not worth the wait. The committee had been mulling over a province-wide ban on lawn chemicals for close to a year, ever since Premier Christy Clark announced her support for a ban and appointed the committee to consider how to proceed.

Unfortunately, it seems the committee missed the point. It is deeply disappointing that after all that mulling, the report, released May 17, does not even recommend a ban. Instead, it proposes a series of toothless measures and tries to pass the buck on the main issue: "Committee members representing the majority are satisfied with how the [federal Pest Management Regulatory Agency] registers and reevaluates pesticides and are confident with the scientific integrity of the federal processes."

The use of pesticides to improve the appearance of lawns and gardens represents a needless risk to the environment and human health. A ban would help to protect those most vulnerable, notably children. But in areas of shared jurisdiction, it's always tempting for lawmakers to make it sound like someone else is responsible for a decision. Pesticide regulation is no exception, and B.C.'s legislative committee jumped feet first into this trap. Rather than delivering serious recommendations for shaping a B.C. ban, this report defers the issue back to federal regulators.

But the federal regulatory regime has gaps. For starters, the federal risk assessments assume that pesticides are used according to label instructions - a leap of faith. Then there's the limitation that each pesticide is assessed on its own with no consideration of the combined effects of multiple chemical exposures. Nor does the federal registration system weigh the need for pesticides whose only purpose is to improve the appearance of lawns and gardens.

In other words, is the risk, however small, worth it? Moreover, many pesticides previously approved through the federal risk assessment process have later been banned as new information emerged about health and environmental hazards, and dozens of active ingredients in pesticides approved in Canada are not permitted in other countries. It is well within a province's mandate to take precautionary action now to eliminate unnecessary chemical exposures.

Six Canadian provinces - and 40 B.C. municipalities - have already banned the cosmetic use of pesticides. These governments are taking seriously the provincial role in pesticide regulation. Applying the precautionary principle, they moved to address gaps in the federal regime when it comes to the completely unnecessary hazards posed by the use of pesticides to improve the appearance of lawns and gardens.

Of the 7,300 comments submitted to the B.C. legislative committee this winter, nearly 5,000 supported a ban. The committee report also notes that some MLAs on the committee (although not the majority) were likewise in favour of a ban. A province-wide ban on the use and sale of cosmetic pesticides is an appropriate and manageable expression of provincial authorities that would protect public health and the environment from an avoidable chemical hazard.

It's been a year since the premier pledged her support for a ban. "We are going to do it," she told reporters. The committee process stalled the issue in the legislature for a year. The premier should go beyond the recommendations in the committee report and finally make good on her promise. It's time for B.C. to catch up with the rest of the country and go for truly green lawns and gardens.

Hey! Want more DSF? Join David Suzuki on Facebook

Going to bat for our furry flying friends

2012-05-17T20:30:42Z

Bats do so much for us, Maybe it’s time we returned the favour – especially considering the dire threats many bat populations face. (Credit: Lee Carson)

Bats are fascinating creatures, and they're more important than many people realize. A bat can eat more than 1,000 insects in an hour - up to 6,000 a night. Some bats consume bugs that attack agricultural crops and some feast on pests like gnats and mosquitoes. The 25 million free-tailed bats in Bracken Cave, Texas, eat more than 200 tonnes of insects every summer night!

Some bats are also pollinators. Without the services of the Mexican long-tongued bat, the agave plant, from which we get tequila, might not survive. So, right off the bat (sorry), if you like tequila but not mosquito bites, you should view bats as your friends.

There's more. Because of their role in insect control, pollination, and seed dispersal, bats are a key part of the interconnected web of life that makes growing food possible. Even their nitrogen-rich poop makes good fertilizer. Bats do so much for us. Maybe it's time we returned the favour - especially considering the dire threats many bat populations face.

But some people are afraid of bats. Much of this is based on misconceptions about the world's only flying mammal: bats will drink your blood, give you rabies, or get stuck in your hair. Although the three species of vampire bats in Central and South America do feed on blood, they prefer to drink from cows, goats, pigs, and chickens. And rabies is rare in bats. Fewer than 40 people have contracted rabies from wild bats over the past 50 years. And despite expressions like "blind as a bat", bats can actually see quite well, and have the added advantage of echolocation for navigating, so they're unlikely to fly into you or your hair.

Many of the 1,200 known species of bats, representing a quarter of all mammal species, are in trouble. And we humans deserve much of the blame. About half the world's bat species are threatened or endangered, mainly due to habitat destruction, pollution, and direct harm by humans.

Other threats are more mysterious. Bats in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and other parts of Eastern North America are being wiped out by white-nose syndrome. A fungus causes the bats to warm and wake from hibernation in cold weather before insects are available, so they starve or die of exposure. Scientists are trying to learn why the fungus affects the bats this way, and where it comes from, but they have yet to find conclusive answers. They believe it could be an invasive species of fungus, imported from Europe through human activity, to which North American bats haven't built up immunity. A committee of experts has recommended that Canada's environment minister issue an emergency order to protect the bats under the Species at Risk Act, but the government has yet to respond. One of the greatest fears is that the fungus could spread to other bat populations, and maybe even jump the Rocky Mountains, unless we act quickly.

New Brunswick Zoologist Don McAlpine told CBC News that, because they provide natural pest control, "the loss of bats could add billions of dollars to the cost of producing food"

Besides protecting bats through legislation, people can also help by building them homes. Different bats require different types of houses, but all should be south-facing and mounted at least four metres off the ground. This will help bats in the face of increasing habitat loss, and may also discourage them from roosting in your home or garage.

We also need to have proper environmental assessments before wind turbines are installed, to reduce harm to bats and minimize other environmental impacts. Scientists suspect that dead bats found near wind-power installations (most of which are migratory species) were killed by air pressure drops rather than contact with blades. With proper environmental reviews and more research about the causes of death and ways to reduce or prevent it, we can enjoy the benefits of clean wind power without putting bats at risk.

Like so many other living things, bats illustrate how everything in nature is interconnected and that harming one plant or animal or ecosystem has cascading effects that touch us all. If we don't do everything we can to help bats, we'll all suffer - and not just from mosquito bites!

Hey! Want more DSF? Join David Suzuki on Facebook

My letter from Windex®

2012-05-13T08:00:00Z

I prefer to clean with cheap and effective DIY options like vinegar and water for glass and mirrors. (Credit: Jill Watson via Flickr)

I officially broke up with Windex® because they don't list ingredients on their products. See for yourself when you take our home cleaners survey. But get this, they wrote back!

Lindsay,

We're sorry to hear you're breaking up with Windex®.

Like you, we think it's important for the people who use our home cleaning products to know what's in their favorite ones. So, before you say goodbye, we hope you'll take a few minutes to get the real facts about the ingredients in Windex® at whatsinsidescjohnson.ca

Please also know our commitment to list ingredients on Windex® labels is well underway, and you should see them on our products at your local stores this summer.

Because we value our relationship, we too want you to get the whole story and help you make the best choices for you and your family.

Best regards,

Elizabeth
Consumer Relationship Center
SC Johnson, A Family Company

I checked out this whole story. Windex® ingredients are listed on their website--more than what most cleaning product companies provide. But I choose to stay away from harmful ingredients such as ammonia, fragrance and dyes. Now that my suspicions have been confirmed, I'll stick with vinegar and water.

I also found the SC Johnson FAQs section fascinating:

Question: Aren't natural products better?

Answer: "Not necessarily. "Natural" or home remedies are not necessarily safer, effective or lower in allergens. In fact, many natural products undergo limited or no scientific testing compared to the extensive toxicological evaluations that companies like SC Johnson require for their product formulations."

Question: Why do you use fragrance in your products?

Answer: "Consumers tell us they love fragrances...most of our testing shows that the majority of people love fragranced household products."

Question: Why use dyes?

Answer: "Dyes, preservatives and fragrances provide valuable benefits. Dyes are an important visual cue that helps you know where you're spraying a product and, in fact, that it's the product you intended to use."

Now that we know they're listening, let SC Johnson know you're looking forward to seeing ingredients listed on their products this summer! Find them on Facebook or @SCJGreenChoices.

What surprised you the most when you entered your home cleaners into our survey?

Sincerely,
Lindsay Coulter, Queen of Green

Hey! Want more DSF? Join David Suzuki on Facebook