Zhu Zhu pets are the hot Christmas toy this year (at least that’s what they tell me). Then a safety scare threatened to dampen the holiday fervor for these fury critters, after a web site claimed one Zhu Zhu model contained unsafe levels of antimony, a fire retardant linked to heart and lung problems. Turns out it was a false alarm. Yesterday the Consumer Product Safety Commission confirmed Zhu Zhu pets meet applicable safety standards. That’s a relief, right? Given the apparent hysteria over Zhu Zhu pets this year — I know one parent who got up in the wee hours of the morning to be first in line for one — some may find the CPSC announcement disappointing, as it eliminates one excuse for failing to have found one.
Patrick says:
Meanwhile, the Consumer Product Safety Commission will continue to protect children from toys made of wood and brass.
(To be fair, most recent silliness from the CPSC is actually the fault of Congress.)
December 8, 2009, 9:33 amProf. S. says:
At this point the damage has been done however. From now until eternity, this pet will have lower sales than the others because someone heard somewhere that they were dangerous — and how do you KNOW that they are not.
It’s for the kids. Better to be hysterical and force people to prove negatives.
December 8, 2009, 10:25 amEH says:
Sorry, but I have no sympathy for a $10 toy being sold for $50. I volunteer for Craigslist, I’ve been watching the Zhu Zhu front lines for the past month and a half, and the only people calling them a “hot toy” are those trying to scalp them for a 400% profit. Call it the invisible hand if you want, but there’s always a conflict of interest whenever a seller calls them a hot toy.
December 8, 2009, 11:51 am“Mr. Squiggles is in the clear” says:
[...] The Consumer Product Safety Commission helps defuse an unfounded toxic-toy scare about one of the year’s toy trends, hamster-like Zhu Zhu pets. [Washington Post via Adler, Volokh] [...]
December 8, 2009, 12:11 pmJohn Armstrong says:
We wouldn’t want our precious children exposed to any paradoxes from unsafe levels of antinomy.
Wait, what?
December 8, 2009, 2:13 pmSara (Pal2Pal) says:
I’m glad I have no little ones around to buy for at Christmas. This ugly little rodent would never be welcome in my house.
But, I’m also wondering how I missed the pay off. I’ve had the name “Squiggles” registered since 1994 and no one asked me about Mr. Squiggles. My Mr. Squiggles is not happy about having a rodent as a namesake.
December 8, 2009, 3:23 pmRob Robinson says:
As someone who has children too young to be swept up into trends like this, what drives this sort of mania? Are children really pulling on their parents’ shirts, begging for a Zhu Zhu? Or is it–”I want to be a good parent and get the hot toy” mindset that creates this sort of absurdity? I ask out of self-interest: I can avoid the latter problem pretty easily, but the former dynamic would be harder to deal with (I’m pretty soft as a parent around Christmas).
December 9, 2009, 11:41 amAllyson Whisnant says:
Hey, thanks for that link to get the free gift card for toys from Kmart, I tried to use it but its only open to those in U.S.A. which sucks because my mom got hers in 3 days in the mail, but she lives in Denver.
December 19, 2009, 10:24 pm