Material Mis-labeling on Love Pacifier Series...?

Hi Red,

I have the beginner and the advanced plugs as well, but I do think they are TPR silicone, and not 100% platinum or medical grade.

Better than most, and as you say, very well priced...but I think the material used is the reason.

Same as the Sue Johanson line of toys, which I thought were 100% silicone, but which are TPR as well.

Every site I found the love pacifier line on listed them as 100% silicone.

I respectfully disagree - the cal exotics website lists the love pacifier series as being 100% Silicone, as does the packaging. If it is indeed TPR, they would be blatantly lying and at risk of legal reprocessions, no?

But maybe my understanding is skewed, or something, as Eden does have it listed as TPR (despite saying things like 100% silicone in the product descriptions)

*shrug*?

Very few Cal Exotic toys are made of 100% silicone. I know it says 100% silicone on the package, but I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are allowed to say anything on the packages since the items they produce are ultimately "novelties" that are "not meant for internal use."

It was mentioned here link that a toy can be called 100% silicone with only 5% silicone content... don't know if that is true or not, but is something to consider.

I'm gonna try and decipher this. Also, will attempt to figure out wtf makes platinum silicone platinum.

Cal exotics sent me an e mail when I asked. They are 100% silicone according to them. They label everything else correctly, as TPR, jelly, etc, so I see no reason they would lie that blatantly with the 100% label. The packaging on the beginner and the beads says 100%. The material feels the same on those as it does on my Tantus silicone products.

From looking at several different sites, they can say silicone if it has some silicone content, but they still can't say 100% silicone if it isn't. Other sex toy online sites do list them as 100% silicone also. From the e mail from Cal Exotics, and my personal experiences with 2 pacifier products and some other silicone toys to compare them to I believe it is.

Wow. Everything else I have from them if it is jelly is labeled jelly etc. I haven't an experience where I felt misled by their labeling.

OK from going through my toys from them, and looking on their website, I see them using silicone in the name of TPR toys but listing the material as TPR. If there is a link to an obviously misleading box it would be interesting to post because I have been going through pages upon pages of Cal Exotics stuff tonight.

Having a Cal exotics rep do one of the interviews here would be great in my opinion.

I guess the difference here is that they are not saying just silicone...but on this it is listed as 100% pure silicone.

This would be good to know - I've always assumed that if it said 100% silicone that it was.

I'm not a Cal Exotics rep. My company's been audience to them on several occasions, most recently about 3 months ago. He had stated that some of their products were being relabeled. Like the Snow Bunny, which on the packaging, states it as silicone, however on EF, its stated as TPR Silicone. He had stated that after some complaints, they were going to be redo the packaging on that rabbit, as well as others, however, he had stated that the rabbit was not a TPR, but a TPE... but yea..

In my personal experience, I've never gotten a toy from CE that stated it was 100% silicone. I have gotten a rabbit or two claiming to be "High quality silicone" like MissKissThis but found out through CE when I emailed that they were in fact either TPE or TPR. I found out that a company can call a toy high quality silicone even if it's only 3-5% silicone which makes it TPE or TPR. I haven't ran into a problem where the manufacturer themselves is boasting a toy to be 100% silicone but I have seen other toy retailers claim TPR and TPE to be 100% silicone. Very confusing if you ask me! I'm really interested to find out if these turn out to be 100% silicone to be honest. It could even turn out to be like the smartballs that everyone originally thought were 100% silicone but they are not. Hopefully we'll figure this one out soon!

Sorry if that was confusing. I have a sinus infection that is killing me and making my eyes cross!

From reading other things on this site link I think the information they have here about silicone may be worth reading.

I've seen lots of toys that claim to be "Silicone" but are really just TPR or TPE. However, if a toy says that it is "100% Silicone", I think it's safe to say that it IS pure silicone, otherwise it's an outright lie. Usually, if the toy is TPR silicone, the name of the toy will have "silicone" in it, but if you read the rest of the box, it will say that it is TPR/TPE. Sometimes, it is rather vague, so I'm glad to hear that Cal Exotics is relabeling.

I just pulled out our (still) almost pristine beginner and advanced pacifier. Though we've had them stored away for three months, there is a definite chemical smell to them. Not so with the Tantus, Jollie toys and the one or two other new med grade silicone stuff we have stored similarly.

The package definitely does say 100% silicone...and that (along with their interesting design) was why I bought them.

I hope we get an answer in the next day or so that settles this; I can't imagine EF would misidentify, as I really rely on these descriptions and properties on site.

Maybe later I'll try a dab of pjur on them to see the reaction; if they are 100% silicone, I now think they are definitely a lower grade...but we're all doing informed speculation right now.

The two I have from that line have no smell at all. Very confusing...I still think the material feels the same as some, not all of my Tantus items.

Possibly. I got mine since Jan. of this year.

Clearly wr all agree and get that labeling that has the word "silicone" thrown around on it isn't necessarily 100% pure silicone.

I don't have a smell with my love pacifier, and I have boiled it a lot, and I have used it with all sorts of oil based lubes, including Vaseline. So in absence of any way to test the chemical composition (and I am considering chipping off a piece and doing just that with a resource I have access to), I feel quite stronly that it is, as labeled, 100% silicone.

I did check out pictures of the products to make sure "100% silicone" isn't a trademark or something.

But, again, I am open to seeing the error in my ways on this one I would love to hear what made EF decide that these were TPR and not 100% silicone, as labeled.

I am an organic chemist, but not in the field of polymers. I have two experiments in mind to test this out that I will do tonight, when the lab is empty. My love pacifier might not survive tho, but I'll take this one for the team.

1) Silicone is supposedly able to stay flexible to temps down to -100C. TPR, generally, becomes brittle below -25C. I will drop the love pacifier in a -78C bath and see how it fares. This is not going to be conclusive, just suggestive.

2) Silicone is supposed to be insoluble in everything, except acids, and also gnarly reagents that will chemically degrade it. I will attempt to dissolve a chip of the Love pacifier on every single organic solvent I have access to.

I was considering putting a chip of it in for elemental analysis, but my reading has led me to conclude that it will be tough to get a definitive answer, as silicone polymers are many and varied in composition.

Stay tuned for an update! Please note, no matter what I find, I'm just an anonymous person posting on a forum, so take it with a grain of salt.

(and yes, this is fully me procrastinating instead of writing a certain epic document...)