apparently the false claims by baby einstein are finally being put under fire. which, to your loyal blogger, is both surprising and non-surprising all at once. i mean, companies make blatantly false statements all the time. just the other day i happened to be walking through a regular supermarket and was stunned by the "healthy" claims stamped upon sugared cereal boxes such as froot loops and cinnamon toast crunch--do people really fall for this stuff? i guess, ultimately, some people do.
i've heard and read reports for a long while now discussing findings that not only does baby einstein not promote language development, it actually hinders it. especially when videos act as a replacement for one-on-one time with a caregiver. it doesn't take a "genius" to understand this, especially with the american academy of pediatrics recommending no time in front of a television for children under the age of 2.
well, as most of you know, we don't have television in our home. it started as a one-month experiment and went from there. occasionally jeremy and i will watch a movie after the kids are sleeping, but it's never on when lucy is awake. as such, we have no einstein DVDs to return, and lucy thinks that the television is something meant to display her artwork--tacking up each painstakingly-scribbled-upon piece with a bit of tape.
but what would i do with the money IF i were returning my non-existent DVDs?
i'm a sucker for green toys. we have their sand set, kitchen set, tea set and indoor garden. great quality stuff. cute. made of recycled materials in the usa. what's not to love? i'm sure lucy would be delighted with both of the toys pictured above. living in a construction zone has her quite familiar with all of daddy's tools, and she looks forward weekly visit from the garbage trucks with gusto.
anyhow. that's what i would spend my einstein money on. and now you know.