The Tower of London responded to my email... in LESS THAN 24 HOURS! Amazing. Read our correspondence here.

December 19, 2022 — Monday

When I woke up this morning and checked my email first thing (around 6 a.m.!) I had already received a response (two, in fact!) from the agency in charge of the Tower of London gift shop (related to my concerns for this tiny London bus ornament). I just sent them a response as well. Please scroll down to read the full exchange. What a refreshing difference from the type of responses I usually receive in the United States! (More evidence supporting my interest in moving to the U.K!) There are screenshots (and text) from four emails, below.

#1) My initial e-mail to The Tower of London: 12/18/22

Text of this email:

Hello I purchased a souvenir last month at the Tower of London (when i was there visiting with my two disabled children) and it turned out that it is quite poisonous and not safe for children and I wanted to alert you to this fact. Please let me know if you have any questions. Details are on the link below:

https://tamararubin.com/2022/12/incredibly-toxic-and-dangerous-souvenir-purchased-at-the-tower-of-london-gift-shop-november-2022/

#2) Their initial response: 12/19/22

Text of this email:

Dear Tamara,

Thanks for getting in touch.

Historic Royal Palaces is a charity that aims to help everyone explore the story of how monarchs and historical figures have shaped society in some of the greatest palaces ever built and we appreciate any feedback that helps us improve our visitors’ experience and enjoyment.

I’m sorry to hear your feedback about your recent purchase at the Tower of London. I have passed your comments to the relevant department so they can investigate and work towards making improvements. The team will reply to you within 14 working days. However, if you wish to contact us in the meantime about your complaint please quote HRP-156841-D2V0.

Thank you again for taking the time to get in touch.

#3) Their second response: 12/19/22

Text of this email:

Dear Tamara,

Thank you for getting in touch with us and flagging your concern regarding the London Bus ornament that you purchased from one of shops. We have spoken to the supplier and their test reports show that this item is made from a zinc alloy and painted in a non- toxic paint.

However we take your concerns very seriously and have sent the item in question for independent testing in an accredited lab. As soon as we have the test results, we will be in touch to share the results and confirm our next steps.

Once again, thank you for bringing this to our attention and we wish to assure you that the safety of our customers is our upmost priority.

#4) My response to their response: 12/19/22

Text of this email:

Hello!

Thank you for the impressively rapid (and positive / proactive) response!

While I reported that the item appears to be made of nearly solid Cadmium, there is a remote chance that (because of the thickness of the paint) the reading of 900,000+ ppm Cadmium was primarily a reading of the paint rather than primarily a reading of the substrate — however, with over 13 years of daily experience testing consumer goods for toxicants using XRF analysis (using the same scientific instrumentation used by the United State Consumer Product Safety Commission) I don’t expect that would be the case [as I have never once found Cadmium-containing paint or enamel to be that high in Cadmium!].

As a comparable example; in the bright red Le Creuset cookware [an egregious example of high Cadmium levels in a consumer product], the Cadmium levels on the outside readings of those pots and pans are typically “only” in the 9,000 to 40,000 range. [Here’s a link to an example of a red enameled pot with Cadmium from Le Creuset.]

And then there was the very high Lead level for that bus ornament, too (2,716 ppm) – which is far above both the substrate and the coating hazard levels for items intended for use by children (90 ppm for coatings in the U.S., and 100 ppm for substrate).

Lastly, the Zinc level was only 56,000 ppm — and I would also expect that to be much higher (even reading through an enamel paint) if the substrate were primarily Zinc, as your supplier has claimed.

I look forward to hearing from you!

My kids thoroughly enjoyed their experience at the Tower museum, and I have a few more small souvenirs we purchased to report on. I also already tested the little British phone box pencil sharpener [I think it was sold in one of the bins in the tables by the register] — also red; also made mostly of metal — and it does not test positive for high levels of either of these metallic toxicants. I will send you that link when I have the data up [This is what I do professionally, testing consumer goods!]

Thanks again for your quick and proactive response! What a refreshing contrast to the reflexively defensive and adversarial responses and attitudes I witness from most American businesses and agencies!

Tamara

For those new to this website:

Tamara Rubin is a multiple-federal-award-winning independent advocate for childhood Lead poisoning prevention and consumer goods safety, and a documentary filmmaker. She is also a mother of Lead-poisoned children (two of her sons were acutely Lead-poisoned in 2005). Since 2009, Tamara has been using XRF technology (a scientific method used by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission) to test consumer goods for toxicants (specifically heavy metals — including Lead, Cadmium, Mercury, Antimony, and Arsenic). All test results reported on this website are science-based, accurate, and replicable. Items are tested multiple times to confirm the test results for each component tested. Tamara’s work was featured in Consumer Reports Magazine in February of 2023 (March 2023 print edition).

Never Miss an Important Article Again!

Join our Email List

14 Comments

Victoria Lee says:

December 19, 2022 at 10:52 am

Amazing response! Yay for British people!

Kevin says:

December 19, 2022 at 5:42 pm

Tamara, you are doing such great work!

1. Tamara says:
  
  December 19, 2022 at 5:45 pm
  
  Thank you.
  
Tim Pye says:

December 20, 2022 at 3:51 am

Tamara,

Thank you for following up on this. Clearly, this item could be used as a key fob, the paint could be chipped, and it could then be given to small children. Perhaps you could encourage the Historic Royal Palaces charity to get more of their products to be tested – particularly from the same supplier.

Would it be OK with you if I forward this story to some UK news media.

Also, thanks for Victoria’s “Yay for British people!” Unfortunately, this is an exception. Usually in the UK lead stands for Lame Excuses And Denial.

If there is anyone in the UK on this thread who would like to help our campaign to manage and mitigate lead hazards you would be welcome to endorse our work at leappalliance.org.uk.

Tim Pye

Pamela says:

December 20, 2022 at 5:23 am

I wish this type of response was the norm in the U.S. KitchenAid and Hu Chocolate should take notes. I think people would be more willing to forgive if they took proactive step of testing and addressing the issues instead of trying to gaslight their customers with no lead claims. Especially Hu, come on reported by Consumer Reports.

Tim Pye says:

January 10, 2023 at 12:36 am

Tamara,

Did you hear any more from the Royal Palaces? Do they accept that the item was made of cadmium? Will they withdraw it and test other items?

best wishes,

Tim

1. Tamara says:
  
  January 10, 2023 at 9:48 am
  
  I have not heard back.
  T
  
Tim Pye says:

January 10, 2023 at 9:51 am

Thank you. If I am down there any time I will have a look if they are still on sale. I suspect they will have been quietly removed.

Tim

Brigid says:

November 20, 2023 at 2:25 pm

Have you heard back on the independent lab’s test results?

1. Tamara says:
  
  November 20, 2023 at 2:27 pm
  
  They denied my findings – which is total B.S. – but I am not sure where to go from there on this.
  T
  
Tim Pye says:

November 21, 2023 at 1:58 pm

If I get near The Tower of London, or other outlet, I will try to buy one and then raise it with our Trading Standards agency.
Tim Pye

1. Tamara says:
  
  November 21, 2023 at 2:12 pm
  
  Yeah – I don’t know how they could have possible determined the one example they tested was Cadmium free – something was funny with that.
  T
  
Katie says:

December 7, 2023 at 5:26 pm

Just curious… why do you think a company would knowingly make something completely out of cadmium? What would be the benefit instead of using something non toxic to make it? Is it cheaper? It baffles me with the knowledge out there that it is cancer causing, why does this still happen?

1. Tamara says:
  
  December 7, 2023 at 5:32 pm
  
  Much cheaper than making things out of safer materials (like Stainless Steel or Sterling Silver – for necklace charms for example.) This could have been made out of Zinc fairly inexpensively however. This happened several years ago with Claire’s Jewelry – they had a lot of Leaded Jewelry and they got cited for the violations. In response their suppliers substituted Cadmium for Lead – and they got cited again. Their jewelry (that I have tested in recent years) is now all Lead-free and Cadmium-free (because they don’t want the cost of being in violation of the current laws.) Lead and Cadmium make Jewelry heavier (and for some that gives it a quality that makes it seem more valuable – as the weight is closer to the weight of Gold.)
  
  Tamara