Earlier in the year we couldn't decide if the design of Tide Pods was useful or silly. Turns out it's a third, unforeseen thing: Dangerous. The Washington Post reports that the colorful little detergent packs--both the Tide ones made by Procter & Gamble, and knock-offs made by competitors--look a little too much like candy, according to nearly 250 reported instances of children eating the things.
Luckily no deaths have been reported, though some children required hospitalization and in one extreme case a child was placed on a ventilator. Unsurprisingly P&G says there's a re-design in the works--but not of the Pods themselves; rather, the lids of the containers holding them will reportedly be beefed up.
Our initial Tide Pods post garnered a flurry of comments, both for and against the product. (We were surprised that the redesign of a detergent would inspire that kind of passion, but that's why Core77's readers rock.) Our question this time is, would you consider this an actual design flaw, or is a lack of parental supervision to blame? And if it's the latter, do you think a child-proof lid will be enough to do the trick?
Create a Core77 Account
Already have an account? Sign In
By creating a Core77 account you confirm that you accept the Terms of Use
Please enter your email and we will send an email to reset your password.
Comments
No, let's blame the product. Nobody is accountable for anything anymore. What a nanny state we've become.
For me the flaw lies in the PACKAGING and BRANDING COMMUNICATION.
It almost replicates a chocolate container or a packet of twix on the right.
(http://www.candywarehouse.com/candy-type/bulk-wrapped-candy/bulk-candy-bags/products/mandm-mars-mini-candy-bars-assortment-52-ounce-bag/)
If a child is used to see this kind of graphic and packaging on the products he eats/buys, of course he would consider similar to be the same.
One of the solution I can think of, is a minimal unbranded packaging for Cigarette (http://www.good.is/post/good-design-daily-are-unbranded-cigarettes-too-ugly-to-smoke/)
We're talking about the packaging to laundry detergent. You don't need high performance characteristics. You need something that'll hold some powder, liquid, or tablets for a few months to a couple of years on a shelf indoors. Non-biodegradable thermoplastics are severe overkill for that task. Once the package contents are spent, the package is chucked. It's beyond ludicrous (frankly, abysmally stupid) to use a material that so grossly outlives the useful life of a *disposable* product.
There's one glaring problem with the declaration that the market should decide what product is better. Go to any big box mart. Tell me how many cleaning products use packaging designed for composting. If you're so lucky as to find any at all, tell me how well represented they are in that store's advertising compared to brands that don't use compostable packaging.
That "market" you reference just isn't there. It doesn't exist. Let's ignore the possibility of people mindlessly buying whatever advertisers tell them to buy and just focus on logistics. Consumers *do not* have full control over what they consume when the retailers that provide the goods are the ones choosing what to stock and the suppliers don't even bother trying to be environmentally and ethically sound in the first place.
The responsibility to do good thus ultimately falls upon designers and manufacturers conjuring up the goods people take for granted. Personally, I'd say Dante Sigona's little rant was spot-on.
The container (child proof or not) is a container that holds toxins, so should have always been child proof, and finally, as these re little containers of something why are the little containers not foul tasting to the tongue, so they do not get bitten?
Yes these should be kept out of the reach of children, and yes it probably says that on the package, but that's a difficult message to reconcile with making the product visually appealing. Perhaps if "Keep out of the reach of children" had to be written with the attention commanding impact as "Smoking may cause cancer" consumers would have more respect for the dangers associated with cleaning products.
Stop making poisonous detergent.
Seriously though. I think it's a nice design. The pods are attractive, and so is the new packaging. I do hope the packaging keeps children out. My kid likes to dig into the drawers where we keep cleaners and all things toxic, when she has the rare opportunity. Fortunately, we watch her and the rest of the time the doors stay locked. I think it's a shame if concern of safety would hurt a nice design. The two factors can live together.
Try taking responsibility and stop blaming P&G. If you believe any corporation wants children to eat a toxic product, you need to have your head examined.
Dante Sigona:
I have yet to find a compostable packaging material that even begins to approach the performance characteristics of plastic. If you don't like the product, don't buy it. If it truly is inferior, the market will make that decision.
I realise this debate was covered in the last thread, however these types of products really annoy me.
Stop being lazy. Buy in bulk. Save the world!!
For one, Tide made the container WAY too much like a candy container, they should make it in an opaque container, just as laundry detergent. As well as improving the lid.
However, its partly the parents fault. Ever taken a look at any prescription drugs? They all look like tiny tasty candy! With anything that is and could be dangerous or confusing to a child, you must pay extra attention to, this is part of parenting.
A child proof lid is a half-way solution. Why not just put the container out of reach of children?
Parents will inevitably forget to close the lid on occasion or spill them onto the floor where one may lay in waiting under an appliance ready to be gobbled up by a passing child.
I've heard of the same thing happening with 'Finish Dishwashing Tablets'. Apparently the solution was simple. Keep them out of reach of children.
On the other hand Tide could always make them look like black licorice. Problem solved.
Kind of like dropping in a cube of sugar instead of opening a packet of sugar.
Proctor & Gamble (and anyone else who copied them) = idiots.
"degruch February 26, 2012 6:29 PM
Well, they look delicious...toddlers around the world will love them. Toxic?"
Yes, this is part of design. While working at a design firm recently we were creating a product which had the potential to be toxic if eaten. Upon rendering out one potential design, I had the sudden realization "I just designed a toxic lollypop". It looked like candy, and I knew that kids would probably see it the same way.
So we tossed the concept and made sure that our other concepts took this into consideration. Tide should have taken more consideration of this