Top furrier says fakes are bad for your skin

[kuma]

Just thought I might pass along this article about one of Tokyo's top furrier's who says it all:

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070412/od_nm/fashion_japan_fur_odd_dc;_ylt=Aidww32ZXLeim_9fdVgK6JLMWM0F

 

Interesting to note she is the furrier for Japan's royal family. For some nice videos and gallery pics check out her site here:

 

http://www.chieexcellence.com/index.html

http://www.chieexcellence.com/colection2006/e/index.htm

 

and a little more from:

 

http://entertainment.msn.com/photos/gallery.aspx?gallery=9792

 

- Kuma

[LordTheNightKnight]

Okay, but it would be better for a disinterested party to make those claims, backed up by scientific studies. It wouldn't change PETA's minds, but it's not for them, they aren't a disinterested party either.

 

It's for the sake of objectivity, and therefore credibility.

[Guest]

In the 50's I couldn't buy a 100% cotton shirt.

 

I quickly discovered that not only were nylon and polyester shirts unbelievably hot but I was alergic to them.

 

Same with T shirts and socks. Forget slacks. I had to search far and wide to get cotton clothing so I wouldn't have a constant alergic rash.

 

Folks told me it was all in my head

 

Not only is "The Real Thing" better for you but Real is much higher tech. I've discussed this in past posts.

 

Gortex is the only sythetic clothing that actually works the way it's suppose to. A Gortex shell for a fur lined raincoat would be an excellent mix. Can't think of a single other.

 

OFF

[LordTheNightKnight]

In the 50's I couldn't buy a 100% cotton shirt.

 

I quickly discovered that not only were nylon and polyester shirts unbelievably hot but I was alergic to them.

 

Same with T shirts and socks. Forget slacks. I had to search far and wide to get cotton clothing so I wouldn't have a constant alergic rash.

 

Folks told me it was all in my head

 

Not only is "The Real Thing" better for you but Real is much higher tech. I've discussed this in past posts.

 

Gortex is the only sythetic clothing that actually works the way it's suppose to. A Gortex shell for a fur lined raincoat would be an excellent mix. Can't think of a single other.

 

OFF

Well some real fur coats use nylon or polyester for the lining, so it would help to have a natural fabric lining as well as the fur.

[Guest]

I keep hearing this claim but I have yet to see one. Every fur my girlfriend has or I have seen in a furriers have been silk lined. And because I have a lot to do with horse racing I do know the difference.

Even her long faux fur is silk lined actually but then it was as expensive as a real one ten years ago.

 

I still hae nightmares about the following:

 

Bri nylon. Crimplene. terylene.

 

Ironic that the grandson of the director of ICI is head of greenpeace btw no?

 

Ahh the New World order. What sweet music they make. Not.

[LordTheNightKnight]

Less expensive furs, such as lower priced mink and fox, and low to middle priced rabbit, have artificial linings. It is a way to keep them affordable, especially for someone like me, with a low income.

[auzmink]

Kuma, the videos from your links were excellent. I particularly like the double sided lynx wrap / stole - very nice.....Thanks

 

Auzmink

[Guest]

Lord.

I am on a low income too. Check the linings again. You may think they are polyester but you may find they are after all silk. I have never seen a real fur lined with polyester and the difference in material costs is only about $60. Of course Asian sellers watch such margins so I suppose its possible but it kind of ruins the anti synthetic argument if they are doing that. But even my native furs are lined with silk; even the hats. Hell Silk come sfrom China and the trade between some Russian and chinese tradres is based on swapping silk for furs.

[MrC1946]

Kuma, thank you for the fascinating post and the great links. I think the discussion engendered will tell you how valuable a post it was. I found the links you gave us just as pleasurable. Thanks again.

 

MrC

[LordTheNightKnight]

Lord.

I am on a low income too. Check the linings again. You may think they are polyester but you may find they are after all silk. I have never seen a real fur lined with polyester and the difference in material costs is only about $60. Of course Asian sellers watch such margins so I suppose its possible but it kind of ruins the anti synthetic argument if they are doing that. But even my native furs are lined with silk; even the hats. Hell Silk come sfrom China and the trade between some Russian and chinese tradres is based on swapping silk for furs.

 

I don't think they are. A couple furs I have say the lining is polyester, and another nylon, on the label.

[Guest]

A couple of furs I've gotten had polyester, nylon and acitate linings.

 

They are somewhere in the Municipal dump now.

 

 

OFF

[Chubby]

I've seen cheaper furs lined with synthetics too.

Okay, but it would be better for a disinterested party to make those claims, backed up by scientific studies.

Not necessarily, let those that disagree with her statement prove she is wrong. If they can't, then she is right. Argument won. Not every claim or statement must be backed up with scientific facts when countering Peta's bullshit propoganda. It's a battle of hearts and minds. Her statement sounds plausible. My niece has a terrible reaction to polyester. Very little research has gone into the study of 'Off Gassing' from synthetics. Who knows, toxic off gassing could be a leading cause of lung cancer. I'm just suggesting it could be (through anecdotal evidence). If someone disagrees, prove it with scientific facts.

 

Chubby

[Guest]

It wasn't until practically every frying pan in the known world was lined with teflon that they found it to be toxic.

 

It was reported by folks who couldn't figure out why their pet birds were dying for no apparent reason. The perverbial canary in the coal mine. Teflon was out gassing a toxin that killed the birds.

 

I empathise with your niece Chubby.

 

I do make a study of toxic and outgasing materials in my Architectural practice. The "Scientific" information on the realities fill Libraries and Court rooms with the law suites in the Billions of dollars.

 

Non allergenic housing is a growing segment of the market now. Frankly more folks are more likely to be alergic to fake fur than natural fur.

 

OFF

[kuma]

A "you're welcome" to those who liked the pics and videos.

 

There were a couple of things I forgot to mention in my original post. I liked the fact that Chie Imai encourages younger people to wear real fur. In the article she says:

 

""Real fur is lighter and better on your skin. So that is why young people should be wearing more".

 

I guess this comment (I believe this is a Japanese to English translation) can be interpreted in many different ways. Fur is natural and it's in the "In-style" thing to wear, proven by a lot of fashion shows showcasing new designers metioned in the article. Also, I try to keep an eye on a lot of Japanese TV dramas and movies, a lot of central female characters are wearing furs or fur-trimmed items. The websites of these TV dramas and movies love showcasing the origins of the wardrobes that thier actresses wear, and use it for promotional purposes.

 

So, in Japan, "Fur Is In", no doubt about it. Viewers see this and want what thier favorite starlets wear, even if it's a fur trim on a jacket or coat.

 

I found this article in Yahoo news, under "Odd News", and I'm sure this was able to get a lot of reads, and make people wonder and think. Hopefully as time goes on, younger people will begin to filter out the PETA bull****, get the real facts, and wear what they want to wear. We're getting to a point where young people are tired of having propaganda and lies shoved in their faces, tired of being told what to wear and do. Chie Imai is trying in her own way to get the attention of younger people with some sensibility.

 

- Kuma

[LordTheNightKnight]

Having allergies to synthetics doesn't really prove they are bad, as some people are allergic to real animal hair.

 

And what I mean by a disinterested party is to help credibility with the undecided. It means one doesn't care, so has least reason to lie (not that interested ones do, but that they would have more reason to). It's why those trying to discredit global warming are losing ground. They are either in the employ of those wanting to stick with fossil fuels (apparently from laziness rather than money) or are being paid by such people. Hence, they are not disinterested.

[ReFur]

Lord.

I am on a low income too. Check the linings again. You may think they are polyester but you may find they are after all silk.

 

I don't think they are. A couple furs I have say the lining is polyester, and another nylon, on the label.

 

 

Lord is correct.

 

In my opinion, the reason many use synthetics in furs is because they are easier "to clean," and "keep clean," for lower-end shoppers. Silk stains easily, does not spot clean well and is very expensive to clean and ultimately replace.

 

Currently, many furriers will only clean the lining by taking it out and dry-cleaning it separately and then they put it back. Usually they just recommend you replace it.

 

This does seem to vary region-to-region in US. I know a major furrier in Texas who cannot imagine ignoring the cleaning of the lining while cleaning the fur. He does not detach the lining either. He pre-cleans the lining with chemicals, the old way, before the fur is cleaned.

 

I do know that most furriers do not clean the lining as part of a regular cleaning. For several reasons:

 

* Part of it is the cost for cleaning is a loss-leader. Their hope is you will need to spend money on repairs;

 

* Another reason is the linings do not clean well, so there is the fear they will be responsible to replace it if there is problem;

 

* Lastly, many do not like working with the chemicals that must be used when it is done by hand.

 

It is worth noting that the newer European methods of cleaning does clean the lining because chemicals are used very similar to dry-cleaning. There has been very positive response to this method in the marketplace by professionals. I personally do not have the knowledge to know if it is good or bad.

 

It is very cash intensive to change to this new technology though. Most established furriers cannot afford to do this.

 

And, many like doing it the old way. They see no reason to change, and in some cases do not like change of any kind. They wish to continue the "family tradition" and pride themselves in the "art" of their business that has been handed down from generation-to-generation.

 

I spoke with my Fur Insurance rep this week. Another four furriers went out of business in the last few months. Many of these were third generation family businesses. A terrible loss. With them will go the "art" of the true furriers. These fur "artists" a national treasures to me. They know so much this is being lost forever.

 

We rapidly are seeing the fur business turn into a commodity.

 

All you have to do is look at how a vintage fur is made compared to the current methods and you know there is a very different objective in their design and market placement, ...and cost.

 

The average customer is no longer willing to pay what was paid in generations past. Furriers "sold" their prices as a purchase that was an "heirloom." Now it is a "garment" that is being purchased, ..or "fashion," which is fickle and short lived in value. The "value" given to an heirloom is no longer being accepted, or paid, in the marketplace.

 

I do not know the numbers, but if you adjusted current fur prices for inflation, I would imagine similar furs sell for half what they did twenty years ago. Maybe some of our true experts could comment.

 

Until the tremendous over-supply of furs is eliminated, furriers will continue to sell their way into the way of the dinosaurs. It will be interesting to see what is left of the industry when this eventually runs its course. One thing is clear, it will be a very different business.

 

What I fear is: within the next ten years, only the very rich will be able to afford furs.

 

Linda