When shoppers take the time to look at apparel hangtags or read an online description of the product, they expect the information to be on the up and up.

But sometimes apparel descriptions are not quite genuine.  Take bamboo clothes, for instance.  They were riding a green high a year ago.  From day one, bamboo was promoted as an eco superstar: organically produced, biodegradable, naturally capable of wicking perspiration – and good for the planet. 

Then the Federal Trade Commission stepped in. It found that the bamboo was being dumped in vats of chemicals, and the fibers were extruded via harsh processing.  "It's rayon," the federal agency declared last summer.  Rayon from bamboo, but still rayon.

"We alleged false and misleading advertising and labeling," said FTC attorney Melinda Claybaugh.  Four apparel and textile makers were charged.  The FTC said the companies also made false and unsubstantiated “green” claims. "Some maintained they used environmentally friendly manufacturing processes and some said they were biodegradable.  We alleged this wasn't substantiated," Claybaugh added.

All four companies have since settled their cases, agreeing to stop making the false claims and to abide by the Textile Act and the FTC's Textile Rules.

Like a rising starlet who’s been kicked off the set and sent to rehab, such was the fate for "organic bamboo apparel." It can still be found in the marketplace, but its green name has been tarnished. 

The FTC is on the lookout for any retailers or manufacturers still not in compliance with the labeling.  In February, the agency warned 78 retailers, including Walmart, Target and Kmart, to stop labeling and advertising rayon products as "bamboo."

“We need to make sure companies use proper labeling and advertising in their efforts to appeal to environmentally conscious consumers,” said David C. Vladeck, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

This is no small complaint; when consumers want to determine if an apparel item is environmentally friendly, they check fiber content labels and garment hang-tags, and look for seals or certification of its authenticity, according to the Cotton Incorporated Environment Survey.  They also pore over product descriptions and in-store ads, as well as TV, magazine and internet ads.

Data from the Environment Survey also reveal that marketing terms do hold sway: 55% of consumers say they would be influenced by terms like "environmentally friendly," "sustainable" and "earth friendly,” while 61% say they would be influenced by the term "natural."

"We look at marketing claims the same way a consumer looks at them," Claybaugh said.  "Our Green Guide directs how we look at environmental marketing, in terms of how consumers view the terms.  Something natural is made without processing.  If something is made of rayon, it's harsh processing with chemicals.” 

"Marketers have to consider what consumers take away from a term like 'natural' and have substantiation for that," Claybaugh said.  In other words, being truthful in advertising isn't just the right thing to do, it's the law.

Cotton Incorporated is part of a group effort to compile comprehensive data, which will lead to the creation of a tool that aims to form a foundation for sustainable textile planning. Lifecycle Assessment is a recognized method of objectively and scientifically evaluating the resource requirements of a given product and the product’s potential environmental impact along every phrase of its production, use and disposal.

J. Berrye Worsham, president and CEO of Cotton Incorporated, explains, “The collection of this current, third-party and peer-reviewed data will provide a gold standard for manufacturers, brands and retailers interested in bettering their environmental bottom line. It will also serve to validate the environmental gains the industry continues to make along every link of the supply chain.”

This kind of transparency is important to the consumer.  The Environmental Survey shows 70% of consumers say they “may be bothered" or would be "extremely bothered" if they purchased apparel labeled as environmentally-friendly, only to find out it was not eco-friendly.  Furthermore, if they purchased apparel and then found out it was produced in a non-environmentally friendly way, 42% would hold the company that manufactured it most responsible.

Cotton, meanwhile, is a fiber and fabric that consumers trust.  Nine of 10 consider it to be safe for the environment, and 70% say it is environmentally friendly, according to the Environment Survey. A full 7 of 10 consumers, too, say natural fibers like cotton are better for the environment than synthetics.

Claybaugh says confusion remains in the marketplace, especially for those consumers looking for environmentally friendly products.  She adds that textile producer must use proper names for fibers, or risk facing charges from the FTC. Ultimately, she notes, "Marketers, manufacturers and sellers of bamboo should properly advertise fiber content and have scientific evidence for the claims they make about their product."