From Dildology Wiki
|UPC:||7 82421 01356 1|
|Source:||Va Va Voom|
|Purchase Date:||2013 May 17|
|Declared Composition:|| Doc Johnson’s Realistic® (PVC)|
Non-Phthalate, Latex Free, Cadmium Free
|Received by Lab:||2013 Jun 06|
|Test(s) Performed:||FTIR, GCMS|
|Polymer Composition:||PVC, 39%|
Note: ECA incorrectly listed the material as Doc Johnson UR3
- the correct material is Doc Johnson R5.
|Notes:|| Doc Johnson has stated that "Sil-A-Gel" should not be interpreted|
to mean "silicone." True to this claim, no silicone was found during analysis.
A letter from the owner of Doc Johnson, regarding Dildology’s purported laboratory analysis of the James Deen Realistic (R5®) Cock:
In their post here (http://wiki.dildology.org/view/James_Deen), Dildology.org’s hobbyist owner, Valentine Orenda (under the alias ‘Protospect’), presents a laboratory analysis on the Doc Johnson James Deen Signature Cock made in Realistic (R5®).
In the identification fields, the sample material is incorrectly named and identified – it is listed as “DocJohnsonUR3”, when in fact it is R5®. The lab used, Expert Chemical Analysis (ECA), has misidentified the sample they tested. The James Deen dildo is not manufactured in UR3®. Our UR3® formula contains no PVC or plasticizer.
Our Realistic (R5®) formula is a PVC blend. This proprietary formula is made with the same plasticizers used in cardiac catheters, blood bags, and medical devices worldwide. This plasticizer is approved for use across the globe. See links and notes on these regulations and irrefutable compliance below.
Doc Johnson switched to non-phthalate plasticizers four years ago, long before many of our competitors and by choice, not by law. We use two different materials: 1,4-benzenedicarboxylic acid, di(2-ethylhexyl) ester and/or 1,2-Cyclohexane dicarboxlic acid, diisononyl ester. Neither of which are phthalates. Both have a very clean toxicological profile and is neither an estrogen mimicker, carcinogen, nor anti-androgen (i.e., an endocrine disrupter.)
We have a full laboratory onsite at our North Hollywood facilities, and employ a Scientific Director, Timothy Crawford, who works full-time onsite, as well as two lab assistants. We have stringent testing and quality control in the making of our formulas and the continued compliance of our materials. We do not take this defamation and inciting of public outcry lightly. The damages done to our company’s reputation in the last few days by this misinformation is unacceptable and undeserved. Additionally, the personal attacks directed at James Deen are deplorable. James Deen has stood behind his product line with Doc Johnson and has been a great partner.
The Dildology website is in error. It is a common mistake made by non-scientists who do not have a working knowledge of polymer chemistry. The ECA testing lab used by the website found bis(2-ethylhexylhexahydrophthalate) which could, to the layman, appear to be DEHP. This misinterpretation and lack of deeper analysis speaks to the competency of the laboratory used.
It is also important to note that we have cradle to grave testing on our materials. That means we have the testing on the raw materials, the intermediate stage, and our final goods. All of which show that our products do not contain phthalates.
Our most recent testing battery was completed on March 20th, 2013 by Bureau Veritas, an accredited laboratory approved by the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) for third-party testing under the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA.) Their test method for the determination of phthalates is either CPSC-CH-C1001-09.3 and/or GB/T 22048-2008. As prescribed by the protocol, our Realistic material was tested down to 0.005% with no sign of any phthalates. This includes DNOP, DINP, DIDP, BBP, DBP, DEHP and DnHP. The protocol stops at 0.005% because any level lower than that is non-reportable.
Our accredited testing Labs:
Our non-phthalate plasticizers satisfy the following regulations and standards:
Thank you for reading this letter.
Ron Braverman and the Doc Johnson team