Fashion monster with phenol inside: Roskachestvo clarifies the situation with Huggy Wuggy

Today, TASS will hold a final press conference, at which they will officially announce the results and conclusions obtained during the examination carried out in relation to the toothy toy, and share the nuances of the situation that has developed around it.

Maria Dubinskaya

On the regulation of the market of socially significant goods, using the example of a study of the children's stuffed toy Huggy Wuggy, Deputy Head of Roskachestvo Yelena Saratseva, First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Family, Women and Children, Chairman of the "Council of Mothers" Tatyana Butskaya, who has been began to treat the problem with great attention, and the chairman of the commission of the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation on demography, protection of the family, childhood and traditional family values Sergey Rybalchenko, who recently held a round table in the OPRF on the topic of monster toys.

"Public spanking" Huggy Waggi was looking forward to a huge number of Russians.

I really want this “bug-eyed freak case” to be as open, detailed and voluminous as possible, this will allow us all to more clearly understand what is happening today in Russia in the field of goods for children, and where it all is actually heading, where it leads than fraught.

In this regard, everyone who cares about this will be interested to read the comments of experts involved in the implementation of the study and invited as part of the November discussion of the special project of Roskachestvo on Huggy Wuggy. Being a participant in this event not only as a journalist, but also as the author of the project “Monsters, get out of the nursery!” , dedicated to the fight against destructive images in the field of childhood, I can testify: Roskachestvo carried out a lot of serious work, during which the Huggi-Waggi toy was studied, as they say, up and down, to the tiniest seam, in fact, to the very molecules. As for the conclusions about the psychological impact of toys on children, here, of course, questions remain - however, with such large-scale public discussions, it cannot be otherwise.

So, Vasily Smirnov, director of the department of analytics and project management of Roskachestvo, commented on how the excitement around Huggy Wuggy was :

“Huggy Waggie is a soft toy with an unkind expression on his face.

At first glance, such an image should repel and frighten children. But the situation shows the opposite: the toy is in the top most popular in 2022.

In conditions of high demand, parents are forced to purchase a toy for their child so that he is on a par with his peers. So the object became socially significant.

The situation is aggravated by the fact that this toy is most often made of low-quality materials, most of the reviews are just that. Its cost ranges from several hundred to several thousand rubles, but the high price does not mean at all that the toy is made at a high level.

Our Center for the Study of Consumer Behavior conducted a survey about what customers care about this toy.

Fears come down to a negative impact on the mental state of the child and instilling in him the wrong attitudes of behavior, aggression. Also, people are worried that the toy is often made of low-quality materials, breaks quickly, and does not meet hygienic requirements. The product may be toxic, including handling with formaldehyde and other hazardous substances. There is a manufacturing defect. The toy has an unpleasant chemical smell. The absence of the necessary accompanying documentation, the manufacturer's certificate is common.

Among other things, our important task was to conduct a psychological and pedagogical examination in order to understand how this toy affects the child’s psyche.”

“Indeed, this product is not always certified, the Huggi-Waggi toy is not always sold as a toy. Both Roskachestvo and Rospotrebnadzor in their conclusions note that a significant part of such fashionable products is sold under the guise of souvenirs or textiles. This requires separate work with the Ministry of Industry and Trade and the Public Chamber, ”explained Elena Saratseva , deputy head of Roskachestvo . She also called the results " generally quite sad", Huggi-Waggi toys, according to her, are made according to the principle "I blinded him from what was", big claims to workmanship.

The head of the testing department of Roskachestvo, Lilia Kotelnikova, spoke in detail about what specific indicators were evaluated by specialists during the study of the Huggi-Waggi toy, which occupied the shelves of the whole country (and far from only in children's stores):

“The study involved 18 brands of soft-filled Huggi-Waggi toys: three of them are Russian manufacturers, fifteen from China. We bought a toy mainly of a classic color - a blue body and yellow inserts. They were purchased both on online trading platforms, including Chinese ones, and at retail outlets.

Nine trademarks did not have information about the manufacturer, producer or importer of products, not to mention other mandatory information.

In total, we conducted a study on 59 indicators.

In terms of safety, microbiological indicators, general contamination, the presence of molds and yeasts, the family of enterobacteria, staphylococci and Pseudomonas (Pseudomonas aeruginosa) were assessed.

In terms of physical and chemical parameters, the quality of the stuffing material, the speed of flame propagation during combustion, and the strength of the electrostatic field were evaluated. In terms of sanitary and hygienic indicators, the aquatic environment, the yield of acryl-nitrile, acetone, benzene, vinyl acetate, methyl alcohol, tenol, phenol, and formaldehyde were evaluated. Similar indicators were also evaluated in the air environment. We also evaluated the release of harmful chemicals into the model environment contained in 1 kg of any toy materials, such as antimony, lead, mercury, cadmium, chromium, arsenic, barium and selenium.

In terms of toxicological and hygienic indicators, the irritating effect on mucous membranes, the toxicity index in the aquatic and air environment, the odor intensity in the aqueous extract and in natural conditions were studied.

In terms of quality, we studied the type and mass fraction of components, the length of the pile, the surface density of the pile cover, the resistance to stalling in the initial state and after 5 washes at a temperature of 30 degrees; expandability of the threads in the seam, breaking load along the loop columns and along the loop rows. We also evaluated the color fastness after washing - to sweat, dry friction, wet friction and saliva.

In terms of appearance requirements, the following were evaluated: appearance in the initial state, after washing at +35 degrees; the presence of long elements in which the child can get confused; stuffing material, the quality of the seams and the quality of the fittings.

The results are as follows: none of the 18 purchased brands met the requirements. This mainly concerned information on the label.

In terms of labeling discrepancies, 12 brands did not match, that is, they did not have the necessary information on the label.

In terms of safety, microbiological indicators corresponded to the requirements, and no deviations were found in terms of physicochemical requirements.

According to sanitary and hygienic requirements in the aquatic environment, 16 brands were found to exceed the norms for phenol. The content of phenol in the water extract varied from 0.73 thousandths to 0.212 thousandths.

There were no deviations in other sanitary and chemical indicators in the aquatic environment.

According to the sanitary and chemical indicators of the air extract, there were no discrepancies in any brand.

The release of harmful chemicals into the model environment was not recorded, all samples met the requirements.

Toxic and hygienic indicators in terms of the toxicity index in the aquatic environment: 8 grades did not meet the requirements (standards vary from 70 to 120%), with values from 127.3 to more than 150.

According to the toxicity index in the air: the normalized value is from 80 to 120%, all samples met the requirement.

According to the intensity of the odor in natural conditions, no discrepancies were found, and in the water extract one sample did not match, it had an intensity of 2 points.

The quality of the seams: four samples did not meet the advanced requirements with values from 151 to 180. The breaking load along the hinge posts should be, in accordance with the advanced requirements and according to GOST, at least 176, 6 - in three codes this did not meet the requirements of the advanced standard with the value from 150 to 165.

The breaking load across should also be at least 176.6 - there were no discrepancies. Color fastness to impact - no discrepancies were recorded for any of the grades.

In terms of appearance in the initial state, there were several comments: glue streaks near the eyes were found in samples of 12 brands, the correct fastening of parts was violated in 10 brands, asymmetry of the product in 6 brands, different distance between the eyes in 8 brands, heterogeneity of samples in 3 brands, paws of different colors for 1 brand, paws and pile of different colors for another brand, Velcro fittings are sewn incorrectly for 1 brand. In total, 15 brands did not meet the advanced requirements of the appearance in general.

After 5 washes at 30 degrees, there were also several types of inconsistencies: the seam came apart in 9 brands. In terms of the quality of the stuffing material, we recorded an uneven distribution of products from 11 brands, and in one of the samples, fabric and thread trimmings were found in the filler.

In terms of the quality of the seams, several inconsistencies were also identified: the presence of uncut edges was in 13 brands, non-observance of the same distance of lines when attaching Velcro - in 5 brands, the color of the threads was different in one brand, and another 3 brands had a split seam even before processing. In total, inconsistencies in the quality of seams were found in samples of 13 brands. There were 2 types of inconsistencies in fittings - different Velcro tapes for toys of 3 brands, and one brand had no Velcro on one paw.

Compliance certificates were also assessed. For 12 trademarks, such certificates were not found, and 1 trademark had a certificate with a validity period of 4 days, which, by the way, we encountered for the first time.”

Turning to the part about the psychological impact of monster toys, the experts reminded that the question of what toys children play with belongs to the sphere of relationships between fathers and children and understanding between generations.

Olga Rubtsova, head of the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies of Modern Childhood at MSUPE, spoke in detail about the data of the psychological and pedagogical examination of the Huggi-Waggi toy, which was the subject of maximum interest from Russians concerned about the abundance of scary and ugly characters in children's stores:

“Moscow State Psychological and Pedagogical University conducted a study on the impact of the Huggi-Waggi toy on children. We got quite interesting results.

Over a thousand parents took part in our survey. The study also involved children of preschool and primary school age.

We, in particular, asked to draw Huggy-Waggi, as well as draw a person. A conversation was held with the children, they talked about their impressions, about the plots of the game with Huggy Wuggy. Based on the analysis, an examination of this toy was carried out.

The Huggy Waggi toy and all the toys in this series are extremely popular among preschoolers and primary school children.

And even if the child does not have this toy, he knows about it.

In the kindergarten environment, these toys practically do not appear and are not used by educators in the process of work (according to observations within the framework of the “Monsters, get out of the nursery!” project, children bring such toys to kindergartens en masse, - author's note).

Most often, children learn about the toy from other children at playgrounds, from relatives and, oddly enough, from videos posted on YouTube.

Videos with the participation of Huggy Wuggy are rapidly spreading in various social networks.

If a child has such a toy at home, in the vast majority of cases, it was purchased at the request of the child himself.

What can be said? First of all, this is a “status” toy. That is, this toy is basically not for playing.

Children bring this trendy toy to kindergarten, show it off, show it off as a status item, and in most cases, forget about it. The same thing happens at home. That is, children practically do not play with this toy, but more often they use it as a hugging toy - they wear it around their necks. They are interested in tactile contact.

If a child plays with Huggy-Waggi, in most cases, the play activity is no different from playing with other soft toys. Children play the same traditional stories with Huggi-Waggi.

Both boys and girls show interest in the toy, and interact with it in approximately the same way.

That is, in the process of playing with this toy, there were no pronounced aggressive tendencies, plots, it was minimal, as with other soft toys.

At the same time, we can talk about the negative emotional burden associated with Huggy Wuggy, which manifested itself in the children's drawings and in the stories that we heard in the stories they invented.

Moreover, there is an absolutely clear connection here: those children who know about the content of the Poppy Playtime game, whose character is Huggy-Waggi, and who watched videos on this topic on YouTube, really show this emotional negative load and have aggressive tendencies in the plots of the game with Huggy Wuggy.

A very important point that I would like to note about the Poppy Playtime game itself. We did not have the task of conducting an examination of this game, but as part of the study, of course, we studied it and found out what kind of plot it was.

This is a horror game that was created according to all the rules of this genre of video games. It has no age limit. And thus, many parents, believing that there is no age limit, give children access to this game.

Of course, this is completely wrong. This game for preschool and primary school age is definitely not suitable or intended at all.

The relevant organizations should deal with this, should decide on the age limit of the video game.

The worst thing is that YouTube and TikTok videos based on the Poppy Playtime game are available to children. That is, they are not related to the game itself, they do not reproduce the plot of this game, these are other products, but Huggi-Waggi characters and other toys from this series appear there.

And this negative and aggressive emotional coloring, this “tail” that reaches for this toy, comes, first of all, from the context of videos from YouTube and Tik-Tok. That is, not even from the game itself.

So, our research showed that interaction with Huggy-Waggi is not much different from interaction with other soft toys. But if a child watches these videos on YouTube and TikTok, and if he is immersed in this scary, negative digital context, then this, of course, manifests itself in his interaction with the toy.

And these data are absolutely consistent with the results of other studies that were on other toys - for example, Monster High, which was conducted under the direction of Elena Smirnova.

That is, the toy itself, outside the context of this terrible digital game, is perceived by children as absolutely normal, it does not scare them, and with it the child plays standard stories. But as soon as a terrible context appears, coming primarily from social networks, this immediately manifests itself in gaming activities.

And here, of course, it is important to talk about the need to call on the parental, psychological, pedagogical and educational communities to limit children's access to such scary digital content and to regulate the interaction with it of children of preschool and primary school age.

As noted by the head of the industry testing center of JSC "Innovative Research and Production Center of Textile and Light Industry" Dmitry Guzov , Roskachestvo, with the support of the government and the Ministry of Industry and Trade, was able to make a truly in-depth examination of the Huggi-Waggi toy, but the problem is that the procedure for conducting directly psychological pedagogical expertise in Russia has not yet been fixed.

By the way, a couple of months ago, a detailed study of the influence of the Huggi-Waggi toy on children, conducted by professors Ponkin and Abramenkova, appeared on the Web, where the conclusion is unequivocal: "this is not a toy at all".

And besides: "the impact of the Huggy Wuggy object is objectively aimed at causing harm (and is really capable of causing such harm) to the health and physical, mental, spiritual and moral development of children, aimed at provoking extremely negative consequences (including delayed and often irreversible) for mentality of the child, that is, the specified object is initially designed for a psychological negative impact on the child.

The object of Huggi Waggi causes aggressive attitudes of consciousness and victim behavior (behavior of the victim), it is contraindicated for minors (under 14 years old) and is not recommended for older minor children.

In a word, it is obvious that it is necessary to develop common intelligible approaches and mechanisms for conducting a psychological and pedagogical examination of toys.

What does this mean? And the fact that it’s too early to put an end to the story with Huggi-Waggi (and the company), of course.