Method’s vibrant bottles promise eco-friendly cleaning, but a $2.25 million lawsuit tells a different story. These colorful cleaning products have become household staples for millions seeking safer alternatives to harsh chemicals. But are method cleaning products truly green, or just cleverly marketed?
While Method excludes some harmful chemicals and uses recycled packaging, concerning ingredients and misleading marketing raise serious questions about their “non-toxic” claims. Our investigation reveals a complex truth about this popular brand that every conscious consumer needs to know.
This comprehensive analysis examines Method’s claims versus reality, analyzes specific ingredients flagged by experts, explores the lawsuit details, and provides genuinely safer alternatives. We’ll help you determine whether method brand cleaning products reviews reflect real eco-friendliness or sophisticated greenwashing.
Method began in 2001 when childhood friends Adam Lowry and Eric Ryan decided to revolutionize household cleaning. Their San Francisco startup aimed to create products that were both effective and environmentally responsible. The brand quickly gained traction with its distinctive teardrop-shaped bottles and promises of plant-based cleaning.
The company’s trajectory changed dramatically in 2017 when SC Johnson, the corporate giant behind brands like Raid and Glade, acquired Method. This acquisition raised immediate concerns among environmentally conscious consumers about whether Method would maintain its eco-friendly mission under corporate ownership.
Today, method products occupy premium shelf space in major retailers from Target to Whole Foods. But the question remains: has the brand maintained its original values, or has corporate influence diluted its environmental commitments?
Method cleaning products in a line span nearly every household cleaning need. Their all-purpose cleaners, particularly the pink grapefruit variety, have become bestsellers. The brand also offers specialized bathroom cleaners, dish soaps, laundry detergents, and hand washes in various method cleaning product sents.
Recent additions include body washes, fabric softeners, and wood floor cleaners, all packaged in Method’s signature colorful bottles. Each product promises to deliver powerful cleaning without harsh chemicals, using what they describe as “plant-based” formulations.
The method household products range extends to over 100 different items across multiple categories. This extensive lineup positions Method as a one-stop shop for consumers seeking alternatives to conventional cleaners.
Method markets itself with several bold environmental claims that attract eco-conscious consumers. The company emphasizes its use of biodegradable ingredients, recycled packaging, and cruelty-free testing practices. Their “People Against Dirty” philosophy suggests a revolutionary approach to cleaning.
The brand’s packaging prominently features claims of being “non-toxic,” “naturally derived,” and “made with plant-based cleaners.” These marketing messages resonate strongly with consumers concerned about chemical exposure in their homes. Method also highlights its B Corporation certification as evidence of social and environmental responsibility.
However, as we’ll explore, the gap between these claims and the actual ingredients list has led to significant controversy, including legal action questioning whether method is greenwashing.
You can visit method official site here.
The method grapefruit cleaner lawsuit became a watershed moment for the brand’s credibility. In 2020, plaintiffs filed a class action suit alleging that Method’s “non-toxic” labeling violated consumer protection laws across all 50 states. The lawsuit specifically targeted the disconnect between marketing claims and actual ingredients.
Court documents revealed that despite “natural” and “non-toxic” labels, Method products contained synthetic chemicals including methylisothiazolinone and phenoxyethanol. These ingredients, according to the Environmental Working Group, can cause skin irritation and other health concerns.
The legal challenge highlighted a fundamental issue: Method’s definition of “non-toxic” differed significantly from consumer expectations and scientific standards. This discrepancy formed the basis of the greenwashing allegations.
SC Johnson ultimately settled the class action lawsuit for $2.25 million, though they admitted no wrongdoing. The settlement allowed consumers who purchased Method products between specific dates to claim refunds. More importantly, it sent a clear message about misleading environmental marketing.
The settlement terms required Method to be more transparent about their ingredients and claims. However, critics argue that the financial penalty was minimal compared to Method’s annual revenue, potentially insufficient to drive real change in marketing practices.
This legal outcome raises important questions about accountability in green marketing. When companies can settle such cases without admitting fault, does it encourage continued greenwashing practices across the industry?
Environmental experts and watchdog organizations have identified several reasons why are method not considered eco friendly despite their marketing. The primary concern centers on ingredient transparency and the presence of potentially harmful chemicals that contradict “non-toxic” claims.
Independent analyses by organizations like Made Safe have found that Method products contain synthetic fragrances, preservatives, and surfactants that can harm both human health and the environment. The lack of full ingredient disclosure, particularly for fragrance components, makes it impossible for consumers to make fully informed choices.
Additionally, Method’s acquisition by SC Johnson, a company with a mixed environmental record, has led many to question whether profit margins now take precedence over the original eco-friendly mission. This corporate connection undermines trust among environmentally conscious consumers.
Performance-wise, method cleaner review reports consistently praise the products’ cleaning effectiveness. Users frequently mention that Method products tackle everyday messes as well as conventional cleaners. The pleasant scents and attractive packaging also receive positive feedback from consumers.
However, some users report that tougher stains and heavy-duty cleaning tasks require multiple applications or switching to stronger products. This performance gap becomes particularly noticeable with bathroom mildew, baked-on grease, and outdoor grime.
The divide in user experiences often correlates with cleaning expectations. Those seeking basic maintenance cleaning generally express satisfaction, while users expecting industrial-strength results from “natural” products often feel disappointed.
Consumer Reports and other testing organizations have provided mixed method brand cleaning products reviews. While some Method products score well for everyday cleaning tasks, they rarely match the performance of top-rated conventional cleaners in rigorous testing.
Which? consumer magazine found that 77% of their members perceived Method as sustainable, but performance tests revealed inconsistent results across the product line. Some Method products earned “Best Buy” status, while others failed to meet basic cleaning standards.
Professional reviews often note the disconnect between premium pricing and actual cleaning power. Many conclude that consumers pay extra for the eco-friendly image rather than superior performance.
When asking are method brand products reviews good, the answer depends heavily on priorities. Consumers prioritizing pleasant scents, attractive design, and perceived environmental benefits generally leave positive reviews. Those focused purely on cleaning performance or ingredient safety often express disappointment.
Analysis of thousands of reviews reveals common themes: appreciation for the brand’s aesthetic appeal, frustration with vague ingredient listings, and mixed experiences with cleaning effectiveness. The polarized reviews suggest Method succeeds more as a lifestyle brand than as a cleaning solution.
Notably, negative reviews spike around discussions of the lawsuit and ingredient concerns, indicating that informed consumers often revise their opinions after learning about the controversy.
The question “is method non toxic” requires examining specific ingredients rather than accepting marketing claims. While Method excludes some known harmful chemicals like phthalates and parabens, their products still contain synthetic ingredients that raise health concerns among experts.
Scientific analysis reveals that Method’s “non-toxic” claim relies on a narrow definition that doesn’t align with comprehensive safety standards. The presence of allergens, potential neurotoxins, and respiratory irritants contradicts what most consumers expect from non-toxic products.
The lack of full ingredient transparency, particularly regarding fragrance components, makes it impossible to fully assess safety. Without complete information, consumers cannot make informed decisions about potential health risks.
Methylisothiazolinone (MI)
This preservative, found in many Method products, is a known skin sensitizer that can cause severe allergic reactions. The European Union has restricted its use in leave-on products due to rising allergy rates. Yet Method continues using MI in products that come into direct skin contact.
Studies link MI exposure to occupational asthma and contact dermatitis. For individuals with sensitive skin or existing allergies, repeated exposure through cleaning products can trigger increasingly severe reactions.
Quaternary Ammonium Compounds
Method’s antibacterial products contain quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs), which the EPA classifies as pesticides. These chemicals can contribute to antimicrobial resistance and have been linked to decreased lung function with regular exposure.
Research shows QACs persist in the environment and accumulate in aquatic ecosystems. Their presence in “eco-friendly” products directly contradicts environmental sustainability claims.
Fragrance and Colorants
Method’s signature scents come from undisclosed fragrance mixtures that can contain hundreds of chemicals. Without full disclosure, consumers cannot identify potential allergens or toxins. The company admits their fragrances are only 50% plant-based, with the remainder being synthetic.
Similarly, the vibrant colors in Method products come from synthetic dyes linked to behavioral issues in children. These aesthetic additions provide no cleaning benefit while potentially introducing health risks.
Sodium Lauryl Sulfate
This surfactant, while effective at cutting grease, can cause skin and eye irritation. Despite being derived from coconut oil, the extensive chemical processing required to create SLS results in a product far removed from its natural origin.
When consumers ask “is method shampoo biodegradable,” the answer isn’t straightforward. While some ingredients biodegrade readily, others persist in the environment. The combination of natural and synthetic ingredients creates a complex environmental profile.
Method’s body care products, including shampoos, contain many of the same concerning ingredients as their cleaning products. The direct skin application of these products raises additional safety questions, particularly for daily use.
The biodegradability claims focus on primary ingredients while ignoring the environmental impact of preservatives, fragrances, and other additives that may bioaccumulate or harm aquatic life.
Method proudly advertises using 100% recycled plastic in their bottles, presenting this as a major environmental achievement. While using recycled materials is certainly better than virgin plastic, it doesn’t address the fundamental issue of single-use packaging.
The colorful bottles, while aesthetically pleasing, are difficult to recycle due to their mixed-color plastics. Many recycling facilities cannot process these bottles effectively, meaning they often end up in landfills despite being technically recyclable.
Compared to truly sustainable cleaning brands offering refillable or compostable packaging, Method’s approach appears more like incremental improvement than revolutionary change.
Despite biodegradability claims, several Method ingredients pose risks to aquatic ecosystems. Quaternary ammonium compounds are highly toxic to fish and can persist in water systems. Even plant-derived surfactants can disrupt aquatic life when released in large quantities.
The synthetic fragrances in Method products contribute to indoor air pollution and can trigger respiratory issues. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from these fragrances add to outdoor air pollution when released during use and disposal.
Environmental impact assessments must consider the full lifecycle of products, from manufacturing through disposal. Method’s environmental footprint extends far beyond their recycled bottles.
Determining is method a good brand for environmental sustainability requires looking beyond marketing claims. While Method has made some positive steps, like using recycled plastic and excluding certain harmful chemicals, these efforts fall short of true sustainability.
The brand’s acquisition by SC Johnson, a company with investments in less sustainable product lines, raises questions about long-term environmental commitment. Corporate priorities often conflict with genuine sustainability goals.
When compared to brands offering concentrated formulas, refillable systems, or truly biodegradable ingredients, Method appears more focused on green marketing than green practices.
| Feature | Method | Blueland | Seventh Generation | Meliora |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Packaging | 100% recycled plastic | Reusable bottles + tablets | Recycled plastic | Compostable/refillable |
| Ingredient Transparency | Partial | Full disclosure | Full disclosure | Full disclosure |
| Third-Party Certifications | B Corp | EPA Safer Choice, B Corp | EPA Safer Choice | B Corp, MADE SAFE |
| Fragrance | Synthetic + natural | Essential oils only | Synthetic + natural | Essential oils only |
| Corporate Ownership | SC Johnson | Independent | Unilever | Independent |
When comparing best method cleaning products to alternatives, the differences become clear. Method’s all-purpose cleaner, while effective for light cleaning, contains fragrances and preservatives that safer alternatives avoid entirely.
Blueland’s cleaning system eliminates single-use plastic through tablet refills and provides complete ingredient transparency. Their products match or exceed Method’s cleaning power while maintaining stricter safety standards.
For consumers seeking is method a clean brand alternatives, companies like Meliora and Branch Basics offer products with minimal, recognizable ingredients that truly align with non-toxic cleaning goals.
Method cleaning product sents like pink grapefruit, beach sage, and French lavender have become signature features of the brand. These appealing fragrances mask the reality that each scent contains dozens of undisclosed chemicals.
The company’s admission that fragrances are only 50% plant-based reveals the significant synthetic component in these formulations. Without full disclosure, consumers cannot know which specific chemicals create these scents.
Popular options like the ylang-ylang and spearmint combinations may smell natural but often rely on synthetic compounds to achieve consistency and longevity that natural essential oils cannot provide.
Synthetic fragrances in cleaning products are linked to numerous health issues, from headaches and respiratory problems to hormone disruption. The lack of regulation around fragrance disclosure means companies can hide hundreds of chemicals under this single term.
For individuals with asthma, allergies, or chemical sensitivities, Method’s heavily scented products can trigger serious reactions. Even those without pre-existing conditions may develop sensitivities through repeated exposure.
The irony of adding unnecessary fragrances to “non-toxic” cleaners highlights the disconnect between Method’s marketing and actual product formulation. Truly clean products clean effectively without artificial scents.
Method products may serve as a transitional option for consumers moving away from harsh conventional cleaners. Their widespread availability and familiar form factor can ease the switch to somewhat greener options.
For those in areas with limited access to truly eco-friendly brands, Method represents an improvement over bleach-based and highly toxic alternatives. The products work adequately for basic cleaning tasks without the strongest industrial chemicals.
However, consumers should view Method as a stepping stone rather than a destination in their journey toward truly non-toxic cleaning solutions.
Several warning signs indicate when cleaning products prioritize marketing over genuine safety:
Genuine eco-friendly cleaners share common characteristics that set them apart from greenwashed alternatives:
Method cleaning products offers frequently appear at major retailers, with buy-one-get-one deals and multi-pack discounts. However, even discounted prices often exceed those of genuinely eco-friendly alternatives when calculated per use.
The premium pricing strategy positions Method as a luxury eco-brand, but the ingredient quality doesn’t justify the cost. Concentrated cleaners from brands like Blueland or Branch Basics provide better value through refillable systems.
Smart shoppers should calculate cost-per-cleaning rather than per-bottle prices. When factoring in effectiveness and safety, Method’s apparent deals often prove expensive compared to safer alternatives.
| Product Category | Popular Items | Key Concerns | Safer Alternatives |
|---|---|---|---|
| All-Purpose Cleaners | Pink Grapefruit, French Lavender | Fragrances, MI preservative | Blueland Multi-Surface |
| Bathroom Cleaners | Antibacterial, Daily Shower | QACs, synthetic fragrance | Seventh Generation Tub & Tile |
| Dish Soaps | Clementine, Sea Minerals | SLS, fragrances | Meliora Dish Soap |
| Laundry Detergents | 4x Concentrated, Free + Clear | Optical brighteners, enzymes | Molly’s Suds |
| Hand Soaps | Foaming varieties | MI, fragrances, dyes | Dr. Bronner’s |
Falling for greenwashing tactics remains the biggest mistake consumers make. Attractive packaging and nature-inspired names don’t equal environmental safety. Method exemplifies how effective marketing can overshadow ingredient concerns.
Not reading full ingredient lists allows companies to hide problematic chemicals behind vague terms. Consumers must look beyond front-label claims to understand what they’re really buying.
Assuming “plant-based” means safe ignores the fact that extensive processing can transform natural ingredients into harmful chemicals. The source matters less than the final formulation.
Ignoring third-party certifications leaves consumers relying on company claims rather than independent verification. Trustworthy eco-brands eagerly submit to rigorous third-party testing.
Start your transition with simple DIY alternatives using ingredients like vinegar, baking soda, and castile soap. These basics handle most cleaning tasks without any toxic concerns.
Reading labels effectively means understanding both what’s included and what’s missing. Look for short ingredient lists with recognizable components rather than lengthy chemical names.
Trusted certifications to seek include:
Budget-friendly green options often outperform expensive branded products. Concentrated formulas and refillable systems provide long-term savings while reducing environmental impact.
While Method products are generally safer than harsh conventional cleaners for pets, the presence of fragrances and certain preservatives can still cause issues. Cats, in particular, are sensitive to essential oils and synthetic fragrances.
Pet owners should consider fragrance-free, truly non-toxic alternatives to minimize risks. Always ensure surfaces are completely dry before allowing pet contact.
Method makes some environmentally positive choices, like using recycled plastic and excluding certain harmful chemicals. However, their overall environmental impact falls short of truly sustainable brands offering zero-waste solutions and complete biodegradability.
The greenwashing controversy and corporate ownership by SC Johnson further complicate their environmental claims. Consumers seeking genuine sustainability should explore independent brands with stronger environmental commitments.
The method lawsuit centered on deceptive labeling claims of “non-toxic” and “natural” while products contained synthetic chemicals. The $2.25 million settlement addressed consumer fraud allegations across all 50 states.
The case highlighted the gap between marketing claims and actual ingredients, setting a precedent for truth in eco-friendly advertising.
Method products generally contain fewer harsh chemicals than conventional cleaners like bleach-based products. They represent an improvement for consumers beginning their journey toward safer cleaning.
However, they fall short of truly non-toxic alternatives and may not clean as effectively as either conventional or genuinely green options.
Method’s fragrance-free and “Free + Clear” options contain fewer concerning ingredients than their scented counterparts. However, even these products include preservatives and other synthetic components.
Consumers seeking the safest options should look beyond Method to brands offering complete ingredient transparency and third-party safety certifications.
Our investigation reveals that Method falls short of truly eco-friendly standards despite attractive packaging and compelling marketing. While the brand excludes some harmful chemicals and uses recycled packaging, the presence of concerning ingredients and lack of transparency confirm that method is greenwashing to some degree.
The key takeaways about greenwashing in the cleaning industry include the importance of looking beyond marketing claims, demanding ingredient transparency, and supporting genuinely sustainable brands. The Method lawsuit serves as a reminder that “natural” and “non-toxic” claims require scrutiny.
Choose transparency and genuine sustainability over marketing claims. Your health and the environment deserve better than clever packaging and synthetic fragrances masquerading as eco-friendly solutions. Seek out brands that openly share their ingredients, submit to third-party testing, and prioritize refillable or truly sustainable packaging systems.
The path to genuinely clean homes doesn’t require compromising on safety or environmental values. Better alternatives exist – we just need to look beyond the colorful bottles and catchy marketing to find them.
Don't let aphids, slugs, and caterpillars ruin another plant. Take back control with simple, natural methods that actually work.
