The New York Times ran an article today that was completely misleading and biased. The whole angle of this article is that
"No one is more anxious [about bedbugs] than those shoppers who live to scout secondhand clothing shops and used-furniture stores"
Now I will not deny that second hand, vintage, resale and consignment shops stand the same chance as any store to be infected by these devious critters since they are worming their way everywhere and are becoming an epidemic in New York.
But I would like to cease these scare tactics based on preconceived notions. "Second hand" already has a large stigma in snooty old New York, why feed into this snobbery, NY Times? Especially since nowhere in the article was there any proof of bedbugs in any of the thrifts they interviewed: Beacon's Closet, Housing Works, Goodwill... all of whom have taken extra precautions to prevent bedbugs.
Lastly, this article is ignoring a glaring fact: all reports of bedbug infestations have come from NEW retail stores like Abercrombie, Hollister, Victoria's Secret, as well as shiny NEW movie theaters and offices.
Barron details a second hand shopper's debate over a couch asking
"Was it worth feeling jittery and jumpy about something whose history she could not know?"
Well if you pick up something at a box store or boutique, how well do you know its history? How well do you know the history of anything you buy? Believe it or not that sparkly skirt and well tailored pants had a life before you, no matter where you purchase it.
This author is just showcasing his own distaste for secondhand and passing it off as journalism.
Jose Medellin, a spokesman for Goodwill Industries of Greater New York and Northern New Jersey, put it best in the article when he reminded the reporter
"Obviously, these bugs do not respect economic level or social status or neighborhood — they found them in Abercrombie & Fitch"