|
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: We're looking for a new twin mattress, probably extra long, for my 86 year old mother to use on her adjustable bed. She has had progressive spine problems for about 40 years, somewhat alleviated by the fact that she's always exercised to the extent she was able and by two back surgeries (most recent about ten years ago). Her mobility has become increasingly limited, so a comfortable bed is increasingly important. Often firm mattresses are recommended for back problems, but for her, they are miserable. Last time we shopped for a mattress she was able to get to a large mattress store, tried many, and the only one she found comfortable seemed to me about as firm as jello. She loved her jello mattress for a number of years, however. But now she says her bed feels to her as if it has rocks in it. My efforts to locate the rocks have led me to conclude that perhaps her back, very sensitive to touch, is being irritated by places where the mattress has worn unevenly over the years at the points where her adjustable bed bends. So we're searching for a new mattress, without rocks. ;] We normally rotate or flip (alternately) her mattress every time the sheets are changed and I think this has helped maintain it as comfortable for her, so we are really looking for a two sided mattress -- and, I believe, we probably want Talalay latex. We live in rural Wyoming -- and those stores within a distance she can travel seem to have gone entirely with the single sided mattress lines, so we will probably order a mattress online, unless a local store suddenly acquires something suitable. QUESTION 1: We've been considering the OMI OrganicPedic Flora (100% natural rubber Talalay latex 3 inch firm core with two inches softer latex top and bottom enclosed in quilted wool/cotton -- rated medium firm) and also the Terra. The Terra appears to be the Flora with a removable, 100% natural rubber latex, two sided, flat/contoured attachable/detachable 3 1/2 inch topper, also enclosed in quilted wool/cotton -- Terra firmness rated plush -- presumably because of the soft topper. The Terra seemed a possiblity that would make enable us to change the firm/soft property and also the smooth/contoured surface property fairly easily, not only for initial comfort, but also because the sensitivity of different areas of her back varies from time to time. Price is comparatively high, but both because she puts more mileage on her bed than most of us, and because comfort in bed is important to maintaining the limited mobility she still has, we'd be willing to spend that, if the mattress would be good for her. Does anyone have any experience with these OMI OrganicPedic mattresses? It would be especially nice to know if they worked well on an adjustable bed, but reports of any kind of experience, even showroom tryout impressions, would be helpful. QUESTION 2: After several weeks of reading posts on this forum, the favorable reports of so many about their Flobeds caused us to consider that source. Their 90 day layer exchange period is certainly a big plus for someone who is unable to try out mattresses being considered. Some things I wondered about: a) It does not appear to me that these mattresses are designed to be flippable -- is that correct? I realize that one can open the mattress cover and shuffle layers, but that is surely more complicated that rotating/flipping a mattress -- and when you are accustomed to rotating/flipping frequently . . . I wonder if that would be a problem. b) Has anyone used these on an adjustable bed? I realize that separate latex layers tend not to slide over one another readily, but I wonder whether the frequent movements of an adjustable bed might cause them to get out of alignment, develop bumps where one layer bent more and the layer above bent less as the bed went up, etc. c) If one wished to change firmness or to replace a damaged layer after the 90 period, does Flobeds sell layers individually? QUESTION 3: Does anyone have any mattress suggestions they think would be better for our situation than the Organipedic or Flobed possibilities mentioned? QUESTION 4: I realize the forum topic is mattresses, not adjustable beds, but some here do seem to know about them. She currently has a twin extra long adjustable bed that works fairly well but I'd been wondering: a) Does anyone know of a maker/model of adjustable bed that has substantial height adjustment capacity? Her current bed has none, and all we've been able to find has about 12 inches of height adjustment in the middle height range. What I wish we could find is one that could go completely down to the floor and up to something a little above standard height. She has had times where she fell or got down on the floor and it was *very* difficult to get her up -- not because she was injured but because it's hard to help her when one shouldn't put pressure on her arms, shoulders or back. We've been kidding her about needing a monorail and harness like they used for Barbaro or some other type of "Momavator" that could elevate her from the floor, but we'd been thinking that if there was an adjustable bed that went really low, it might be a serious way to deal with such situations. And the ability to raise the height to a little above standard would be useful if she had a bedfast episode, which we try to avoid but which has happened in the past. b) Does anyone know of any reason it would be inappropriate to put larger wheels on her existing adjustable bed if they could be made to fit? We currently have her bed's feet on contoured blocks (blocks that elevate the bed's four feet but don't allow them to roll off the blocks) because the tiny wheels on the bed's feet sink into the carpet and make dents and because we want the room to be Roomba-friendly so the bottom of the bed needs to be high enough for Roomba to clear. Larger wheels might make it possible to eliminate the blocks, move the bed more easily, and keep Roomba happy. Thanks for any thoughts, JLJ |
|
Yes ... It was Bedrooms and More. I don't remember exactly what the ILD was or even if I asked at the time as it was early in my search and the OMI was a feel that we were trying to duplicate more than a spec at the time. I just phoned them though and talked with a "Jackie" there and asked her what the ILD's were. She didn't know specifically but said that it was soft on top and that the core was a "sandwich" of soft firm soft. She had also just bought one for herself and loved it. I told her why I wanted to know because "a friend's mother was interested etc." and she said she would call and find out for me and call me back in an hour or two. I'll post here when she does. Given what I have since found out, I would question some of what OMI says not because it's untrue necessarily but because it's "slanted". I have no doubt that they use very high quality materials and they really are beautiful but I can't imagine (not possible) that they produce their own Talalay and I think they may be referring there to what LI does when they make the Talalay that they use in which case anyone that used their talalay could make the same claim. In terms of the fire regulations, I would tend to believe them that they only use wool that to their knowledge has nothing added (they don't say the "to our knowledge" part) however adding Silica does not add a cancer risk so they are probably referring to the other alternatives that are used such as Boron, PBDE type compounds, or antimony. Here too though, they are not the only one that use thick GOTS certified wool. As I mentioned in another thread too, GOTS doesn't test for Silica. There are also different qualities of wool and the source makes a difference (Being Dutch with Friesland ancestry, I choose to believe that the wool that comes from sheep that live on the islands off Holland (Friesland) produce the best wool (laughing)). I personally believe that they are not the "most organic" manufacturers out there and that other manufacturers use materials of equal or greater "purity" in terms of the latex, wool, and cotton. I have had some indication that some of their "wording" in their claims are more about marketing than anything else and I believe that it is the perception that comes from this marketing that allows them to charge as much as they do in comparison to others who use similar materials of equal "purity". Their cover though is very nice in comparison to most others ... although I don't believe this alone justifies their cost. As to the parasites and what they use ... not sure I want to go there :). A long time ago I used to sell an herbal product that was a "parasite cleanse" and I have seen very clear and somewhat horrifying evidence (personally and from others) that we as humans are not immune from them either on the outside or the inside. I think that's probably enough of that though (grimacing). All in all ... I think there are many really good reasons to buy a Terra. The only reason I would personally question it ... especially after the research I have done ... was the price. Phoenix This message was modified Nov 15, 2010 by Phoenix
|
|
Regarding the latex, as far as I know they don't claim to make it themselves, they say that it's brought into the country as a powder and manufactured in the US -- and is thus, so they say -- less exposed to various chemicals than rubber that is brought into the country in any other form. They say that to the extent they can, they manufacture their own components, and in the other instances they have specific requirements that must be certified to be met on components supplied to them. As I said . . . it's a veracity challlenged industry so one never knows . . . but there does seem to be evidence that they are fairly compulsive about their manufacturing. As far as anyone else being able to make the same claim about their latex -- that might be true, but I don't think one can assume that it is. I have known personally of instances when components (not mattress components) were manufactured for a customer to meet specific requirements set by that customer's purchase contract -- and other customers of that supplier, even though theoretically buying the same item, didn't necessarily receive components manufactured to the same specs -- so that might or might not apply in this situation. I believe that their "organic" sheep live in Northern California. I think you always have to kind of take marketing claims a little lightly -- and consider the source and circumstances of each. In general, I feel about them about the way I do about political claims. As long as politicians say things like "My opponent favors massive tax rises to pour into wasteful extravagance, while I am for essential revenue enhancement to be prudently dispersed for the public good" they don't bother me -- when they begin to venture into outright lies, that's something else. Your mention of the cover does remind me of a little thing that seems to me significant -- though I won't know how helpful it is until/unless we try it. But they have an attachable topper -- that seems to me a very good idea, and I'm surprised that, as common as toppers are, there aren't more provisions for securing them. In their case, there are attachment locations built onto the mattress, but I don't think it would be hard to have some sort of simple, inexpensive (ha!) harness that slid under any mattress and secured the topper. I doubt that it's an issue for many people, but for adjustable beds, and for people, especially older people, who kind of scoot on and off the bed and tend to pull the mattress a little off the base anyway, topper attachment seems to me a good idea. I agree about the price, but I haven't seen other sources that seemed to be offering the same alleged level of product for a much better price. Having inspected most of the mattress makers in the US -- at least remotely -- you probably have. [g] JLJ |
|
I am "pretty certain" that their latex is no different from other LI talalay. Sent you a PM. Phoenix This message was modified Nov 15, 2010 by Phoenix
|
|
If they were using Dunlop, their claim that their latex is in any way different would be more believable. There are other high cost/high quality manufacturers (Greensleep comes to mind) that have far more control over their latex supply chain than OMI does by a long shot since they own their own plantation and even use a specific "type" of rubber tree to produce their latex ... but they are using Dunlop and there are many more manufacturers of Dunlop than Talalay. I also like both the material they use in their cover and it's design. If I don't get a call back soon from Bedrooms and more, I'll call them again. I'm curious as well now that you brought it up. Phoenix |
|
JLJ_ wrote: PROBLEM DESCRIPTION:
We're looking for a new twin mattress, probably extra long, for my 86 year old mother to use on her adjustable bed. She has had progressive spine problems for about 40 years, somewhat alleviated by the fact that she's always exercised to the extent she was able and by two back surgeries (most recent about ten years ago). Her mobility has become increasingly limited, so a comfortable bed is increasingly important. Often firm mattresses are recommended for back problems, but for her, they are miserable. Last time we shopped for a mattress she was able to get to a large mattress store, tried many, and the only one she found comfortable seemed to me about as firm as jello. She loved her jello mattress for a number of years, however. But now she says her bed feels to her as if it has rocks in it. My efforts to locate the rocks have led me to conclude that perhaps her back, very sensitive to touch, is being irritated by places where the mattress has worn unevenly over the years at the points where her adjustable bed bends. So we're searching for a new mattress, without rocks. ;] We normally rotate or flip (alternately) her mattress every time the sheets are changed and I think this has helped maintain it as comfortable for her, so we are really looking for a two sided mattress -- and, I believe, we probably want Talalay latex. We live in rural Wyoming -- and those stores within a distance she can travel seem to have gone entirely with the single sided mattress lines, so we will probably order a mattress online, unless a local store suddenly acquires something suitable. QUESTION 1: We've been considering the OMI OrganicPedic Flora (100% natural rubber Talalay latex 3 inch firm core with two inches softer latex top and bottom enclosed in quilted wool/cotton -- rated medium firm) and also the Terra. The Terra appears to be the Flora with a removable, 100% natural rubber latex, two sided, flat/contoured attachable/detachable 3 1/2 inch topper, also enclosed in quilted wool/cotton -- Terra firmness rated plush -- presumably because of the soft topper. The Terra seemed a possiblity that would make enable us to change the firm/soft property and also the smooth/contoured surface property fairly easily, not only for initial comfort, but also because the sensitivity of different areas of her back varies from time to time. Price is comparatively high, but both because she puts more mileage on her bed than most of us, and because comfort in bed is important to maintaining the limited mobility she still has, we'd be willing to spend that, if the mattress would be good for her. Does anyone have any experience with these OMI OrganicPedic mattresses? It would be especially nice to know if they worked well on an adjustable bed, but reports of any kind of experience, even showroom tryout impressions, would be helpful. QUESTION 2: After several weeks of reading posts on this forum, the favorable reports of so many about their Flobeds caused us to consider that source. Their 90 day layer exchange period is certainly a big plus for someone who is unable to try out mattresses being considered. Some things I wondered about: a) It does not appear to me that these mattresses are designed to be flippable -- is that correct? I realize that one can open the mattress cover and shuffle layers, but that is surely more complicated that rotating/flipping a mattress -- and when you are accustomed to rotating/flipping frequently . . . I wonder if that would be a problem. b) Has anyone used these on an adjustable bed? I realize that separate latex layers tend not to slide over one another readily, but I wonder whether the frequent movements of an adjustable bed might cause them to get out of alignment, develop bumps where one layer bent more and the layer above bent less as the bed went up, etc. c) If one wished to change firmness or to replace a damaged layer after the 90 period, does Flobeds sell layers individually? QUESTION 3: Does anyone have any mattress suggestions they think would be better for our situation than the Organipedic or Flobed possibilities mentioned? QUESTION 4: I realize the forum topic is mattresses, not adjustable beds, but some here do seem to know about them. She currently has a twin extra long adjustable bed that works fairly well but I'd been wondering: a) Does anyone know of a maker/model of adjustable bed that has substantial height adjustment capacity? Her current bed has none, and all we've been able to find has about 12 inches of height adjustment in the middle height range. What I wish we could find is one that could go completely down to the floor and up to something a little above standard height. She has had times where she fell or got down on the floor and it was *very* difficult to get her up -- not because she was injured but because it's hard to help her when one shouldn't put pressure on her arms, shoulders or back. We've been kidding her about needing a monorail and harness like they used for Barbaro or some other type of "Momavator" that could elevate her from the floor, but we'd been thinking that if there was an adjustable bed that went really low, it might be a serious way to deal with such situations. And the ability to raise the height to a little above standard would be useful if she had a bedfast episode, which we try to avoid but which has happened in the past. b) Does anyone know of any reason it would be inappropriate to put larger wheels on her existing adjustable bed if they could be made to fit? We currently have her bed's feet on contoured blocks (blocks that elevate the bed's four feet but don't allow them to roll off the blocks) because the tiny wheels on the bed's feet sink into the carpet and make dents and because we want the room to be Roomba-friendly so the bottom of the bed needs to be high enough for Roomba to clear. Larger wheels might make it possible to eliminate the blocks, move the bed more easily, and keep Roomba happy. Thanks for any thoughts, JLJ
Stay away from memory foam if she has limited mobility |
|
LOL ... I think we're long past that point mr "expert". Did you actually take the time to read this thread? Phoenix |
|
OK, I called Jackie back and here's what she told me. The topper is 25 ILD The core is 25 over 35 over 25. They will also customize it and what she did was switch out the 35 for a 25 so her whole mattress is 25. She also said that she could have got an N2 topper (softer probably in the range of about 20) but they can only do the sculpted layer with N3 (25) and she really liked the sculpting. She actually told me that she thought the N2 was around 14 (this came from her not OMI) but I don't believe that and I don't believe that LI makes a 14 in the natural. The SLAB website says different as well. Hope that helps. Phoenix This message was modified Nov 15, 2010 by Phoenix
|
| What do you think about the all 25 ILD bed? I guess on the average it's the same as the Barrington super ultra: Phoenix edition? ;] |
|
I personally would not go this way unless I had tried it in person and it was perfect for me. Some people sleep on a single slab of latex and love it. What I would miss is the progressive support that comes from a softer latex over a slightly firmer one and I would also want the top a little softer. I do agree though that it does "average out" to about the same as mine but I doubt it would be as suitable for either me or my other half. I think she would have even more problems with it as a softer top was even more important to her than to me. We did try a single slab of 28 and 32 ILD and they were both too firm for both of us without a softer topper. Having said that the OMI with 25 over 25 (over of course 35 and 25) did feel very "plush" but part of that would have been the convoluted layer and the cover making it feel a little softer than 25. We liked it best in it's softest configuration. It's sort of cool that I know now that one of the first mattresses we lay on and really liked is so close in a way to the one we ended up with :) Maybe I should have stopped there and just duplicated the Terra ... but at that time I didn't even know that was really possible ... and I would have "missed out" on most of the research that I did. Phoenix This message was modified Nov 16, 2010 by Phoenix
|
|
I did get some ILD information from another source that said that OMI also has an ILD 30 that can be used in the mix with several of their mattresses. I wonder whether 25-30-25 with 25 topper would be good, or if that would be too firm. It would be a bit softer than their default, which you, and other soft bed folks, found comfortable. But the only one I've actually heard of being used on an adjustable bed was an all 25 configuration, and how well a mattress would contour to the adjustable bed is an important element. Something I've begun to wish that mattress listings routinely put into their specs is mattress weight. I think most of the online ones don't because they often build shipping into their price. I really began thinking about it wondering how difficult some mattresses would be to flip frequently. Mom likes her mattress flipped every time her sheets are changed and has enough stuff in her bedroom close to the bed (so she can reach it without having to get up) that one has to be able to keep control of a mattress when flipping it -- can't just flop it over so it lands generally on the bed. And because of the size and shape, it can be harder to handle a mattress than to handle a smaller object of the same weight. After I began wondering about weight, I began thinking that weight would be useful because in some instances in might be a useful indicator that there's something different in two mattresses with specs that seem similar. As far as OMI relative to their competitors -- we're still considering other possibilities and welcome any and all suggestions -- and agree that OMI's price is probably higher than it should be. At this point, if I did what I feel most inclined to do, I'd open Mom's spare mattress (she actually has two, bought at the same time, of the jello type she loved for years that I described originally), examine spare mattress's innards, order some supplement for the latex I think is in there, and close it up again. I suspect I could make her a mattress she'd like as well as any we'd buy, and it would certainly be a better price. However, considering the length of my Do Immediately #1, Do Immediately #2 and Do Immediately #3 lists, and that Mom is 86 and has rocks in her bed right now -- I don't think that's the way to go. Plus I'm not sure of the quality of latex that's in the current mattresses, even if there is latex in there. They were not inexpensive mattresses when purchased, but they have had a lot of "mileage" put on them. So it seemed that the best alternative would be to find a really good, flippable mattress that would make her comfortable right away. I know that she'll be very unlikely to say she's unhappy with a new mattress or needs a different one, after we get something -- so a very high probability of quality is important. I can't really judge by something like lying a new mattress myself, because a mattress she likes feels appallingly soft to me -- so I have to look at specs, reputation, and reports of soft bed folks. As discussed in other threads, some criticize OMI -- as far as I can see, not so much on the grounds that what they say isn't true, as on the grounds that they at least imply that they are more unique than they are in order to justify higher prices. That has a ring of truth -- and information about others who do what OMI does as well as OMI does or better is certainly welcome. Even if we ultimately buy a Terra by OMI, alternative information will be useful to others -- and as I said, we've made no definite decision yet. But another side of the discussion that I wonder about -- only wonder because I really know very little about the mattress industry -- is whether the "we're just as organic as OMI and the organic standards need to be defined" type arguments might also be driven by something not apparent. As I recall, some years back, organic food was produced by small growers that took great pains -- in their own field being as particular as OMI allegedly is -- to make their products high quality and as safe as possible. When the desire for organic food became mainstream enough that it began to really command higher prices, pressure arose to "define" organic food more precisely -- which turned out not so much to be in the interest of protecting the consumer as it was to enable larger producers to label foods as "organic" -- and raise their prices -- without the necessity of being as picky about production as the former smaller organic producers were. The above oversimplifies the organic issue with regard to food -- and greatly oversimplifies with regard to OMI and organic production -- but I wonder whether there might not be an element of truth in it. My impression of OMI is that, while they have their problems, they are more analogous to the early small producers of organic foods than they are to the giant "organic" ag producers. They provide enough potentially refutable specifics about the measures they take to ensure quality -- which have not been publicly refuted -- that I'm inclined to think their claims are largely true. While OMI may imply that they are unique, when they are not entirely so -- I suspect that it's true that they are enormously more careful and exacting in their standards than most of their competitors. I recall a thread in this forum not long ago, when a manufacturer was angry about alleged misrepresentations of their product here, but when asked to correct the data, said "we do not release that information, contact us privately". There are an awful lot of producers, I think, who grouse at suggestions that their product is not just as good as any other, but who are unwilling to use the obvious remedy -- to say exactly what components and what assembly techniques make their product worth buying. While I think avoiding unnecessary chemicals is good, I'm not so much personally interested in OMI being "pure" and "organic" as I am in the increased quality control, compared to many manufacturers, that I think probably results from their attempts to be genuinely organic. I suspect that competition may pull their price down somewhat -- but if so, I hope it is through others either becoming -- or demonstrating that they already are -- using the same care OMI does and offering a better priced product, rather than by large enitities (perhaps behind the scenes) redefining "organic" so that they can claim to be producing just as "organic" a product without having to take the same care. Certification standards can be beneficial to the public -- but they can also be -- and sadly often are -- used instead as a tool to confuse consumers and to make it difficult for a small business to compete with a megabusiness, by defining the small business's good product as not different from the big business's sloppy one, or by setting complex certification standards that are unaffordable for a small business to meet, even though their product may be better than that of the megabusiness. JLJ <~~ wondering whether getting a few dozen geese and beginning to collect for a big featherbed for Mom isn't the best solution |