upworthy

Science

Sustainability

Former Levi's CEO Charles Bergh settled the debate on how often you should wash your jeans

"We don’t need to wash jeans as often as most people think we do.”

via Levi Strauss and Ricardo Gomez Angel/Unsplash

Levi's CEO Charles Bergh settles the jean washing debate

Social media has become a fertile breeding ground for conversations about hygiene. Whether it’s celebrities bragging about how little their family bathes or battles over how often people should wash their sheets or bras.

One of the debates that gets the most diverse responses is how often people wash their denim jeans.

Denim atelier Benjamin Talley Smith tells Today that jeans should be washed "as little as possible, if at all.” Laundry expert Patric Richardson adds they should be cleaned “after nine or 10 wearings, like to me, that is the ideal." At that point, they probably have stains and are "a little sweaty by that point, so you need to wash 'em," Richardson says.

Still, some people wash and dry them after every wear while others will hand wash and never hang dry. With all these significant differences of opinion, there must be a correct answer somewhere, right?

The former CEO of Levi Strauss, Charles Bergh, has stepped up to set the record straight on when and how to wash your jeans. He caused a stir in 2014 when he said he only washes his jeans once a year, but it was for environmental reasons more than hygiene.


He later clarified his thoughts in a blog post, “The Dirty Jean Manifesto” he posted to LinkedIn.

“I made this provocative statement because I believe strongly in what our brands stand for: quality, durability and lasting products made sustainably. I also said it because I believe we don’t need to wash jeans as often as most people think we do,” Bergh wrote.

"We learned that an average pair of jeans consumes roughly 3,500 liters of water — and that is after only two years of use, washing the jeans once a week," Bergh wrote. "Nearly half of the total water consumption, or 1,600 liters, is the consumer throwing the jeans in the washing machine. That’s equivalent to 6,700 glasses of drinking water!"

To add to the problem, denim jeans are often manufactured in places where water is scarce, such as India, Pakistan, Mexico, China and parts of California.

Bergh recently spoke with CNBC’s Christine Tan and clarified his thoughts on jean cleanliness.

“True denim heads, people that really love their denim, will tell you to never put your denim into a washing machine. So that’s what I do,” Bergh explained. “If I drop some curry on my jeans, I’m gonna clean it. But I’ll spot-clean it. And if they get really gross you know, if I’ve been out sweating or something and they get really gross, I’ll wash them in the shower.”

However, when Bergh washes his jeans in the shower, he does it while wearing them and washing them with soap. The image that the scene conjures is of a cowboy bathing in a cartoon, clothes on and all.

There are a lot of different opinions on how often one should wash and dry their jeans and many of them boil down to personal preference. But the debate on the topic has brought up one very big point we should all consider: when choosing how often we wash our jeans, a big part of the decision should be considering the amount of water we use.

This article originally appeared two years ago.

From Your Site Articles
life hacks
SustainabilityScience
Science

People with 'spiky' names are less likely to get job interviews. Do you have one?

Name-based bias goes even beyond race, sex, and class.

via Canva/Photos

People lined up for job interviews.

There have been many studies in the past that show people face a lot of bias when they turn in a job application. A 2021 study found that job applicants who had "Black-sounding" names were nine percent less likely to get a call back than those whose names sounded "white." People who review resumes are also looking for subtle clues of social class.

A 2016 Yale study found that men who appear to be upper-class in job applications fare much better than women of the same class when applying to elite positions. However, lower-class women perform better than lower-class men in the same process. Unfortunately, sex, race, and class bias are significant issues when it comes to hiring, but another prejudice has nothing to do with inherent characteristics: the way your name sounds can make a big difference when you send in a job application.

Do people judge job applications based on your name?

A recent study carried out by The Conversation found that people attribute personality characteristics to people based on whether their name sounds "smooth" or "spiky." The researchers designed a job ad looking for a candidate high in one of six personality factors: honesty/humility, emotionality, extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness (how organized or hard-working someone is), and openness to experience.

spiky names, job interview, job application, job candidates, resumes, waiting, People lined up for job interviews.via Canva/Photos

The researchers sent in applications with people who had smooth-sounding names with sonorant consonants (l, m, n), and the others were spiky with voiceless stops (p, t, k).

Some examples of smooth names (sonorant consonants) include: Joanna, June, Norah, Allen, Linus, and Moses.

Some examples of spiky names (voiceless stops) include: Rita, Erica, Tia, Kurt, and Victor.

The researchers found that individuals with smooth-sounding names were perceived as more agreeable and emotional, whereas those with spikier names were seen as more extroverted. So, if people are hiring for a job where they were looking for agreeable characteristics, those with smooth-sounding names had a better chance of getting the gig.

Interestingly, according to researchers, the way a name sounds has nothing to do with someone’s personality. In real life, Lou and Erica may be just as agreeable as one another. But when hiring managers are just looking at names, Lou gets the gig.

What is sound symbolism?

The idea that the sound of a word can make it feel aligned with particular qualities is known as sound symbolism. It’s why we often say that so-and-so looks like an Emma or a Charles. A popular study on the phenomenon known as the Bouba / Kiki effect found that when given the two names Kiki (spiky) and Bouba (smooth), they are much more likely to call the figure on the left Kiki and the one on the right Bouba. Although researchers don’t know the exact reason why we map certain sounds to specific shapes, they believe it may reflect how we move our mouths to make those sounds.

bouba kiki, bouba kiki effect, shapes, sounds and shapes, sound symbolism, The Bouba / Kiki effect. via Wikimedia Commons

“The rounded shape may most commonly be named ‘Bouba’ because the mouth makes a more rounded shape to produce that sound, while a more taut, angular mouth shape is needed to make the sounds in ‘Kiki.’ Alternatively, the distinction may be between coronal or dorsal consonants like /k/ and labial consonants like /b/,” researchers at Mind Modeling wrote.

The study may reveal that there’s one more thing many of us have to worry about when applying for a job. But it’s also a reminder that we all have some sort of bias, and next time we see a name without knowing the person, we may be judging them based on criteria that doesn't reflect who they are. Much like it’s wrong to judge a book by its cover, judging someone by their name may mean you miss out on someone truly wonderful.

From Your Site Articles
names
ScienceInnovation
Science

Google Maps, Apple Maps, or Waze— former Uber driver shares which app is best

Do you agree? Not everyone did.

Google Maps/Apple Maps

Google maps and Apple maps screenshots

Those of us of a certain age remember asking for directions and keeping two-inch thick road atlases in our cars to find our way around. Then with the internet came the miracle of Mapquest, followed by the how-did-we-ever-live-without-this GPS systems you could attach to your dashboard.

Then smartphones kicked the road trip game up a notch with map apps that not only give up step-by-step directions but also real-time traffic conditions and the ability to find a gas station or restaurant with gluten-free options along your route.

Even those of us who grew up with paper maps struggle to recall how we ever got anywhere before Google Maps.Now we're so deep into the map app era that we're past the wow stage and into the nit-picky stage. It's no longer good enough to have a handheld computer tell us how to get someplace in real time. Now we have expectations, preferences, opinions and complaints. We also have data and anecdotes with which to compare different apps and discuss which ones do what best.

And hoo boy do people have thoughts on that front.

Former Uber employee Flo Crivello shared some info on X about the analysis they did with three of the most popular map apps—Google Maps, Apple Maps and Waze—using a dataset with millions of trips.

The big winner? Apple Maps.

Google came in second, and Waze was a distant third (worst "by far").

"The research also included which apps people *thought* was worse, and the order came in the exact opposite order," Crivello shared. "We understood why Apple Maps got a bad rap given how bad it was at launch — it rapidly got better, but the brand stuck. Waze was more of a mystery, and we ended up realizing that people thought its routes were best because it was exposing them to so much info on traffic, construction, police presence etc… Everyone thinks they want a minimalist UI, but in practice, when they see all this info, they subconsciously conclude 'wow, these guys really have their sh*t together' — even when the routes were actually the worst ones."

Crivello said the results "may be shocking," presumably because Apple Maps started with the worst reputation. In fact, Apple CEO Tim Cook famously apologized for Apple Maps in 2012 and recommended people use Google Maps instead.

However, in the years since, Apple Maps has redeemed itself while Google Maps has lost a bit of its initial luster.



Then Waze came along, which people in cities with variable traffic touted as more accurate for timing and real-time updates, becoming some people's favorite. But according to his data eight years ago, Apple was the winner.

Do those results still hold? Some people in the replies said Google Maps was the best, hands down, while other said they preferred Apple or Waze.

It might depend on where you live and what you look for in a map app (and whether you even have access to Apple Maps). Discussions about these apps abound, with some common threads throughout. Many people agree that the U.S. is where Apple Maps shines, but Google Maps works better abroad. Apple Maps offers more natural navigation directions, such as "Not at this stop sign, but at the next one, turn right," instead of Google Maps' assumption that everyone knows how far 300 feet is. Google maps has great searchability and is easier to check reviews of places compared to Apple Maps. So opinions might vary on "best" depending on what you're using it for.

Waze has loyal users and people who love to joke about where it reroutes you when there's traffic.



These are not the only three map apps available, either. People who travel internationally and use public transportation seem partial to the CityMapper app, which makes finding train and bus routes simple with a user-friendly interface, so again, a lot depends on why you're using the app in the first place.

As far as popularity goes, Google Maps boasts a whopping 1 billion monthly users. In a recent MarketWatch study, 70% of respondents said they use Google Maps, particularly to avoid speed traps. In that study, both Apple Maps and Waze tied for second place. However, there is data that shows younger generations are partial to iPhones, on which Apple Maps is a native app, so it might have a bit of an advantage there.

This article originally appeared last year.

From Your Site Articles
modern life
ScienceTechnology
Climate Change

This glacier was featured on a postcard in 1900. A satellite captured where it is today.

A lot has changed since 1900.

Credit: Wikicommons and Credit: European Union, Copernicus Sentinel-2 imagery

The Pasterze Glacier in a 1900 postcard and in March 2025

125 years ago, the Pasterze glacier in the Austria's Eastern Alps was postcard perfect: Snowy peaks. Windswept valleys. Ruddy-cheeked mountain children in lederhosen playing "Edelweiss" on the flugelhorn.

But a lot has changed since 1900. Much of it has changed for the better. We've eradicated smallpox, Hitler is dead, and the song "Billie Jean" exists now. On the downside, the Earth has gotten hotter. A lot hotter. From June 2023 to May 2024 each month was the hottest ever recorded in the planet's history. July 2023 was the planet's hottest month — ever. Unsurprisingly, man-made climate change has wreaked havoc on the planet's glaciers — including the Pasterze, which is Austria's largest. Just how much havoc are we talking about? Well, this is how the Pasterze Glacier looked in a 1900 postcard:

Pasterze, Pasterze Glacier, climate change, weather, glacier The Pasterze Glacier in a 1900 postcardImage via Wikicommons


And this is how it looks now in March 2025:

Pasterze Glacier, Pasterze, Austria, climate change, alps, Eastern Alps What's left of the Pasterze GlacierEuropean Union, Copernicus Sentinel-2 imagery

First measured in 1851, the glacier lost half of its mass between that year and 2008. A marker placed in 1985 shows where the edge of the glacier reached just 40 years ago. You can still see the ice sheet, but just barely, way off in the distance. In between is ... a big, muddy lake. The view from the glacial foot marker from 1995 — 10 years later — isn't much more encouraging. Even in just one year, 2015, the glacier lost an astounding amount of mass — 177 feet, by some estimates.

Overall, it is estimated that the glacier has retracted by 980 feet since the park first opened in 1963.

Ice continues to melt daily, and while the dripping makes for a good photo, it's unfortunate news for planet Earth. Glacial melting is one of the three primary causes of sea-level rise. Pasterze is still technically the largest glacier in Austria and the Eastern Alps at approximately 6.2 miles. And even in its reduced form, Pasterze remains a significant tourist destination.


- YouTube www.youtube.com


According to a European Environment Agency report, the average temperature in the Alps has increased 2 degrees Celsius in the last 100 years — double the global average. It's not unreasonable to assume that that's why this mountain hut has been abandoned by the flugelhorn-playing children who once probably lived in it.

Is there anything we can do to stop the Pasterze Glacier from disappearing?

There are efforts underway to save Pasterze and other significant glaciers. However, Gerhard Lieb, the co-leader of the Austrian Alpine Club described the glacier's retreat as "unstoppable" with predictions that it and Austraia's other major glaciers will be gone in as little as 45 years. It would take decades of meaningful counter climate change initiatives, with even the existing ones being too slow for meaningful action, "and the time is up,” Lieb said. “That means nothing can be done anymore.”

This article originally appeared 10 years ago. It has been updated with new information.

climate change
Climate ChangeScience
Trending Stories