Would just like to reinforce the fact that, since the first day I heard of this absurd claim that excess formaldehyde was present in the clothes I already suspected the testing methods used were more than satisfactory.

The view can be put in 2 perspectives, 1st is to measure formaldehyde which is free to react. Note that upon a dip in water formaldehyde will dissolve in water.

Notice the double bonded oxygen which would mean the molecule is significantly polar. More clearly illustrated in my point of view by the cloud representation.

2nd perspective is:
If you were a company mass producing cheap goods you would want to use the least amount of formaldehyde to achieve the desired effect, no doubt there are alternatives out there which cost more; the amount required for the desired stiffening effect is within WHO limits.
Either the company is being silly and wants to increase the cost of their goods which is highly unlikely.

Example (Actual amount I cant be bothered to find out)
Some basic math will help you figure this out, if 1 garment has 1mg of formaldehyde and 1g of formaldehyde costs 1cent there for 10 garments costs you 1 cent in cost for formaldehyde.

100 garments 10 cents and so on. Remember these are cheap and nasty products so their income comes from mass sales so if we say they manufacture 1 million garments they spend $1000 in formaldehyde. If they put 2mg instead of 1mg due to poor manufacturing processes it costs them $2000. And so on!! The actual amount they use I am not certain but I would think it is more than 2mg…