EWG offers you popular, easy-to-use guides to help you choose products and foods that are free of toxic ingredients, safe for your children and environmentally friendly.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a voluntary "repellency awareness graphic” that would be displayed on bug repellents. It represents a small step forward but falls short of providing the full measure of information that consumers need to make informed decisions about products that provide the greatest benefit while minimizing the risks of exposure to toxic chemicals. After more than a year of research on bug repellents, EWG concluded that the lack of consistent efficacy testing and labeling of skin-applied repellents unnecessarily put consumers at risk from diseases borne by mosquitoes and ticks. According to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 5,650 American were infected with West Nile virus in 2012 and 286 of them died. Confirmed and probable cases of Lyme disease rose to more than 30,000 in 2012, but the CDC has estimated that the true number of newly-diagnosed cases is probably 10 times greater. Currently, there is no convenient way for consumers to compare the general efficacy of different repellents. The efficacy testing of various products against tick species is inconsistent. Consumers have no easy way to evaluate the efficacy of botanical pesticide products, technically called minimum-risk pesticides.Read More
Renee Sharp, research director at the Environmental Working Group said today that the cosmetics industry’s legislative proposal to reform cosmetics law would deprive the federal Food and Drug Administration of the power to keep hazardous substances out of personal care products.Read More
If you’ve planked on a yoga mat, slipped on flip-flops, extracted a cell phone from protective padding or lined an attic with foam insulation, chances are you’ve had a brush with an industrial chemical called azodicarbonamide, nicknamed ADA. In the plastics industry, ADA is the “chemical foaming agent” of choice. It is mixed into polymer plastic gel to generate tiny gas bubbles, something like champagne for plastics. The results are materials that are strong, light, spongy and malleable.
Citing a lack of transparency and public involvement in the ongoing Trans-Pacific Partnership trade negotiations, EWG and 11 other organizations sent a letter to Michael Froman, the United States Trade Representative, this week asking for the publRead More
EWG’s New Year’s resolution for cosmetic manufacturers: shed bad actor ingredients that disrupt the hormone system, cause allergies and may accelerate skin cancer.Read More
The federal Food and Drug administration has announced proposed rules that could drive unnecessary and potentially dangerous products from the market -- antibacterial hand soaps like those marketed by Dial, Softsoap and CVS.
This is a big deal.Read More
How did I spend my summer? I hung around department store makeup aisles, looking for the much talked about “miracle” makeup, BB and CC creams. You should have seen the looks I got as I dabbed the testers on my arm – mind you, I’m a 40-year-old man wearing cargo shorts and a ratty T-shirt.Read More
A new analysis by Environmental Working Group of 100 BB (beauty balm) and CC (color corrector or complexion corrector) creams concludes that they may expose users to fewer toxic chemicals than the moisturizer, foundation and sunscreen they are designed to replace.Read More
If a claim sounds too good to be true, it probably is. If it’s a claim made by a company trying to sell you a wrinkle cream, the federal Food and Drug Administration probably isn’t checking it out. The FDA routinely requires drugs to be tested before they are sold to consumers to ensure that they perform as promised and are safe. EWG has long sounded the alarm that the FDA does not subject cosmetics to similar premarket reviews for efficacy and safety. After you’ve read a few ads for anti-aging creams, you might be asking yourself, are these supposed miracle creams cosmetics or drugs? When do regulators insist on testing? Is there sufficient FDA oversight for anti-aging products? The answer may give you worry lines.Read More
Belgium recently adopted new cell phone regulations that bar mobile phone models designed for, and marketed to children ages 7 and younger. Under Belgium’s new rules, slated to take effect next March, cell phone retailers will be required to disclose phones’ maximum emission levels, known as specific absorption rates, or SAR, at the point of sale. Belgium becomes the latest in a rapidly lengthening list of nations to attempt to shield children from too much cell phone radiation and to inform everyone about the risks of exposure to these emissions. At least a dozen other nations have taken steps to protect children from cell phone radiation.Read More
A series of studies quietly published over the last five years show that cell phone network technologies affect radiation exposure as much as the phone design itself.Read More
People will go to great lengths to be “beautiful,” and cosmetics companies know it. It was not until 1938 that Congress passed the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, which gave the FDA power to act against dangerous cosmetics through the Department of Justice and federal court system. But the agency’s ability to address unsavory beauty products was limited. In 2004, EWG launched the Skin Deep cosmetics database, an online resource where EWG scientists have researched ingredients in popular cosmetics and personal care products. It aimed to fill in where industry and government left off. Today, Skin Deep lists more than 78,000 items.Read More
There is no end to the tricks that endocrine disruptors can play on our bodies: increasing production of certain hormones; decreasing production of others; imitating hormones; turning one hormone into another; interfering with hormone signaling; telling cells to die prematurely; competing with essential nutrients; binding to essential hormones; accumulating in organs that produce hormones. Here are 12 of the worst hormone disrupters, how they do their dirty deeds, and some tips on how to avoid them.
At EWG, we know how much you care about the safety of personal care products. Over the next several weeks we will delve deeper into some of the crucial issues surrounding these products. EWG's investigative series, "Exposing the Cosmetics Cover-Up," will take on a wide range of topics that should be on the minds of everyone who uses a personal care product. As EWG has long known — and as leading medical specialists recently underscored -- many cosmetics and personal care products contain potentially toxic ingredients. Major cosmetics companies have not publicly committed themselves to removing harmful ingredients. We'll look at deceptive claims made by some popular anti-aging products. And we'll help you sort out cosmetics safety facts from myths.
“Skin Perfector.” “Balance, brighten, renew and protect.” “Anti-aging.”
The ads sound too good to be true. BB (stands for beauty balm) and CC (stands for color corrector or complexion corrector) creams claim to be all-in-one moisturizer, concealer, foundation and sometimes sunscreen.Read More
McDonald's restaurants finish the job of eliminating polystyrene containers as they switch to paper cups for hot beverages.Read More
Michael Bradley of Tunnel Hill, Georgia has spent the past 17 months in and out of surgery fighting peritoneal mesothelioma, a rare and usually fatal abdominal cancer caused by exposure to asbestos fibers. He has lost 150 pounds and must wear a colostomy bag. Chemotherapy has failed. He has no health insurance. He is now undergoing experimental treatment and hoping for a miracle.
He is 29 years old.Read More