News Coverage
Lather, Rinse, Retreat
Toxic, unlisted chemicals get into cosmetics
Published May 10, 2008
For anyone who’s ever used soap, shampoo or makeup, Stacy Malkan has some bad news.
That lotion that moisturizes so well might be doing more than you know. It could contain allergens or potentially toxic chemicals whose long-term effects are unknown, and they might not even be listed on the label.
Potentially harmful ingredients are everywhere, in products that we use every day. Recent studies have found traces of lead in lipstick and 1,4-Dioxane, a possible carcinogen, in children’s bath products.
Neither of these are listed on labels as an ingredient because each is “a contaminant that unintentionally ends up in products, that’s what (manufacturers) claim,” says Malkan, co-founder of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (www.safecosmetics.org
“Companies aren’t required to safety-test products. (And) it’s legal to use nearly any ingredient,” she says.
“We only have partial labeling. Companies don’t have to tell us what’s in fragrances. They don’t have to tell us about contaminants.”
Her goal is to use legislation and public pressure to force companies to make safer products, and to set a higher bar for the definition of a “natural” product. Some states are trying to ban certain chemicals on their own, without waiting for federal laws.
“The manufacturers say ‘it’s just a little bit in my product.’ But since we’re getting exposed through so many sources, it makes sense to eliminate exposure wherever we can,” she says.
“The reality is none of us are using just one product. A little bit of a carcinogen here and there adds up over a lifetime.”
Personal care products – everything from toothpaste and baby ointment to sunscreen and shaving cream – largely go unregulated, Malkan says. The Food and Drug Administration has jurisdiction over cosmetics through the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act and the Environmental Protection Agency oversees chemicals in general. But cosmetics seem to get the least amount of funding and attention, she adds.
And unlike Europe, the U.S. has “some of the weakest chemical safety laws in the world … we have a system of having to prove harm before action can be taken to eliminate chemicals.”
On the other hand, drug companies must show proof of safety to get approval for their products and Malkan would like to see similar laws for all personal care products.
For now, consumers can protect themselves by using fewer products and looking for safer alternatives, she says. That’s why the Environmental Working Group created the Skin Deep database with more than 25,000 products, searchable by the company or brand name (www.cosmeticsdatabase.com
“Less is better. We can’t eliminate every exposure tomorrow, but we can reduce them by choosing safer products,” Malkan says.
Despite intense federal lobbying by cosmetics companies and strong resistance to change, there have been some successes. Many nail-care companies have removed the “toxic trio” of toluene, formaldehyde, and dibutyl phthalates from their products, she says, as a result of media attention and consumer complaints.
Whole Foods Market has developed a premium seal for products it sells that achieve a special standard, namely that they are free of 250 certain chemicals and synthetic fragrances. The Organic Consumers Association has launched a “Coming Clean” campaign for organic integrity in personal care products. And Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps sued several companies last month over misleading organic labeling claims.
But the challenge goes beyond just buying safer personal care products. In some ways, we can’t escape being exposed to chemicals that could be harmful.
Much of this stuff ends up in the environment after being rinsed off or flushed out of our body systems, Malkan says. Recent studies have found traces of various prescription and over-the-counter drugs, and even bug spray, in municipal water supplies.
“We’re living in a chemical soup,” she says. “We’re breathing them in, eating them and putting them on our bodies.”
