Can you pronounce 4-phenylenediamine? What about triethanolamine? Neither can I. Now, can you say high fructose corn syrup? Chances are you read your food labels carefully to avoid that particular sweetener. You probably also buy organic produce and dairy products. What surprises me is that many consumers pay so much attention to the ingredients that go into their food but so little attention to what goes on their skin, their largest organ. Many of us look at food labels every day, but how many of us look at labels when shopping for personal care products?
About 1,100 ingredients have been banned by the European Union since 2003 (Cosmetics Directive 76/768/EEC). These ingredients were cited as causing or suspected of causing cancer, genetic mutations, birth defects or reproductive harm. The United States has banned fewer than 12, and we have not seriously touched the regulations that govern personal care products and cosmetics since 1938. Despite growing consumer awareness, scientific evidence and international precedence, the Safe Cosmetic Act has met stiff resistance in Congress. Money, political influence via lobbyists and the free reign of large corporations to protect their own activities have effectively prevented the necessary update to depression era laws.
Most consumers believe their government proactively monitors the beauty and personal care product industry. I was afforded no such luxury. My awakening to the dangers of unregulated beauty had a more dramatic tale.
It was not until Earth Day 2009, when I was given another chance at life, that I gained a new perspective on beauty. I awoke from brain surgery to discover that a potentially fatal tumor had been successfully removed. Having learned that environmental toxins may have been the likely culprits, I began devoting myself to leading a healthier lifestyle and starting a line of all-natural skin care products.
My experience showed me the truth behind the lack of regulation in the beauty industry. I too, bought blindly. I believed that the FDA would surely recall any personal care or cosmetic products found or suspected to be toxic. I believed that the government required products be tested for safety in advance of arriving in stores. I believed labels told the entire truth of the product within. Sadly, this could not have been farther from the truth. Except for about a dozen ingredients here in the U.S., the industry is pretty much allowed to put whatever they want in their beauty products. Worse still, subtle marketing campaigns and fancy packaging encourage consumers to buy into a product's efficacy and safety even though those products might very well be inefficacious and unsafe.
I recently had dinner with a friend who was shocked to find out that U.S. personal care companies will create product formulations to adhere to the European Union safety standards, yet continue to manufacture the same product, but with known toxins included, stateside. Why? Because they can. Because profit margins are higher when products are made outside the E.U. safety standards and, sadly, because consumers in the U.S. will buy these products.
The truth is we have put the fox in charge of the hen house. And, until the government steps in, we as consumers need to be our own watchdogs. We need to learn how to read labels and challenge the use of ingredients in products. The choice is ours to make. We have more power than we give ourselves credit for. A little knowledge on ingredient toxicity and we can use our purchasing power to demand higher quality and healthier products. I now tell consumers, "Chances are if you cannot pronounce it, it is not good for you." After all, how many syllables are needed in each ingredient of our moisturizers? Using the principle that less is more does not mean that you sacrifice quality, efficacy or your health. Being healthy does not mean that you need to throw out every product you own. Healthy living means that the choice should be yours. Personally, I choose to get my hair highlighted every six months. I know the risks; I make the choice. I also choose to use skin care that is all-natural. My daily facial moisturizer is made of one ingredient (i.e., Organic Squalane). My weekly body scrub has six. And guess what? I can pronounce them all.
A little knowledge can go a long way. We can empower ourselves to make healthier choices; less is definitely more.
Indie Lee is the Founder and CEO of Indie Lee & Co., an upscale all-natural skin care company. Indie speaks and writes about natural beauty and is an advocate for more effective governmental regulation and oversight in the beauty industry. Indie is a true believer that green can be sexy.
Find out more about Indie and her natural beauty products at www.indielee.com. Follow her on www.twitter.com/indie_lee and www.facebook.com/ilikeindielee.
For more on beauty and skin, click here.
Follow Indie Lee on Twitter: www.twitter.com/indie_lee
This world is not perfect. You will never be 100% safe.... but seriously, come on, Indie Lee products are NOT the ones you should be worried about!
And almost all of these banned ingredients never were used in cosmetics. It's like saying the USA needs to ban aborted babies used in cosmetics. Will that make us safer? No...because no one is using aborted babies in cosmetics. I think the USA should just adopt 1,000 ingredients from that list just to shut up the people who spread this misleading statistic. Guess what...not a single US cosmetic formulation will change.
The bill, (SB 1418 by Senator Shortey of Oklahoma) introduced Jan. 18 by State Sen. Ralph Shortey, prohibits the manufacture or sale of “food or any other product intended for human consumption which contains aborted human fetuses in the ingredients or which used aborted human fetuses in the research or development of any of the ingredients.” http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=SB%201418
As a cosmetics expert and cosmetic company insider (owner) - please explain to your readers how you can advocate for and write in support of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and their annual Safe Cosmetics Acts, and then think you can then qualify for the Leaping Bunny program?
You simply CANNOT have it both ways. If you support the Campaign for safe Cosmetics - you are IN FAVOR of INCREASED ANIMAL TESTING!!
Their proposed bills (H.R.5786/H.R.2359) which Leaping Bunny and PETA have warned will result in a huge increase in animal testing and which will put every US cosmetics company - large or small - out of compliance with the EU Cosmetics Directives?
"August 17, 2011—
The Coalition for Consumer Information on Cosmetics (CCIC), which runs the Leaping Bunny Program, has concerns about the ... it is likely to have disastrous consequences for the animals who will be used to test cosmetic products and ingredients....this bill will result in substantial increases in the numbers of animals used in testing." http://leapingbunny.org/2011LBFE/LB-Press.php
PETA also has spoken out against these proposed bills: http://www.peta.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/tags/The+Safe+Cosmetics+Act/default.aspx
The INDIE Beauty Network also formally opposes these bills (and more also oppose): http://www.indiebusinessblog.com/indie-beauty-network-opposes-hr-2359-the-safe-cosmetics-act-of-2011/
A false statement - semantics have nothing to do with it. For a person who places such weight on being able to pronounce words as a deciding factor in their safety or risk, one would think you would pay special attention to your choice of words and their definitions.
The claim that a product or facility or business is "FDA Approved" is a serious enough that the FDA has a media campaign to warn consumers about this lie: http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm047470.htm
The correct response to your statement is not to blame "semantics" - you should have said, I'm sorry I misrepresented the manufacture of my cosmetics as taking place in an FDA approved lab, I made a mistake and was wrong.
If a Heath Inspector ate dinner at a restaurant and left a nice tip, would you as the restaurant owner say "our resturant was inspected by the Health Department and given the highest marks"?
No - a visit is not the same as an inspection - and being part of the FDA voluntary registration process is not the same as being FDA Approved.
I replied "I'm sure nothing I posted can be changed by the passage of time"
The information I posted is completely up to date and unlikely to change with the passage of time.
I apologize in advance if the tone of my email sounds snarky or sarcastic. You seem like a lovely young woman but it literally frightens me when I see some of the things you have written, and especially since you offer your articles and comments as a self-identified as a cosmetics expert.
+++
"The FDA per se cannot approve or disapprove a “cosmetic manufacturing facility” , since it is not a food or pharmaceutical, however they can certainly “close your doors” if they inspect and find irregularities."
I am glad you posted this Indie! Because the Campaign for safe Cosmetics has written time and time again that the FDA cannot do anything at all if a company is manufacturing unsafe cosmetics...much less “close your doors” if they inspect and find irregularities."
+++
Indie speaks and writes about natural beauty and is an advocate for more effective governmental regulation and oversight in the beauty industry. Indie is a true believer that green can be sexy.
So why is Indie Lee selling products with ethoxylated ingredients including Ethylhexylglycerin & phenoxyethanol?
Why is she claiming her products are manufacturered in an "FDA approved lab" when there is no such thing as an FDA approved lab?
All-natural ingredients? Polysorbate-60 is NOT a natural ingredient. Neither are many of the other ingredients in her products.
I want more effective governmental regulation of cosmetics and ingredients, including false advertising!!
Exactly why people who are concerned about the safety or hazard of cosmetic ingredients should do research that includes information OTHER than this database. Skin Deep gives different scores to the exact same ingredient listed under alternative names. Skin Deep even scores ingredients that do not ACTUALLY exist! Skin Deep gives a "ZERO" score to products that are safe - and a misleading "ZERO" score to ingredients for which they do not have any data - leading readers who do not look closely enough to think this also means the ingredient is a zero risk instead of zero data. Skin Deep lists ingredients that are hazardous as safe - because they only factor in research from a very small, limited pool of sources. In reality - there is safety data for EVERY ingredient that is now or has ever been used in cosmetics - there is no such thing as a 100% Data Gap...except in Skin Deep. Want to know the best way to have a "ZERO"...make spelling errors on your label. Skin Deep will not show ANY hazardous warnings for misspellings...and then the cosmetic company can proudly proclaim to be a "CHAMPION"!! So you have a nice day, too!
See www.nochemicalcosmetics.com for free reports on how to recognise and avoid the chemicals and contaminants in the skin care products you use.
Both aestheticians and dermatologists receive information from sales Reps of various companies and may have biased opinions.
Toxic means causes death. What natural/organic cosmetics kill people?
"nochemicalcosmetics" there is no such thing as a "no chemical cosmetic" - every ingredient in cosmetics - natural, organic, synthetic, botanical, man-made or food based ingredient IS made up of chemicals.