That’s just crackers

Published: 3-Nov-2010

Could everyone please stop using fear tactics to sell cosmetics, implores John Woodruff

Anyone with access to the web or who sees a tabloid newspaper will have seen shock-horror stories such as women absorb 2kg of toxic chemicals through their skin every year; 81% of women could consume up to 2lbs of lipstick made of toxic chemical ingredients in their lifetime; sunscreens cause cancer; and the latest, crackers stay fresh if kept in mineral oil!

Could everyone please stop using fear tactics to sell cosmetics, implores John Woodruff

Anyone with access to the web or who sees a tabloid newspaper will have seen shock-horror stories such as women absorb 2kg of toxic chemicals through their skin every year; 81% of women could consume up to 2lbs of lipstick made of toxic chemical ingredients in their lifetime; sunscreens cause cancer; and the latest, crackers stay fresh if kept in mineral oil!

Mineral oil appears to be having a particularly bad press with one well established cosmetic company claiming that it is the second biggest cause of visible ageing after excess exposure to sunlight. Another company claims that it is a petroleum by-product that coats the skin like plastic; clogs the pores; interferes with skin’s ability to eliminate toxins; promotes acne and other disorders, slows down skin function and cell development and causes premature ageing.

An American website claims that cosmetics typically contain:
• Urea (urine) – mouthwash, shampoo, deodorants, moisturisers
• Ambergris – (waste from the digestive system of sperm whales) – perfumes
• Fish scales – nail polish, lipstick
• Chicken bone marrow – face creams, moisturisers
Oleoresin capsicum (pepper spray) – lipstick, lip gloss
• Bull semen – shampoo, conditioner
• Human foreskin – anti-wrinkle creams
• Cochineal beetles – colouring for dye, lipstick etc
• Used cooking oil – face creams, moisturisers

An innocuous sounding website calling itself ‘health-report’ claims that one third of all personal care products contain chemicals which are potential human carcinogens. Under the usual headlines such as ‘toxic toiletries’, ‘babies are being poisoned in the womb’ and ‘are your cosmetics killing you’ are numerous cosmetic ingredients and their potential effects on people who use products that contain them. Unfortunately in the majority of cases the source of the information is the MSDS, which only applies to the single substance and not to the quantity used and the environment in which it finds itself.

Another reason given why we should not use many of these materials is that they are used in household or industrial products, thus all anionic surfactants are condemned; “Anionic surfactants can pose serious health threats. They are used in car washes, as garage floor cleaners and engine degreasers – and in 90% of personal care products that foam.”

What do these and numerous other websites have in common? Somehow they get the word ‘health’ in their domain name and they almost invariably advertise products that do not contain the ingredients listed as harmful. Unfortunately a large percentage of consumers read these spurious offerings and would rather believe a self-styled expert who cannot tell the difference between hazard and risk than rely on the expert opinions of qualified toxicologists. Worst of all in this regard is the Environmental Working Group[1] that prints all the hazards to be encountered with the individual ingredients and totally disregards risk.

So what can the cosmetic industry do about it?

Certain sections of the industry should stop promoting products using fear tactics. All too often purveyors of natural and organic cosmetics are guilty of misguided safety claims, unfounded criticism of the safety of non-natural and non-organic products and in so doing they are damaging the reputation of the cosmetics industry.

When confronted by scare stories suggest the perpetrator look at more rational sources of information. There are several informative websites[2,3,4,5] that try and present an unbiased, informative opinion about the various scare stories in the media and others that give safety information about individual ingredients and the products that contain them.[6,7,8]

If we formulators are given a negative brief by marketing try and establish why various materials cannot be used. Unfortunately if they are perceived as harmful by the general public that is sufficient to warrant their exclusion.

It has become increasingly evident that a significant number of raw material suppliers are no longer targeting the formulating chemist but the marketing department with sketchy information presented on a brightly coloured flyer. If asked to incorporate such ingredients then we as chemists should demand the reason why it should be included and cite the need to prove effect.

European cosmetic regulations insist that ingredients be listed at point of sale yet this is ignored by many company websites, including major brands and almost invariably by those claiming natural formulations. Unless all companies are made to comply, the worst perpetrators of scare stories will continue to sell their products without let or hindrance to an unsuspecting public. Did you notice that the ridiculous list of cosmetic ingredients reproduced above are all natural materials?

And the crackers and mineral oil story? Apparently representatives of a multi-level marketing company with international distribution are told to store crackers in mineral oil to show that it is bad for the skin as the crackers stay fresh because the mineral oil is not absorbed! Sorry, I can’t see the relevance either.

References
1. www.cosmeticsdatabase.com
2. www.senseaboutscience.org.uk
3. www.ctpa.org.uk
4. www.thefactsabout.co.uk
5. www.cosmeticsinfo.org/index.php
6. www.personalcarecouncil.org
7. www.colipa.eu/safety-a-science-colipa-the-european-cosmetic-cosmetics-association.html
8. www.cir-safety.org

Trending Articles

  1. You need to be a subscriber to read this article.
    Click here to find out more.

You may also like