As a member of the Safe Cosmetics Campaign and a participant in the Environmental Working Group’s Skin Deep cosmetics database, I support and applaud these organizations efforts to bring some reform to the way cosmetics and personal care products are formulated -especially in the case where products are still being made with known toxins. With the recent introduction of the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010, they are clearly making some significant strides in moving their agenda forward.
This is important work because of the potential benefits and protection it could provide consumers who are at present like experimental subjects in the giant petri dish that comprises the $35 billion a year beauty and personal care industry (often ironically referred to as HABA or HBA which is shorthand for Health and Beauty).
However as a small manufacturer who is working hard and diligently to make safe and effective products I sometimes wonder if, in spite of their best intentions, they are on a course that will soon run amok. What I mean is as they continue to gain credibility as an independent authority on the subject (and right now they are pretty much the ONLY independent authority on the subject) they will begin to wield real power or market clout that can have an impact on consumers perceptions of what’s safe and what’s not. And that is not something to be taken lightly.
While these are the “good guys” looking out for your health and safety, at the end of the day they are NGOs (non-governmental organizations) that have neither the scientific backing nor the funding to legitimately substantiate all the red flags they are continually raising. They are walking a fine line now between fear-mongering and agitating for meaningful change.
The latest red flag is the finding from a 2009 FDA study that the ingredient Retinyl Palmitate, which is a synthetic form of Vitamin A found in many skin care products and apparently widely used in sunscreens as well, may actually speed the development of cancer, even when present in low doses. The industry puts Vitamin A in its formulations because it is an anti-oxidant that slows skin aging. It seems that if you use these products at night or indoors you’re ok but if you go out into the sun after applying them you may be in big trouble.
This is not an insignificant finding, however I have to wonder what must be going on in the average consumer’s head when they hear this. In its 2010 Sunscreen Guide, the EWG recommends that consumers avoid all sunscreen products with this ingredient. If more than 40% of sun products contain it then that doesn’t leave a lot of options to choose from. Basically, out of 1400 products with sunscreen that were assessed, the EWG identified only 39 products that were worthy of their coveted “green” rating and all of those products used zinc or titanium oxide (sun blocks) as their primary ingredients.
It reminds me of the story of the boy who cried wolf. If day in and day out, all we hear is more bad news about cancer-causing ingredients and products and little or no useful or better alternatives we can trust, then we might as well all slit our wrists and jump off a cliff now and get it over with! I’m being facetious of course. But my point is if this is all that’s presented to us, eventually fatigue will set in and we will stop listening and that’s not good for anyone. This is one of my fears about what might happen if the EWG continues to lead us down this rabbit hole.
As I mentioned in my last post, about the only thing that seems to have changed with respect to the state of sunscreens and sun safety products is that the mainstream media is starting to pay more attention to this issue and take a frank look at what needs to be done.
