| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Medicine - Nursing Forum » /Lipstick with lead? check http://www.cosmeticdatabase.com
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Mike |
 Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 5:09 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
news.google.com
Can Beauty Be Dangerous?
Washington Post
Sunday, January 27, 2008; N01
Lipstick tainted with lead. Mascara that contains mercury. A hair-
straightening treatment that slicks your tresses with protein . . .
and formaldehyde? As three recent controversies show, sometimes the
world of beauty can be downright ugly.
Take the lipstick debate. Last fall, a study gave women reason to
worry about their war paint: The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics tested 33
lipsticks for lead, from Burt's Bees Lip Shimmer to L'Oreal Colour
Riche. They found that 61 percent of the lipsticks tested contained a
detectable amount of the contaminant. In fact, several lipsticks
exceeded the Food and Drug Administration's lead limit for candy. (The
study used candy as a benchmark not only because women ingest both
candy and lipstick -- albeit in vastly different amounts -- but also
because the FDA does not set lead standards for lipstick.)
Even a minuscule amount of lead is a big problem, says Campaign for
Safe Cosmetics spokeswoman Stacy Malkan. "What the companies will
often say is, 'There's a little toxin in one product and you can't say
it causes harm,' " she says. "But none of us uses just one product."
Lead is a neurotoxin that accumulates in the body over time, which is
why tiny amounts ingested regularly (or in the case of lipstick,
multiple times per day) could be hazardous.
Not everyone sees lead in lipstick as quite the issue Malkan does.
"Lead is in our environment, even without all the industrial
production of chemicals," says John Bailey, chief scientist for the
Personal Care Products Council, a D.C.-based trade association. "It's
part of the earth . . . I don't think it really warrants these
alarmist conclusions."
Right now, concerned lipstick lovers don't have a lot of options. "The
only way to find out if your lipstick has lead is to send it to a lab
and pay $150," Malkan says. "I think that's ridiculous, to expect
consumers to do that."
It's considerably easier to find out if your mascara contains mercury.
Traditionally added as a preservative, the substance is rare in
cosmetics these days. When it exists, it's generally in cake mascaras,
such as those made by Paula Dorf and La Femme, rather than wand
versions. You may see it listed as "thimerosal," a mercury-based
compound.
In eye-area cosmetics, the FDA allows mercury if no other effective
preservative is available. The concentration can be up to 65 parts per
million. That may not sound like much, but the presence of mercury in
any amount worries some people. This month, Minnesota imposed a ban on
many products containing the substance, including thermostats, medical
devices and, yes, mascara.
"It's a potent neurotoxin that can cause brain damage in developing
fetuses," Malkan says. "Many women get mercury from fish and other
sources. We don't need any more."
Bailey says that the FDA uses a voluntary reporting program for
cosmetics ingredients; the program has no current registrations that
report mercury being used in the eye area, he says. "We certainly
can't count on a voluntary reporting program," Malkan says. "We need a
real reporting system." To see whether any products you use contain
mercury or other potentially hazardous ingredients, she recommends the
Environmental Working Group's Skin Deep Web site ( http://www.cosmeticdatabase.com),
which lists information on more than 27,000 cosmetics and personal-
care products. That may seem like a high number, but it's a small
fraction of what's on the market, Malkan says.
The Skin Deep site is a useful resource: It gives each product a 1-
to-10 "hazard score" and offers detailed information on its
ingredients. But the site analyzes only over-the-counter products.
Salon treatments are not examined -- and for controversial ones such
as the Brazilian Keratin treatment, that's unfortunate. The BKT, as
it's known, is a hair-straightening process that has smitten women in
search of silky, frizz-free tresses. It also contains formaldehyde, a
carcinogen.
"It is really, truly what I consider the miracle cure for hair," says
Dennis Roche, who offers the treatment at his two Roche salons in the
District. Roche says his salons use a formulation that contains "under
2 percent" formaldehyde. But he says the percent concentration is
irrelevant -- what matters is the amount of formaldehyde that gets
released as fumes when heat is applied. Roche says he minimizes that
amount by using cool-air hair dryers and flat irons wrapped in heat-
protectant tape.
"I'm going to continue doing this because I see the benefits from it,
and I don't believe there's any health risk -- nothing more than hair
color or fake nails or anything else," Roche says. "I don't think a
little hair color is going to hurt anybody."
The issue, of course, is that it's hard to know. Beauty products and
treatments don't have to get FDA approval before hitting store
shelves; the FDA mandates such approval only for color additives in
cosmetics. Sure, most people probably would agree that you shouldn't
eat your lipstick or put mascara on a baby. But beyond that, the
definition of "dangerous" comes down to different people's ideas about
the effects of accumulated toxins. How much is too much? If experts
can't agree, consumers can't be confident either.
"I love the way my hair looks. I'm so happy with it," says Roche
client Lauren Stempler, who lives in the District and has gotten the
Brazilian Keratin treatment twice. "But it's a hard choice. . . .
There is that nagging feeling in me that it might not be worth it." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Sep 05, 2008 10:26 pm
|
|