Bad Boys with Bad Reps
Those that know me well know I’m not much of a shopper without a purpose, but then, on this occasion I surprised myself and didn’t mind the browse. It ended in my falling over the edge of the world as I knew it into a cosmetic & beauty market tail spin and contemplating the relative merits of compliant packaging and labeling. Fascinating and scary all at once!
Lately, and in the wider scheme of my life, my business mentoring has taken me into an area of health and beauty products that continues to deepen my knowledge of this field at a major rate of knots too. The subject matter is as broad as it is deep as it is controversial and I’d just like to reiterate I’m no expert (I simply write about things that interest me) but I can and will offer you a jump off point of consumer be-awareness today.
Now I’m no Becky Bloomwood but I found myself turning into a label-reading browseaholic. I picked up product after product reciting long seemingly meaningless phrases ending in ates or inyl or MEA, DEA and TEA. Yet they’re only meaningless to those of us who don’t know any better. And me, I’m getting to know better! I thought I’d point out to you today the Top 3 in a long list of bad boys with bad reps and leave you to decide what you’ll do with the information.
No. 3 Bad Boy
Number 3 on our Watch List are Ureas, formally known as diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, or DMDM hydantoin and sodium hydroxymethyl-glycinate. “They are an anti-microbial preservative used in cosmetics. Diazolidinyl is chemically related to imidazolidinyl urea which is used in the same way. Diazolidinyl urea acts as a formaldehyde releaser and is used in many cosmetics, skin care products, shampoos and conditioners, as well as a wide range of products including bubble baths, baby wipes and household detergents.
Me, I’d be inclined to find alternative products particularly if I was a dermatitis sufferer in any way, shape or form since the primary entry routes for these ureas is via dermal (skin) or eyes and the related acute health hazards being mild skin and eye irritations.
No. 2 Bad Boy
At No.2 are Parabens which are also found in most skincare products. They preserve other ingredients and extend that product’s shelf life. Parabens kill or inhibit the growth of micro-organisms such as bacteria or fungi, as well as destroy viruses.
Interestingly, the work of A. Smith-Palmer, J. Stewart and L. Fyfe “investigated the anti-microbial properties of 21 plant essential oils and two essences (considered Non-pharmaceutical antimicrobials) against five food-borne pathogens: Campylobacter jejuni, Salmonella enteriditis, Escherichia coli, Staphylococus aureus and Listeria monocytogenes. Their investigations showed that the oils of Bay, Cinnamon, Clove and Thyme were the most inhibitory against all five pathogens.
Traditional healers have long used plants to prevent or cure infectious disease. Many of these plants have been investigated scientifically for antimicrobial activity, and a large number of plant products have indeed been shown to inhibit the growth of pathogenic microorganisms. However, based on current research, typical paraben exposure from skin care products does not seem to increase health risks though I’d subscibe to the premise, ‘when in doubt, leave it out! And all things being equal!
No. 1 Bad Boy
Coming in at No.1 are Phthalates. Many synthetic fragrances often contain phthalates (pronounced THAY-lates) or synthetic chemicals commonly used to stabilise fragrances and make plastic more pliable. They are mainly used as plasticisers (substances added to plastics to increase their flexibility, transparency, durability, and longevity). They are being phased out of many products in the United States and European Union over health concerns.
They are referred to as endocrine disrupters, meaning they are an external influence, act like hormones and can tend to throw the bodily functions out of kilter. “Studies have linked endocrine disruptors to adverse biological effects in animals, giving rise to concerns that low-level exposure might cause similar effects in human beings.”
“Product tests conducted by ShopSmart magazine in January 2007 found the phthalates DEP and DEHP (banned in Europe) in each of eight popular perfumes tested. In 2002, the “Not Too Pretty” report from some of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics founders revealed phthalates in more than 72 percent of personal care products tested, including fragrance-containing shampoos, deodorants and hair gels.
None of the products listed phthalates on the label. Follow-up testing in 2008, published in the report, “A Little Prettier,” indicated that some leading companies are now using fewer phthalates than in 2002, though these companies still deny that phthalates may pose a health risk.”
Labelling
So a cautionary word without causing a stampede in a china shop is to avoid products that simply list ‘fragrance’ as an ingredient unless the label specifically states that it’s derived from essentials oils, or look for a Phthalate-Free label on the packaging. Bad boys or just a bad rep? Me, I’ve taken to reading labels more!
If you liked this post then you might also like: Safe Cosmetics
