Untitled Document

	Beauty Biohazard Putting on make-up is supposed to be about improving a look, but some make-up may have ugly effects. By jessica A. knoblauch Fall 2007
Make-up has been around for centuries. Still, the government and the public know little about the health and environmental effects of chemicals used by the make-up industry. Using ingredients that have unknown health effects creates an inherent risk to public and environmental health, said Sabrina McCormick, an assistant professor in the sociology department and the environmental science and policy program at Michigan State University. “The plethora of chemicals used in make-up are simply not well-regulated,” she said. Though the Food and Drug Administration’s Office of Cosmetics and Colors is responsible for regulating cosmetics, the agency does not approve ingredients before they are sold to the public. Major loopholes in federal laws that oversee chemicals allow the cosmetics industry to put unlimited chemicals into personal care products with no testing, no monitoring of health effects and inadequate labeling, McCormick said. “With these kinds of regulations, putting on make-up is like playing with matches,” she said. The FDA has the authority to test an ingredient only after the product is proved in court to be injurious to users, improperly labeled or otherwise violates the law. That puts the responsibility on the FDA to prove fault rather than on the cosmetics industry to prove that products are safe, McCormick said. Another party responsible for regulating cosmetic ingredients, the Cosmetic Ingredient Review was established by the Cosmetic, Toiletry & Fragrance Association with support of the U.S. Food & Drug Administration and the Consumer Federation of America. The panel is made up almost entirely of members of the cosmetics industry, said Jovana Ruzicic, press secretary for the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a non-profit organization to protect public health and the environment. “You have scientists on the board who are also the people making the cosmetics. They are, simply put, not independent,” Ruzicic said. The panel only tests for short-term health effects like rashes or skin irritation, and does not look at long-term effects such as cancer, she said. The lack of testing in the cosmetics industry has both broad health and environmental ramifications. One particularly worrisome ingredient often found in make-up are phthalates, a class of widely used industrial compounds used in cosmetics to help products like lipstick adhere to the skin without smudging. In a November 2003 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives, scientists reported a direct correlation between phthalates in pregnant women and changes to the reproductive organs in their male babies. In addition to phthalates, other chemicals found in a variety of cosmetics—including acrylamide, formaldehyde and ethylene oxide—raise red flags. They are listed by the Environmental Protection Agency as carcinogens and reproductive toxins. The make-up industry maintains that its products are safe. “Cosmetics are safe, have been safe, will be safe,’’ wrote Gerald McEwen, vice president of science for the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association in a 2005 San Jose Mercury News article. “Lab rats are not humans, and they don’t respond to toxins in the same way that people do,” McEwen added. The hazards of make-up don’t stop at the point of application, however. Since all make-up is eventually washed off, hormone disruptors like phthalates, bisephenol A and triclosan end up in the waste stream. “Once you remove the make-up, it goes down the drain and into the water supply,” said Ruzicic. “The chemicals in that make-up go along with it.” In 2002, the U.S. Geological Survey conducted the first nationwide study of man-made chemicals and hormones in 139 streams. The study revealed that 80 percent of streams tested were contaminated. Several of the chemicals examined are “known or suspected of disrupting the hormone systems of animals and people,” and of these, “only a small fraction have been regulated at all,” according to the report. This happens because even though wastewater is treated to remove biodegradable food and human waste, the treatment was never designed to remove the more than 80,000 chemicals found in consumer products. As the potential environmental and health impacts of certain cosmetic ingredients are uncovered, more people are demanding that safer ingredients be used. This effect can already be seen in the European Union, which in 2004 began requiring cosmetics companies to remove all chemicals known or strongly suspected of causing harmful health effects from all personal care products sold. “Cosmetics can be safe,” said Stacy Malkan, spokesperson for the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, a coalition of U.S. non-profit groups working to promote non-toxic personal care products. “But it will take public pressure to get legislation for safer cosmetics passed.” Want Safer Make-Up? Check out these sites. • cosmeticsdatabase.com EWG’s Skin Deep Web site, an online database that provides in-depth information on more than 25,000 personal care products, allows users to search products and see what health hazards are associated with each product. • safecosmetics.org Visit the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics Web site to view a list of more than 600 companies that have signed the Compact for Safe Cosmetics. Companies listed have pledged to avoid using chemicals known or strongly suspected of causing cancer, mutation or birth defects.

Beauty Biohazard

Putting on make-up is supposed to be about improving a look, but some make-up may have ugly effects.

By jessica A. knoblauch

Fall 2007

Make-up has been around for centuries. Still, the government and the public know little about the health and environmental effects of chemicals used by the make-up industry.

Using ingredients that have unknown health effects creates an inherent risk to public and environmental health, said Sabrina McCormick, an assistant professor in the sociology department and the environmental science and policy program at Michigan State University. “The plethora of chemicals used in make-up are simply not well-regulated,” she said.

Though the Food and Drug Administration’s Office of Cosmetics and Colors is responsible for regulating cosmetics, the agency does not approve ingredients before they are sold to the public.

Major loopholes in federal laws that oversee chemicals allow the cosmetics industry to put unlimited chemicals into personal care products with no testing, no monitoring of health effects and inadequate labeling, McCormick said.

“With these kinds of regulations, putting on make-up is like playing with matches,” she said.

The FDA has the authority to test an ingredient only after the product is proved in court to be injurious to users, improperly labeled or otherwise violates the law. That puts the responsibility on the FDA to prove fault rather than on the cosmetics industry to prove that products are safe,
McCormick said.

Another party responsible for regulating cosmetic ingredients, the Cosmetic Ingredient Review was established by the Cosmetic, Toiletry & Fragrance Association with support of the U.S. Food & Drug Administration and the Consumer Federation of America. The panel is made up almost entirely of members of the cosmetics industry, said Jovana Ruzicic, press secretary for the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a non-profit organization to protect public health and the environment.

“You have scientists on the board who are also the people making the cosmetics. They are, simply put, not independent,” Ruzicic said. The panel only tests for short-term health effects like rashes or skin irritation, and does not look at long-term effects such as cancer, she said.

The lack of testing in the cosmetics industry has both broad health and environmental ramifications. One particularly worrisome ingredient often found in make-up are phthalates, a class of widely used industrial compounds used in cosmetics to help products like lipstick adhere to the skin without smudging. In a November 2003 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives, scientists reported a direct correlation between phthalates in pregnant women and changes to the reproductive organs in their male babies.

In addition to phthalates, other chemicals found in a variety of cosmetics—including acrylamide, formaldehyde and ethylene oxide—raise red flags. They are listed by the Environmental Protection Agency as carcinogens and reproductive toxins.

The make-up industry maintains that its products are safe. “Cosmetics are safe, have been safe, will be safe,’’ wrote Gerald McEwen, vice president of science for the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association in a 2005 San Jose Mercury News article. “Lab rats are not humans, and they don’t respond to toxins in the same way that people do,” McEwen added.

The hazards of make-up don’t stop at the point of application, however. Since all make-up is eventually washed off, hormone disruptors like phthalates, bisephenol A and triclosan end up in the waste stream. “Once you remove the make-up, it goes down the drain and into the water supply,” said Ruzicic. “The chemicals in that make-up go along with it.”

In 2002, the U.S. Geological Survey conducted the first nationwide study of man-made chemicals and hormones in 139 streams. The study revealed that 80 percent of streams tested were contaminated. Several of the chemicals examined are “known or suspected of disrupting the hormone systems of animals and people,” and of these, “only a small fraction have been regulated at all,” according to the report.

This happens because even though wastewater is treated to remove biodegradable food and human waste, the treatment was never designed to remove the more than 80,000 chemicals found in consumer products.

As the potential environmental and health impacts of certain cosmetic ingredients are uncovered, more people are demanding that safer ingredients be used. This effect can already be seen in the European Union, which in 2004 began requiring cosmetics companies to remove all chemicals known or strongly suspected of causing harmful health effects from all personal care products sold.

“Cosmetics can be safe,” said Stacy Malkan, spokesperson for the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, a coalition of U.S. non-profit groups working to promote non-toxic personal care products. “But it will take public pressure to get legislation for safer cosmetics passed.”

Want Safer Make-Up?
Check out these sites.

• cosmeticsdatabase.com
EWG’s Skin Deep Web site, an online database that provides in-depth information on more than 25,000 personal care products, allows users to search products and see what health hazards are associated with each product.

• safecosmetics.org
Visit the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics Web site to view a list of more than 600 companies that have signed the Compact for Safe Cosmetics. Companies listed have pledged to avoid using chemicals known or strongly suspected of causing cancer, mutation or birth defects.