Buyers at Risk: Christmas Season of Toxic Recalls

As we pass through the season of toy recalls into the season of Christmas consumerism, none of the presidential candidates on either side of the aisle have focused on a singular issue that would send a powerful signal of commitment to protecting Americans. The question of ensuring the security of Americans from the hazards to their health contained in hundreds of consumer products hangs like a ripe fruit for any candidate willing to pick it.

Who is out there protecting Americans from these hidden hazards?
The answer: practically nobody.

We now know what happens when illegal substances like lead are integrated into toys and shipped to the United States from China: They slip into the country past the eviscerated Consumer Product Safety Commission, whose sole toy inspector spends most of his time making sure toys don't break in children's hands, rather than assessing the toxic substances that may enter into their bodies. In fact, the CPSC's budget has dropped in a more or less inverse proportion to U.S. toy manufacturers sourcing production in China.

Hillary Clinton may have called for greater vigilance of our imports from China, but it's not just illegal substances like lead that are being integrated into an array of consumer products. A host of substances suspected of causing cancer, mutating genes and disrupting the reproductive system are permitted in the United States, while much of the world -- our economic peers in Europe, Japan and even in emerging economies like Korea -- are banning them from use.
U.S. influence has been slipping globally, diminished by a bellicose foreign policy, the rapidly dropping clout of the dollar and the quicksand of Iraq. But nowhere are Americans feeling this shrinking global presence more than in the realm of their safety from consumer products that can cause innumerous life-threatening health problems.

Once, 30 years ago, the United States was the leader on environmental protection. What we did in America -- creating the EPA, passing laws regulating chemicals -- was followed by the rest of the world. The Toxic Substances Control Act was our law. It was the first in the world to address the potential health dangers from chemicals. But it included a massive loophole: Any chemical already on the market as of 1981 did not have to undergo any testing for its effects on human health or the environment.

The result: Some 30 years later, 90 percent of the chemicals on the market today -- some 65,000 substances -- have never been assessed for their toxicity.

Over the intervening 26 years, our laws have not kept up with the exponential increase in scientific knowledge of chemicals' effects on the human body. But the rest of the world is moving ahead. Those moves are being led by the European Union, which now includes nearly 500 million people in 27 countries -- a market far larger than the United States.

Why did the EU make the changes? It's just good business. They are looking at the billions of dollars in costs to public health triggered by exposure to toxic chemicals. They did the math. It's cheaper to act before the problem worsens. They are taking a preventative stance, while the United States remains complacent with the status quo.

Take toys, for example: the Europeans responded to a growing body of evidence suggesting that a plastic additive called phthalates may contribute to decreased production of testosterone in infant boys by banning the substance from use in products aimed at children under the age of 3. Much of the evidence used by the Europeans to make that decision came from American scientists, some of whom have been supported in their research by our own EPA. But no one in the U.S. government has been willing to listen.

The result: Toys are manufactured in China without phthalates for export to the European Union and with phthalates for export to the United States. European manufacturers have found far less toxic alternatives, and European kids have as many plastic animals and other goofy playthings as their American counterparts.

Another example, cosmetics: No independent body anywhere in the United States independently assesses the safety of ingredients used in cosmetics. Who knew how many carcinogenic, mutagenic and reproductive system inhibitors are included in cosmetics? Now we know, because the Europeans have published a "negative" list banning such substances from cosmetics now sold in Europe. And not just Europe: increasing numbers of emerging economies, like Korea and Brazil, are beginning to look to Brussels, capitol of the EU, and not Washington for guidance on how to address such potential hazards.

Altogether, America's bluff is being called: The world's other major economy is showing that safety and financial success are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, at a time of rising environmental sensitivity in the marketplace, many of these "greener" businesses are now posing a competitive challenge to U.S. producers. The first candidate to realize that this issue strikes directly at American's sense of safety and security will reap major benefits at the polls.


Straight to the source: http://www.alternet.org/story/71031/

Ask Bath & Body Works to Make Safe Holiday Gifts

Source: http://www.safecosmetics.org/action/bbworks.cfm

The holidays are upon us and the scent of cosmetic gift baskets is in the air—especially at Bath & Body Works. The retailer’s holiday Sugar & Spice, Glittery Gumdrop and Twisted Peppermint products contain a lot of “fragrance,” a mystery ingredient often made from dozens—even hundreds—of individual chemicals that don't appear on ingredient labels and that may be more naughty than nice for your health.

The Skin Deep cosmetic safety database lists fragrance as a cosmetic ingredient to avoid whenever possible. Because of a giant loophole in federal law, companies are not required to list on product labels any of the chemicals in a fragrance mixture. Fragrances can contain neurotoxins, allergens and phthalates, chemicals that have been linked to reproductive problems, testicular cancer and early puberty in girls—which is, in turn, a risk factor for breast cancer.

Fragrance, as your nose knows, is a major ingredient in these Bath & Body Works holiday wares. But it's not the only ingredient we're checking twice: Sodium Laureth Sulfate, a main ingredient in the Sugar & Spice 3-in-1 Body Wash, is often contaminated with a hidden carcinogen called 1,4-Dioxane; and the Glittery Gumdrop lotion contains at least two parabens, chemicals that act like estrogen in the body and have been found in breast cancer tumors.

If young girls are on your holiday shopping list, steer clear of Bath & Body Works' American Girl line, marketed to tweens. The American Girl Truly Me Glistening Shower and Bath Wash warns on its back label: "Excessive use or prolonged exposure may cause irritation to skin and urinary tract." No surprise, then, that this bath wash and American Girl Shimmer roll-on fragrance contain skin irritants, organ sensitizers and suspected carcinogens. Exposure to these chemicals at critical windows of development, like pre-puberty, can be especially harmful.

The 1,500+ Bath & Body Works stores nationwide will be bustling this season with holiday shoppers buying fragrant lotion or soaps. Please tell Bath & Body Works that you don’t want to give or receive toxic body products this holiday season. We've provided a sample message below that you can edit, copy and paste into the company's online contact form, or deliver your message to their customer service line at (800) 395-1001.

Please copy this letter and submit it to Bath & Body Works online:

I am concerned that Bath & Body Works' scented lotions and soap products contain numerous ingredients that are linked to serious health affects, as well as potentially harmful undisclosed ingredients under the term “fragrance.” I deserve to know what's in the bath products I buy for my friends and family this holiday season, and to know that they're safe.

I urge you to take responsible action to protect your customers. Please disclose all of the components of the fragrances used in your products, and commit to phasing out all known and suspected carcinogens, mutagens and reproductive toxins from your products, beginning with those products marketed to young girls in the American Girl product line.

I hope that Bath & Body Works and parent company Limited Brands will take this issue seriously, and respond by signing the Compact for Safe Cosmetics, a meaningful commitment to make safer personal care products (see www.safecosmetics.org/companies). Limited Brands identifies itself as a values-based organization that prioritizes “doing what is right, pursuing excellence, working for the greater good and being inclusive.” Please illustrate these values with respect to the toxic chemicals in your products.

Thank you.

Body absorbs 5lb of make-up chemicals a year

by Paul Stokes

telegraph.co.uk

Women who use make-up on a daily basis are absorbing almost 5lb of chemicals a year into their bodies, it is claimed.

Many use more than 20 different beauty products a day striving to look their best while nine out of 10 apply make-up which is past its use by date.

Dependence on cosmetics and toiletries means that a cocktail of 4lb 6oz of chemicals a year is absorbed into the body through the skin.

Some synthetic compounds involved have been linked to side effects ranging from skin irritation to premature ageing and cancer.

Richard Bence, a biochemist who has spent three years researching conventional products, said: "We really need to start questioning the products we are putting on our skin and not just assume that the chemicals in them are safe.

"We have no idea what these chemicals do when they are mixed together, the effect could be much greater than the sum of the individual parts." Mr Bence, an advocate of organic beauty products, believes that absorbing chemicals through the skin in more dangerous than swallowing them.

He said: "If lipstick gets into your mouth it is broken down by the enzymes in saliva and in the stomach. But chemicals get straight into your bloodstream, there is no protection."
Warnings over using out-of-date lipstick and mascara have also been issued by the Royal College of Optometrists which believes such items are a "hothouse" for harmful bacteria.

Clio Turton, of the Soil Association, said: "Many women are using over 20 different products a day, bombarding themselves with hundreds of different chemicals. They should be asking themselves 'is that eyelash conditioner really essential?' "

Among chemicals under scrutiny are parabens (para-hydroxybenzoic acids) which are preservatives used in products including soap, shampoo, deodorant and baby lotion. Traces of parabens have been found in breast tumour samples, although its link to the development of the cancer is disputed.

Sodium lauryl sulphate, used to help create lather in soaps, shampoo, shaving foam, toothpaste and bubble bath, can cause skin irritation.

The Cosmetic, Toiletry and Perfumery Association said there was no reason for worry because the products were covered by European Union rules requiring them to be safe.

A spokesman said: "The cocktail effect is an urban myth. We do know how different chemicals react individually and can predict how they interact with each other and this is taken into account when the safety of products is assessed."

Article for Safe Cosmetics in the Whole Living Journal