Companies currently can put loads of questionable ingredients into cosmetics and skin care products. These ingredients can cause many health problems.

Just in case you don't believe that the big cosmetics companies are doing things to jeapardize your health, here are a few statements from Senator Edward M. Kennedy. The Senator delivered this statement during a debate about a bill on FDA reform and reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee program. Senator Kennedy is urging the Senate not to pass the bill as written because of some provisions which had been added on "to advance selfish special interests." The questionable provision that I am going to highlight would preempt state regulation of cosmetics and over-the-counter medicines.

From Senator Kennedy's Statement:

"Whether the issue is hair spray, or shampoo, or lipstick, or baby powder, suntan lotion, soap and toothpaste, Americans assume that the products they use are safe. But this confidence is too often unjustified--because Federal oversight of this $20 billion industry today is extremely limited. The basic Federal law regulating cosmetics has not been updated since 1938. The FDA has less than 30 employees overseeing this huge industry--and only two employees dealing with the critical issues of packaging, labeling, and consumer warnings. The FDA has no authority to require manufacturers to register their plants and products. It cannot require manufacturers to file data on the ingredients in their products. It cannot compel manufacturers to file reports on cosmetic-related injuries. It cannot require that products be tested for safety or that the results of safety testing be made available to the agency. It does not have the right of access to manufacturers' records. It cannot require recall of a product."

Comments:

As you can see, the Federal regulation of cosmetics is very insufficient indeed. As a result, companies have been able to use all sorts of dangerous ingredients in their products for the sake of convenience and low cost. Here is some of the information Senator Kennedy has collected on the subject:

"A study by the respected, nonpartisan General Accounting Office reported that more than 125 ingredients available for use in cosmetics are suspected of causing cancer. Twenty cosmetic ingredients may cause adverse effects on the nervous system, including headaches, drowsiness, and convulsions. Twenty cosmetic ingredients are suspected of causing birth defects. The GAO concluded that "cosmetics are being marketed in the United States which may pose a serious hazard to the public."

Many of these ingredients are still in use in today's products. Here is more from the report:

"In fact, for every one million cosmetic products purchased, there are more than 200 visits to the doctor to treat cosmetic-caused illnesses. A 1987 study for the Consumer Product Safety Commission found that in one year alone, cosmetic products resulted in 47,000 emergency room visits. Another study found that between 1985 and 1987, more than 151,000 cosmetic-related injuries occurred."

Senator Kennedy continues with a "dishonor role of just a few of the complaints made to the FDA in the last few months." From the Report:

"Eye problems such as rash, redness, swelling, and inflammation from Alberto Culver's "European Instant Hot Oil Treatment for Color Treated and Permed Hair." Clairol's Helene Curtis "Nice and Easy Natural Lite" causing problems such as pain and tissue damage. Proctor & Gamble "Cover Girl Make Up Master Sponge Puffs" causing such problems as rash, redness, swelling, sores. Maybelline "Great Lash Mascara" : pain and rash. Proctor and Gamble "Pantene" shampoo: neck tissue damage Personal Care Products "Personal Care Anti-Wrinkle Cream": eye infection Neutrogena Corporation "Neutragena Glow Sunless Tanning Spray," hand pain and tissue damage. The list goes on and on. These severe reactions are only the tip of the iceberg. As the GAO study points out, "Available estimates of cosmetic-related injuries do not accurately reflect the extent to which consumers are exposed to toxic cosmetic products and ingredients. Because symptoms of chronic toxic effects may not occur until months or years after exposure, injury estimates generally account for only acute toxic effects." "

Now the Senator speaks of specific risks from "just four widely-used products". From the Statement:

"Alpha-hydroxy acid used in face creams can be a potent contributor to skin cancer. Feminine hygiene products can cause pelvic inflammatory disease leading to infertility in young women. Talc used in baby powder and other products is a carcinogen. And mascara can cause blindness."

Sadly, one of the highest risk occupations for cancer and other chemically related problems is that of a beauty technician. They have daily high exposure. The Senator addresses asthma. From the Statement:

"Beauty parlor employees are particularly vulnerable to asthma and other diseases that result from exposure to chemicals in the products they use. In fact, their exposure to the chemicals in cosmetic products results in asthma rates twice as high as a comparison group."

The provision that Senator Kennedy is arguing against would severely limit the state's ability to regulate the cosmetic industry. Since Federal regulation is so lax, the Senator says "you would think that the Congress would want to encourage states to fill the regulatory vacuum." From the statement:

"Instead, this bill entirely bars states from regulating packaging and labeling, and places severe limits on the states' ability to establish other forms of regulation. In fact, the language is so extreme that states are barred from establishing "any requirement relating to public information or any other form of public communication relating to the safety and effectiveness of a drug or cosmetic." No warning labels. No information that a product contains carcinogens or can cause severe allergic reactions. No "keep out of reach of children" labels. No notification that a product has been recalled because it is dangerous or adulterated. The cosmetic industry seems to believe that, for purchasers of their products, ignorance is bliss. In fact, what you don't know today can severely injure you, or even kill you tomorrow."

Senator Kennedy responds to the "outrageous" prohibition on "keep out of reach of children" labels with examples of injury and death of children from cosmetic products. From the statement:

"To cite just a few examples: A 13 month old girl was treated for chemical burns and poisoning after she ingested some permanent wave relaxer. A 16 month old toddler died of cyanide poisoning after swallowing a liquid used to remove artificial nails. A 2 year old boy in Utah was rushed to the emergency room for rigorous intensive care after his parents found him in bed vomiting, moaning and unresponsive, after swallowing another liquid used for removing artificial nails. You would think that states should be entitled to require warning labels so that parents can be especially alert to these dangers--but not under this bill."

The Senator tells about states that have already passed "hazardous product" laws. These laws would be unenforceble with the passage of the bill. These types of protections are what the industry would take away from us, if they had the chance. From the statement:

"Minnesota has passed a hazardous product labeling bill, requiring a warning on all products that are ignitable, corrosive, reactive, or toxic. You would think that all consumers should be entitled to that kind of information about products they put on their faces, spray on their hair, or wash their bodies with. But the cosmetics industry disagrees. California requires notification if products contain carcinogens, or reproductive toxins that can cause birth defects. You would think every consumer should be entitled to that information. But the cosmetic industry disagrees. Texas is investigating hormone creams that may affect the reproductive health of young women. You would think that states should be encouraged to take this kind of action; but this law prohibits it. New York requires expiration dates on cosmetics, because products can break down or be subject to bacterial contamination after certain time periods. Most of us would think that this is basic, obvious information that every consumer should have--but not the cosmetic industry. At least 25 states ban adulterated and misbranded cosmetic products, giving them broad authority to ban harmful ingredients or to require warning labels."

The Senator closes the cosmetic regulation topic with this statement:

"This is unacceptable to the President, to the National Women's Health Network, to the National Governor's Association, the National Council of State Legislators, the Association of State and Territorial Health Officers, the Environmental Defense Fund, and to a broad coalition of consumer and health groups as well. When similar attempts to preempt state action were proposed a decade ago, they were even opposed by the Reagan Administration. The only group that supports it is the cosmetics industry--an industry with a consistent record of placing profits ahead of public health. And the Senate should have the courage to stand up to this corporate greed."

On September 11th 1997 Senator Kennedy released news of a compromise on the bill (Read the statement here.). Due in large part (in my opinion) to his excellent research and debate on the subject, the provision which would have pre-empted state regulation of cosmetics was dropped.

This is good news. But it is only the tip of the iceberg. Cosmetics companies continue to use dangerous ingredients. The states' regulation still requires much research, argument in the state legislation and time to produce safe products. Some states have the issue higher on their agenda than others. The cosmetic companies have a powerful lobby and are trying to weaken these potential safety laws every chance they get.

Do what you can to avoid dangerous products. There are a very few small companies whose goal is to provide safer products to consumers. These companies strive to use natural ingredients.

---

[Note: When I originally posted this material, there was a link to the information and pictures the speech was based on. I have been unable to relocate that link thus far.]