House Parties Launched to Detox Homes for New Parents
Posted May 11th, 2012
Organization Women’s Voices for the Earth seeks to reduce exposure to unregulated toxic chemicals
Contact:
Sian Wu, swu@colehourcohen.com, 206-701-4734
Cassidy Randall, cassidyr@womensvoices.org, 406-543-3747
MISSOULA, Mont. –The national women’s health nonprofit Women’s Voices for the Earth (WVE) has come out with a fun way to get rid of toxic chemicals lurking in the home: throw a party. The organization has been working closely with parents concerned about disconcerting news that unregulated toxic chemicals, including carcinogens, can be found in everyday personal care products, cleaners, and other common household products. As a result, WVE developed the Green Momma Party. Designed for baby showers, parents’ groups, or get-togethers with friends, a Green Momma Party educates parents about reducing toxic chemicals in the home while empowering them to become advocates for safer products at the same time.
“I’m a new mom myself, so I know the feeling of wanting to make sure you’re providing the safest environment possible for your kids,” said WVE executive director Erin Switalski. “But detoxing your home can be overwhelming – and cost prohibitive. So we’ve developed this party to give parents the resources they need to make changes they can afford and do easily. And by having a party, it’s fun!”
People can sign up online to host a Green Momma Party and download WVE’s free Green Momma Party Guide, which includes steps for hosting a party, non-toxic tips for each room in the house, economical do-it-yourself recipes for safer products that have been pre-tested by parents and verified by scientific experts, and more. The result is reducing the family’s exposure to toxics in conventional products, while having fun and educating friends and family about the importance of making green choices in the home.
But the party is about more than just making personal choices; the party-goers will have the opportunity to collectively take action to demand safer products in the marketplace.
“We need regulations that ultimately protect the public,” says Switalski. “We can make personal choices that will result in a healthier home, but it is impossible to remove every hidden toxic hazard in the home without strong laws.”
It is estimated that between 80,000 and 85,000 chemicals are in use in the environment in United States, yet only about 200 of these chemicals have been tested for safety. Women’s Voices for the Earth believes that all products, especially those for vulnerable populations like babies, should be safe and non-toxic.
WVE’s Green Momma Parties build on the success of the organization’s Green Cleaning Parties launched in 2008, which empowered people to make their own homemade cleaners as an alternative to conventional cleaning products. That effort resulted in thousands of people holding green cleaning parties in every state in the U.S., as well as internationally. Since then, major cleaning product manufacturers such as SC Johnson & Son, Clorox, and Reckitt-Benckiser have begun disclosing chemical ingredients and made efforts to phase out chemicals of concern.
# # #
Women’s Voices for the Earth is a national organization that works to eliminate toxic chemicals that impact women’s health by changing consumer behaviors, corporate practices and government policies.
Tide Pressured to Reformulate After Laboratory Testing Finds Carcinogen in Tide Free & Gentle
Posted April 23rd, 2012
Procter & Gamble faces lawsuit in California
Date:
April 13, 2011
Contact:
Sian Wu, swu@colehourcohen.com, 206-262-0363 x115
Erin Switalski, erins@womensvoices.org, 406-396-6324
Rachel Sarnoff, rachel@healthychild.org, 310-820-2030
SACRAMENTO—Today an alliance of health nonprofits and nurses associations issued a public letter to executives at Procter & Gamble, in an effort to pressure the corporation to reformulate its detergents, which were found to contain actionable levels of 1,4-dioxane under California law. The State of California’s Proposition 65 classifies 1,4-dioxane as a known human carcinogen. The alliance is especially concerned about the presence of the toxic chemical in Tide Free & Gentle®, a detergent heavily marketed to moms as a safer and healthier choice for infants’ and children’s laundry. Young children are particularly vulnerable to toxic chemical exposure because their immune, neurological, and hormone systems are still developing.
The findings originated from a series of lab testing done by Analytical Sciences in California, commissioned by the national women’s health nonprofit, Women’s Voices for the Earth (WVE). Under that study, Dirty Secrets: What’s Hiding in your Cleaning Products, WVE found reproductive toxins, carcinogens, hormone disruptors and allergens in 20 different cleaning products.
Procter & Gamble faces a lawsuit in the state of California under its Proposition 65 law, The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act, by the As You Sow Foundation. If the plaintiff is successful, P&G would be required to label its products that tested positive for 1,4-dioxane with warnings about the presence of a carcinogen. However, P&G would not have to reformulate their products to remove 1,4-dioxane.
In 2010 P&G reformulated its Herbal Essences® hair products to remove 1,4 dioxane, following a public outcry about the presence of the carcinogen. Tide Free & Gentle® tested at three times the level of 1,4 dioxane than was found in Herbal Essences®, yet the company has stated that it has no intention of reformulating Tide Free & Gentle based on the most recent independent testing.
“People are outraged because they feel deceived. They bought this product because they thought it was a healthier choice. They wouldn’t have purchased it if they knew there was a carcinogen in it. That’s why we need to increase accountability in the cleaning products sector, so that dangerous chemicals aren’t put needlessly in our products,” said Erin Switalski, executive director of Women’s Voices for the Earth.
“More than 76,000 people have already signed onto a Change.org petition and sent emails to P&G asking the company to reformulate Tide Free & Gentle®, yet the company has remained silent in response to this outpouring of customer concern,” said Lori Popkewitz Alper, a mom blogger at Groovy Green Livin’ who started the online petition. “P&G’s action to reformulate Herbal Essences® proved that products can be made without 1,4 dioxane–this disregard for human health is unacceptable.”
“No ‘safe’ level exists for 1,4-dioxane in consumer products— and the range of health hazards extend beyond cancer,” said Dr. Anne Steinemann, Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Public Affairs at the University of Washington, and Visiting Researcher at the University of California San Diego. “Much more work needs to be done to improve the safety of cleaning products, including those claiming to be green or hypo-allergenic.”
“The fact that P&G hasn’t yet taken this chemical out of one of their most trusted brands is appalling,” said Rachel Lincoln Sarnoff, executive director of Healthy Child, Healthy World, which has been co-organizing an online advocacy effort for this cause. “A lot of people are saying that they used to trust Tide, but will now stop buying their products, because of this discovery. If Tide wants to keep its customer base, it needs to listen to the thousands of people who have urged them to take out 1,4-dioxane.”
“As nurses, we care for our patients and their families and watch the devastation that a diagnosis of cancer can have on them. We recognize that what causes cancer is complicated,” said Barbara Sattler of the Alliance of Nurses for a Healthy Environment, a co-signer of the letter to P&G. Why would we want a laundry soap that contains a known carcinogen? Proctor and Gamble needs to find a safer alternative to 1,4 dioxane for Tide Free and Gentle.”
Women’s Voices for the Earth is a national organization that works to eliminate toxic chemicals that impact women’s health by changing consumer behaviors, corporate practices and government policies. www.womensvoices.org
# # #
Nail Polishes Test Positive for Toxic Chemicals Despite Label Claims
Posted April 11th, 2012
Consumers and nail salon workers can’t trust labels, highlighting
the need for meaningful regulation of cosmetics
See if your favorite polish contains toxic chemicals.
For Immediate Release:
April 11, 2012
Contact: Shannon Coughlin, 415-336-2246, scoughlin@breastcancerfund.org; Julia Liou, 310-804-9953, jliou@ahschc.org; Jamie Silberberger, 406-543-3747, jamies@womensvoices.org; Stephenie Hendricks, 415-258-9151, stephdh@gmail.com
(Sacramento, CA) California Environmental Protection Agency’s Department of Toxic Substances Control announced yesterday that some nail care products typically found in many of California’s estimated 48,000 nail salons and sold directly to consumers contain high levels of hazardous chemicals despite their labels claiming otherwise. These chemicals, dibutyl phthalate and toluene, have been linked to birth defects, asthma and other chronic health conditions.
Dibutyl phthalate was banned from cosmetics in Europe in 2003, which prompted consumer groups to demand that the chemical be removed from products sold in the United States. Many top nail polish brands then began claiming their products were free of dibutyl phthalate, even labeling as such, but the DTSC tests reveal that products from brands including Sation, Dare to Wear, Chelsea, New York Summer, Paris Spicy, Sunshine, Cacie and Golden Girl actually contain high levels of the chemical.
This misbranding of nail polish is the latest in a series of scandals that have rocked the cosmetics industry, including formaldehyde in Brazilian Blowout hair straightener, lead in L’Oreal lipstick, carcinogens in Johnson’s baby shampoo and mercury in skin-lightening creams.
“Consumers have had it with the current system that tolerates cosmetics companies outright lying to consumers, putting dangerous chemicals in our products, and getting away with it,” said Lisa Archer, director of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics at the Breast Cancer Fund. “It’s clearer than ever that we need to overhaul our country’s outdated and broken cosmetics laws to protect workers and all of us.”
The House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee is currently debating the inclusion of cosmetics regulation in must-pass user fee authorization bills, and health advocates are urging members to ensure that any regulation they adopt is meaningful and effective. They say the regulations must include the phase-out of ingredients linked to cancer and reproductive or developmental toxicity; a safety standard that protects workers, babies and other vulnerable populations; full disclosure of ingredients; and FDA authority to recall dangerous products from the market—all of which are elements of the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011 (H.R.2359), sponsored by Reps. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisc.
In the case of nail polish, worker safety is of particular concern, as nail salon workers are heavily exposed. In California there are approximately 121,000 nail technicians and 284,000 cosmetologists offering nail services on a part-time basis; more than 380,000 nationwide. Women make up 96 percent of this workforce. “Many salons choose brands that do not contain toluene and dibutyl phthalate as a way to protect workers and customers from potentially harmful exposure to these chemicals,” said Julia Liou of the National Healthy Nail and Beauty Salon Alliance and co-founder of the California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative. “The fact that some manufacturers are making false claims regarding their ingredients is a major public health problem. The heath of workers who use these products day in and day out is at stake here. No worker should suffer occupational exposures and health impacts due to manufacturer misrepresentation.
For the report, DTSC sampled 25 nail care products bought from six San Francisco Bay Area locations. Of the 12 products that claimed to be free of at least one of what’s known as the “toxic-trio”—toluene, dibutyl phthalate and formadlehyde, 10 contained toluene, and 4 contained dibutyl phthalate. Toluene is a neurological and a developmental toxicant that can cause headaches, dizziness, nausea, loss of short-term memory, and is proven to be toxic to a developing fetus. Both of these chemicals can impact the health of nail salon workers as well as consumers. Dibutyl phthalate can cause adverse effects on the male and female reproductive systems, as well as developmental problems in infants and children.
“Manufacturers that don’t get their labels right are putting those that do in a bad light,” said Debbie Raphael, DTSC director. “Manufacturers must ask themselves a basic question: ‘Is it necessary to make nail care products with these ingredients?’ Asking that question is a primary goal of DTSC’s Safer Consumer Products Regulations,” Raphael said. The regulations, scheduled to go into effect in 2012, are an effort to make selected product manufacturers analyze alternatives to toxic ingredients in their products.
“This report shows that companies are including harmful chemicals in their products, and are not being truthful about it,” said Miriam Yeung of the National Health Nail and Beauty Salon Alliance. “More disturbing is that the cosmetics industry continues to be almost completely unregulated—the FDA still does not have the power it needs to keep consumers and salon workers safe. Over 40 percent of nail salon workers are Asian American women. These are hardworking women trying to make a living while providing the service that their customers want. They deserve better.”
In 2006, under consumer pressure generated by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, leading salon nail polish manufacturer OPI agreed to remove the “toxic trio” chemicals—formaldehyde, toluene and DBP—from its nail polishes and treatments, and several other manufacturers followed suit. Yet the DTSC study highlights the fact that voluntary action on the part of industry is not backed by any kind of enforcement.
“Clearly we have a big problem. While the FDA has the responsibility to protect the public by ensuring cosmetics are safe and non-toxic, under current law it doesn’t have the authority to do so,” said Archer of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics. “The DTSC study illustrates the importance of states having the right to regulate toxic chemicals to protect people’s health, and that ultimately we need stronger laws at the federal level that set a bottom line of safety, no matter where you live and work.”
The DTSC report can be found online at http://dtsc.ca.gov/PollutionPrevention/SaferNailProducts.cfm.
###
The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is a coalition of more than 150 nonprofit organizations working to protect the health of consumers and workers by eliminating dangerous chemicals from cosmetics. Core members include: Clean Water Action, the Breast Cancer Fund, Commonweal, Environmental Working Group, Friends of the Earth, Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition and Women’s Voices for the Earth. www.safecosmetics.org
Founded in 2007, the National Healthy Nail and Beauty Salon Alliance (Alliance) works to increase the health, safety, and rights of salon workers by reducing toxic chemical exposure and engaging in strategic movement building, policy advocacy, and media efforts nationwide. The Alliance is a joint project of Women’s Voices for the Earth (WVE), the California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative (the Collaborative), and the National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum (NAPAWF).
Industry Influence Dominates Historic Hearing on Toxic Cosmetics
Posted March 28th, 2012
Regulatory Fight Could Turn Ugly as Congress Seeks to Overhaul Cosmetics Regulations
For Immediate Release:
March 28, 2012
Contact: Stacy Malkan, stacy@safecosmetics.org, 202-321-6963; Stephenie Hendricks, stephdh@earthlink.net, 415-299-9510
(Washington DC) In response to public pressure from recent scandals including mercury in face cream, lead in lipstick and formaldehyde in hair products, the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee yesterday convened the first Congressional hearing in 30 years on the safety of cosmetics and personal care products. The hearing was weighted in favor of industry, which represented four of the six witnesses who testified. No witnesses representing health impacted salon workers or consumers were called to testify.
“It’s upsetting that manufacturers, their trade groups and lawyers got most of the seats at the table but the voices of people who have been hurt by toxic products were shut out of the process,” said Jennifer Arce, a hairstylist who is suffering respiratory ailments due to formaldehyde exposure from hair straightening treatments that she was required to give clients. Arce’s name was submitted to the Committee but she was not chosen to testify.
“Despite the heavy industry influence, safe cosmetics champions Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D – IL) and Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) gave voice to the strong science supporting concerns about toxic chemicals in cosmetics and were staunch advocates for public health, worker safety and consumers’ right to know,” said Lisa Archer, director of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.
Michael DiBartolomeis, PhD toxicologist and head of the Safe Cosmetics Program for the California Department of Health, testified that companies have reported to his office 17,060 personal care products that contain one or more of 96 carcinogens or reproductive toxicants. The reporting is required by the California Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005.
DiBartolomeis stressed the importance that any federal cosmetics legislation must not preempt states’ rights to create stronger standards, as California has done. This could be a central issue as Congress gears up to debate cosmetics safety in the weeks ahead.
“This is a critical time for the future of cosmetic safety in the United States. Industry, environmental groups and both parties seem to agree that the failed 1938 cosmetics laws need to be updated, but the million-dollar question is, will it be meaningful reform or will industry write its own rules and make a bad situation worse?” said Janet Nudelman, policy director of the Breast Cancer Fund.
Three legislative proposals are circulating. The original cosmetics safety bill — the Safe Cosmetics Act, introduced last year by Schakowsky, Markey and Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) — is being supported by more than 100 consumer, public health, medical, faith and environmental groups.
Yesterday, Reps. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and John Dingle (D-MI) introduced the Cosmetics Safety Enhancement Act. That bill calls for companies to pay $500 in user fees and would grant recall authority to FDA for cosmetics. Unlike Schakowsky’s bill, it would not provide protections against carcinogens and reproductive toxins in cosmetics, would not require full disclosure of cosmetic ingredients, and does not contain as strong a safety standard.
A third legislative proposal, written by the Personal Care Products Council, seeks to have FDA codify into law decisions about ingredient safety made by the industry-funded Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel. Such a move would be “unprecedented” and possibly unconstitutional, according to Michael Landa, Director of the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition at FDA, who testified at the hearing.
The Energy and Commerce Committee has said there is a placeholder for cosmetics safety language to be added by Rep. Leonard Lance (R-NJ) to the User Fee Reauthorization Act that Congress will vote on in the coming months.
“Essential public health protections could be set back another 70 years if industry gets away with writing its own laws that put industry profits over public health,” said Janet Nudelman from the Breast Cancer Fund.
Nudelman stressed the need for meaningful reform that includes phasing out cosmetic ingredients linked to cancer, reproductive or developmental toxicity; a safety standard that protects workers, babies and other vulnerable populations; full disclosure of ingredients and FDA authority to recall dangerous products from the market—all of which are elements of the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011.
“Anything less than this will fail to protect the public from the worst toxic chemicals that are lurking in our most intimate products,” Nudelman said.
# # #
The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is a coalition of more than 150 nonprofit organizations working to protect the health of consumers and workers by eliminating dangerous chemicals from cosmetics. Core members include: the Breast Cancer Fund, Clean Water Action, Commonweal, Environmental Working Group, Friends of the Earth, and Women’s Voices for the Earth. www.safecosmetics.org
Toxic Chemicals in Cosmetics: Congress to Investigate
Posted March 22nd, 2012
Mercury, Lead, Formaldehyde Found in Many Body-Care Products
Congressional Hearing March 27 with Energy & Commerce Committee
For Immediate Release:
March 22, 2011
Contact:
Stacy Malkan, 202-321-6963, stacy@safecosmetics.org; Stephenie Hendricks, stephdh@earthlink.net; Shannon Coughlin, 415-346-8223 x14, scoughlin@breastcancerfund.org
(Washington, DC) In the wake of recent scandals involving mercury in face cream, formaldehyde in hair products and lead in lipstick, the House Energy and Commerce Committee has called the first official Congressional hearing on cosmetics safety in more than 30 years. The hearing will take place March 27.
“It’s time for Congress to overhaul the 1938 cosmetic regulations that are utterly failing to protect public health. Personal care products from deodorants, to lotions to baby shampoos contain chemicals linked to cancer, birth defects, learning disabilities and other health problems,” said Janet Nudelman, policy director of the Breast Cancer Fund.
“The FDA doesn’t even have the authority to recall unsafe products such as face creams linked to mercury poisoning or hair products with high levels of formaldehyde,” Nudelman said.
In a recent example, the California Attorney General forced the makers of Brazilian Blowout hair smoothing products to warn consumers about exposure to cancer-causing formaldehyde. But just last week, a hidden camera investigation by Good Morning America revealed that 16 of 16 salons failed to notify consumers about the risk.
“There is a war on women happening every day in salons across the country, where salon workers and their clients are being exposed to harmful cancer-causing chemicals, and the US government is powerless to do anything about it. Current laws are incapable of protecting consumers and salon workers,” said Erin Switalski, of Women’s Voices for the Earth.
“We’re pleased the Energy and Commerce Committee is seriously considering regulating the cosmetics industry, which is currently allowed to use chemicals that have hardly been studied at all in personal care products,” said Jane Houlihan, senior vice president for research of the Environmental Working Group. “Getting cancer-causing chemicals and other harmful toxins out of the products we put on our bodies is an urgent public health and consumer rights issue.”
In a Feb. 17 letter to the Energy and Commerce Committee, 50 businesses and 50 environmental groups called for the hearing and urged the Committee to support meaningful regulations that phase out cosmetic ingredients linked to cancer, reproductive or developmental toxicity; create a safety standard for cosmetics; and require full disclosure of ingredients including fragrance and salon products.
These elements are included in the Safe Cosmetics Act, a bill introduced into Congress last year by Reps. Jan Schakowsky, D-IL, Ed Markey, D-MA., and Tammy Baldwin, D-WI.
“We hope this is a moment when Congress can rise above partisan politics as usual and take a step forward to better protect our health,” concluded Cindy Luppi, New England Director for Clean Water Action. “Thanks to our legislative champions for leading the charge on this critical health issue.”
President Obama’s proposed budget for the next fiscal year calls for an additional $19 million in funding through user fees to enable the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to more effectively regulate cosmetics, signaling the White House’s acknowledgement that the agency’s current oversight is inadequate to protect consumers.
###
The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is a coalition of more than 150 nonprofit organizations working to protect the health of consumers and workers by eliminating dangerous chemicals from cosmetics. Core members include: the Breast Cancer Fund, Clean Water Action, Commonweal, Environmental Working Group, Friends of the Earth, and Women’s Voices for the Earth. www.safecosmetics.org
Toxics Linked to Hormone Disruption and Asthma Found In Consumer Products
Posted March 8th, 2012
New Peer Reviewed Study Analyzed Broadest Range of Products Ever Tested
Public Health Advocates Support Full Ingredient Labeling and New Safety Rules
For immediate release:
March 8th, 2012
BOSTON – Toxic chemicals linked to the rising rates of endocrine disruption related disease on the rise were found in a broad array of consumer products and reported in a peer reviewed article in Environmental Health Perspectives today. The Silent Spring Institute tested 213 consumer products, including cleaning products, cosmetics, sunscreens, shower curtains, air fresheners, drier sheets, and other household goods made by Colgate, Unilever, S.C. Johnson, Johnson and Johnson, Procter & Gamble, Seventh Generation, and Ecover among other manufacturers.
“These test results show that both conventional and so-called green products contain hidden toxic chemicals that are not on product labels – so consumers have no way of avoiding them,” says Alexandra Scranton from Women’s Voices for the Earth, who recently conducted their own tests for hidden toxic chemicals in 20 top brand-name cleaning products. “Companies need to phase out these harmful chemicals, and we need a policy that standardizes labeling guidelines for cleaning products, so companies can’t keep these toxic chemicals a secret.”
Environmental health advocates across the nation see this new study as confirmation that ubiquitous chemical exposure is playing a factor in adverse health impacts.
Martha Arguello, with Physicians for Social Responsibility – Los Angeles, comments, “Silent Spring used Battelle Labs in Ohio, and they found 55 chemicals associated with endocrine disruption or with asthma, including parabens, BPA, triclosan, Alkylphenols, cyclosiloxanes. It is not good science to assume that cumulative exposure to these chemicals is safe.
“This new study found PVC products, including a pillow protector and shower curtain, contained high levels of the toxic phthalate DEHP,” explains Mike Schade from the Center for Health, Environment & Justice. “Phthalates have been banned in toys, but are widespread in many PVC products children come in contact with in schools and even at home. Phthalates have been linked to asthma, adverse impacts on brain development, and reproductive health problems in baby boys. Thankfully, there are safer cost-effective alternatives to phthalate-laden PVC products for our schools and homes.”
“Many products are targeted to women of color who suffer from high health disparities that can be linked directly to the endocrine disruptors found in these products. We can only hope that studies like this one inspire better policies and regulations of these dangerous chemicals,” says Janette Robinson-Flint from Black Women for Wellness. “Mother shouldn’t have to be a biochemist to protect themselves and their families from toxic chemicals in everyday products.”
“We know many folks have tested positive for BPA and Triclosan in our human biomonitoring studies,” says Sharyle Patton, Director of the Biomonitoring Resource Center at Commonweal, “One has to wonder if rising rates of associated health problems are linked to these exposures.”
Caroline Cox, Research Director, Center for Environmental Health, says, “These unnecessary, untested and unlabeled chemicals in dozens of everyday products threaten our children’s and families’ health. It’s past time for federal action that calls for evaluating chemicals for safety before they end up contaminating our homes and our bodies.”
“This is another example of the failure of federal law to protect workers and consumers,” said Sarah Doll from SAFER States, “States have been acting to protect consumers from toxic chemicals in products for years now, and will continue to move on these issues in the absence of federal reform.”
The products were tested in 2008, and the study authors acknowledge that product samples can vary and that some formulations may have changed.
Available for Interviews:
Martha Dina Argüello, Executive Director, Physicians for Social Responsibility — Los Angeles, CA. marguello@psr-la.org.310 261-0073, Martha can address a variety of toxic chemical exposure issues — on exposure in communities of color, about educating physicians, and women’s reproductive health.
Caroline Cox, Center for Environmental Health (510 655-3900 x308, caroline@ceh.org. Caroline can discuss the chemicals and need for environmental protections
Sarah Doll, National Director at SAFER States, sarah@saferstates.org, 503 522-6110, Sarah can address state policy efforts to stop toxic chemical exposure.
David Levine, CEO, American Sustainable Business Council, 917 359-9623 dlevine@asbcouncil.org., David can address how enforcing safety regulations for household products restores consumer confidence and makes the marketplace a more fair arena for US personal care product businesses.
Janette Robinson-Flint from Black Women for Wellness. Contact Nourbese Flint, , nourbese@bwwla.org, 323 290-5955. Jan can address inequities for women of color in regards to chemical exposure and health.
Sharyle Patton, Director, Commonweal Biomonitoring Resource Center, 415 779-1010, 415 686-4857. Sharyle is an expert on biomonitoring and chemical exposure issues.
Alexandra Scranton. Director of Science and Research. Women’s Voices for the Earth (WVE), alexs@womensvoices.org, 406 543-3747. Alex can describe WVE’s own testing of top brand-name cleaning products, legislation to label cleaning products, and how to make safer cleaners for a healthier home.
Mike Schade, Center for Health, Environment & Justice (CHEJ), New York. 718.873.3505 (cell), mike@chej.org. Mike Schade can address the manufacturing of polyvinyl chloride and the communities harmed by it, and the hazards PVC presents in everyday products.
Resources:
Silent Spring Institute www.silentspring.org
American Sustainable Business Council, www.asbcouncil.org
Black Women for Wellness, www.bwwla.com
Campaign for Safe Cosmetics
Center for Environmental Health, www.ceh.org
Center for Health, Environment & Justice, www.chej.org
Commonweal Biomonitoring Resource Center www.commonweal.org
Physicians for Social Responsibility – Los Angeles www.psr-la.org
Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, www.saferchemicals.org
SAFER States, www.saferstates.com/
Women’s Voices for the Earth, www.womensvoices.org/
Hundreds of Lipsticks Contaminated with Lead, Reports New FDA Study
Posted February 27th, 2012
Levels up to twice as high as previously reported; L’Oreal worst offender
For Immediate Release:
February 7th, 2012
Contact:
Stacy Malkan, 202-321-6963, stacy@safecosmetics.org; Stephenie Hendricks, 415-258-9151, stephdh@gmail.com
(Washington, DC) — A new analysis of lead in lipstick conducted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration reveals that the problem of lead in lipstick is worse and more widespread than previously reported. The new study found lead in 400 lipsticks tested by the agency, at widely varying levels of up to 7.19 parts per million (ppm) — more than twice the levels reported in a previous FDA study.
Yesterday, the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics sent FDA a letter asking them to correct misleading statements on their website about the supposed safety of lead in lipstick. The agency has studied only the levels of lead in lipstick, and has conducted no health studies or safety assessments.
In January, an advisory committee to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a new report asserting that there is no safe level of lead for children, and stressing the importance of preventing lead exposure for children and pregnant women.
“Lead builds up in the body over time and lead-containing lipstick applied several times a day, every day, can add up to significant exposure levels,” said Mark Mitchell, M.D., MPH, policy advisor of the Connecticut Coalition for Environmental Justice and co-chair of the Environmental Health Task Force for the National Medical Association.
“Lead is a proven neurotoxin that can cause learning, language and behavioral problems. Pregnant women are particularly vulnerable to lead exposure, because lead easily crosses the placenta and enters the fetal brain where it can interfere with normal development,” said Sean Palfrey, M.D., a professor of pediatrics and public health at Boston University and the medical director of Boston’s Lead Poisoning Prevention Program.
The FDA study of 400 lipsticks was quietly posted on the agency’s website in December. The most contaminated brand in the study, Maybelline Color Sensation by L’Oreal USA, contained more than 275 times the amount of lead found in the least contaminated, and least expensive, brand, Wet & Wild Mega Mixers Lip Balm — demonstrating that price is not an indicator of good manufacturing practices.
“How many millions of women have applied and reapplied lead-containing lipsticks since we first raised concerns about this problem five years ago? How many kids have played with their mom’s lipstick?” said Janet Nudelman, interim director of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and policy director at the Breast Cancer Fund. “It’s time for L’Oreal to get the lead out of its products, and for FDA to set a safety standard for lead in lipstick.”
The FDA said it is currently evaluating whether to recommend an upper limit for lead in lipstick. The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is urging FDA to set a maximum limit for lead in lipstick based on the lowest lead levels cosmetic manufacturers can feasibly achieve. U.S. Senators Barbara Boxer, John Kerry and Dianne Feinstein have also urged FDA to take action to reduce lead in lipstick.
The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is also calling on L’Oreal to make a public commitment to reformulate its lipsticks to ensure the lowest possible levels of lead. L’Oreal makes five of the 10 most lead-contaminated brands in the FDA study.
###
SC Johnson Becomes First Mainstream Company to List Ingredients On All Cleaning Product Labels
Posted February 1st, 2012
Date:
Jan. 31, 2012
Contact:
Sian Wu, 206-701-4734, sian@resource-media.org
Erin Switalski, 206-543-3747, erins@womensvoices.org
RACINE, Wis. – In an unprecedented move, SC Johnson & Son has become the first major cleaning product manufacturer to announce that it will disclose ingredients in cleaning products directly on the label. Beginning later this year, consumers will start to see all ingredients, except fragrances, on the product’s label. SC Johnson, makers of Windex®, Glade® and Pledge®, has said their goal is to help families learn more about the ingredients that are in the products they use in their homes every day.
“We want all of our ingredients to be transparent, so consumers can make their own, informed choices on what to purchase,” said Fisk Johnson, Chairman and CEO of SC Johnson in their press release. “We also want to earn the trust and confidence every day of the people that buy our products because we work hard on our ingredient choices and strive to continually improve our products.”
“Women have been calling for this information for years. SC Johnson has made an extremely smart business move by giving consumers more information about the ingredients in these household products,” said Erin Switalski, executive director of Women’s Voices for the Earth, a national environmental health nonprofit. “Now we hope that all companies will label their cleaning products, as SC Johnson has.”
The company’s decision comes on the heels of the introduction of federal legislation that would require cleaning products to bear a full listing of ingredients on the product label. Introduced by Representative Steve Israel of New York, the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act would also require fragrance ingredients to be listed, a step that SC Johnson and Son has not yet taken. Chemicals in fragrances such as synthetic musks are problematic as they build up in the body and have been linked to hormone disruption. Other chemicals are allergenic, and can cause respiratory problems or skin irritation for people with fragrance allergies.
“The final roadblock to full transparency is fragrance,” said Switalski. “In order for consumers to truly know what’s in the products they use, they need to know the ingredients used in the fragrance of their products, too. The Cleaning Product Right to Know Act will ensure this.”
In November, Women’s Voices for the Earth tested a sampling of 20 cleaning products from major corporations, including SC Johnson & Son, Clorox and Procter & Gamble. Their test results, revealed in their report “Dirty Secrets: What’s Hiding in your Cleaning Products?” revealed a number of allergens, phthalates, and carcinogens in air sanitizers, detergents and cleaning sprays. Without full ingredient disclosure, it is virtually impossible for consumers to avoid chemicals in cleaning products, for allergenic or health concerns.
“When I’m making choices about what products to use in my home, I’m looking for companies that don’t have anything to hide, and safe products,” said Brandy Gillespie, WVE member and mom of 2. “I think all companies will be moving in this direction eventually, and I’m glad that moms like me have raised our concerns with enough volume that we’ve been heard.”
SC Johnson & Son’s newly enhanced ingredient website can be found at: www.whatsinsidescjohnson.com.
WVE’s report, “Dirty Secrets: What’s Hiding in your Cleaning Products” can be downloaded here: http://www.womensvoices.org/science/reports/dirty-secrets.
Women’s Voices for the Earth is a national organization that works to eliminate toxic chemicals that impact women’s health by changing consumer behaviors, corporate practices and government policies. www.womensvoices.org
# # #
Toxic Hair Treatments: Lawsuits Settled on Brazilian Blowout; California Attorney General Suit Forces Hazard Warning
Posted February 1st, 2012
Products cause dangerous exposure to carcinogenic formaldehyde
For immediate release: January 30, 2012
Contact:
Sian Wu, 206-701-4734, sian@resource-media.org; Stephenie Hendricks, 415-258-9151, stephdh@earthlink.net; Stacy Malkan, 202-321-6963, stacy@safecosmetics.org; Leeann Brown, 510-444-0973 x 305; leeann@ewg.org
Los Angeles—Health advocates are ramping up pressure on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to remove the keratin hair-straightening product Brazilian Blowout from the marketplace in light of a legal settlement announced today in a California court against the company that makes the product.
The manufacturers of Brazilian Blowout and Acai Professional Smoothing Solution must cease deceptive advertising practices and put caution stickers on their products advising users that the product releases formaldehyde gas, according to the settlement agreement with California Attorney General Kamala Harris’s office. The settlement is the first comprehensive and enforceable action by U.S. government authorities to address formaldehyde exposures associated with use of these products.
Formaldehyde is a known human carcinogen, according to the U.S. National Toxicology Program, and it can cause both acute and long-term health effects in sensitive persons, including breathing difficulties, bloody noses and nausea.
“Every day, salon workers across the U.S. are being exposed to dangerous levels of formaldehyde from hair smoothing products that have been banned for over a year in Canada and other countries,” said Alexandra Scranton of the National Healthy Nail and Beauty Salon Alliance. “It’s time for the FDA to take a stand against this company that has a history of deception and consumer disregard.”
Stylists who regularly perform Brazilian Blowout treatments are exposed to formaldehyde gas at levels well in excess of the state’s Proposition 65 warning threshold, according to the California AG’s lawsuit. The lawsuit accused Brazilian Blowout of violating several state laws by falsely marketing the products as “salon safe” and “formaldehyde free,” failing to provide accurate Material Safety Data Sheets, and selling products with volatile organic compounds in excess of allowable limits under state regulations.
Despite all of these violations, the warning requirements are the maximum penalty that could be achieved under state law.
“We commend the California Attorney General’s office for accomplishing what no other government agency in the U.S. has been able to do: force Brazilian Blowout to be honest with salons about the risk of their products. We are also proud that this lawsuit was the first legal action taken by the state under the authority of the California Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005, which forces companies to publicly disclose the presence of cancer-causing chemicals in cosmetics sold in the state,” said Stacy Malkan, co-founder of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.
“But the legal settlement, while helpful, is not enough to protect the public. The FDA must now follow through on its threat to seize these dangerous hair-straightening products.”
In a letter dated August 11, 2011, the FDA accused Brazilian Blowout of selling products that are misbranded and contain deleterious substances, in violation of the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act of 1938. Failure to correct the violations “may result in enforcement action without further notice, including, but not limited to, seizure and/or injunction,” states the FDA letter. http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/ucm270809.htm
“Obviously, these violations have not been addressed sufficiently,” said Anuja Mendiratta of the National Healthy Nail and Beauty Salon Alliance. “The California Attorney General’s settlement makes it clear that Brazilian Blowout has been selling products containing hazardous substances and marketing them as safe. The FDA must take action today to protect salon workers who are being exposed to dangerous levels of formaldehyde every day.”
The federal Safe Cosmetics Act, introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives in July 2011 by Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) would ban chemicals known to cause cancer from cosmetics, as many other countries have already done.
“The Brazilian Blowout scandal is the perfect case study to showcase our broken regulatory system,” said Jennifer Goeres-Arce, a hair stylist in the San Diego area who contributed evidence for the state’s lawsuit against the company. “A year after other countries banned Brazilian Blowout, countless salon workers in the U.S. have been unnecessarily exposed to formaldehyde, and we are just now getting around to requiring the company to be honest about the risks of their products. It’s time to give the FDA the power and resources to protect the American public from toxic chemicals in cosmetics.”
The National Healthy Nail and Beauty Salon Alliance is encouraging people who have experienced health symptoms after being exposed to Brazilian Blowout-style hair straighteners to write letters to the FDA through this website: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2708/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=9308.
The Alliance and the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics are asking FDA to remove Brazilian Blowout products from the marketplace and to ban formaldehyde from all hair products.
More info: www.SafeCosmetics.org/SafeCosmeticsAct
###
The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is a coalition of more than 150 nonprofit organizations working to protect the health of consumers and workers by eliminating dangerous chemicals from cosmetics. Core members include: Clean Water Action, the Breast Cancer Fund, Commonweal, Environmental Working Group, Friends of the Earth, Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition and Women’s Voices for the Earth.
