EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'Beyond Orwellian': Outrage Follows Revelations of Vast Domestic Spying Program
- The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- Naomi Klein: 'Anti-Shock Doctrines' Show the Way to Resist
- NSA Whistleblower Revealed: Q&A with Edward Snowden
Popular content
Today's Top News
Probable Carcinogens Found in Baby Toiletries
More than half the baby shampoo, lotion and other infant care products analyzed by a health advocacy group were found to contain trace amounts of two chemicals that are believed to cause cancer, the organization said yesterday.
Some of the biggest names on the market, including Johnson & Johnson Baby Shampoo and Baby Magic lotion, tested positive for 1,4-dioxane or formaldehyde, or both, the nonprofit Campaign for Safe Cosmetics reported.
The chemicals, which the Environmental Protection Agency has characterized as probable carcinogens, are not intentionally added to the products and are not listed among ingredients on labels. Instead, they appear to be byproducts of the manufacturing process. Formaldehyde is created when other chemicals in the product break down over time, while 1,4-dioxane is formed when foaming agents are combined with ethylene oxide or similar petrochemicals.
The organization tested 48 baby bath products such as bubble bath and shampoo. Of those, 32 contained trace amounts of 1,4-dioxane and 23 contained small amounts of formaldehyde. Seventeen tested positive for both chemicals.
"Our intention is not to alarm parents, but to inform parents that products that claim to be gentle and pure are contaminated with carcinogens, which is completely unnecessary," said Stacy Malkan, a spokeswoman for the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, which is calling for the government to more strictly regulate personal care products such as shampoo, lotion and makeup.
Companies that manufacture and sell the products tested by the group stressed that they comply with government standards.
"The FDA and other government agencies around the world consider these trace levels safe, and all our products meet or exceed the regulatory requirements in every country where they are sold," Johnson & Johnson said in a statement. "We are disappointed that the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics has inaccurately characterized the safety of our products, misrepresented the overwhelming consensus of scientists and government agencies that review the safety of ingredients, and unnecessarily alarmed parents."
The European Union has banned 1,4-dioxane as an ingredient in personal care products, but the Food and Drug Administration has not established a safe limit for the chemical in shampoo, lotion and other toiletries. It maintains that the trace amounts found in those products are not harmful.
A 1982 study by the FDA showed that 1,4-dioxane can penetrate human skin when used in lotion.
Health advocates argue, however, that federal regulators have not considered the cumulative effect of chemicals in personal care products.
"The levels we've found are relatively low, and the industry often says there's just a little bit of carcinogen in my product," Malkan said. "The problem is, we're finding a little bit of carcinogen in many products. Many of these products are used every day, so we've got repeated and frequent exposure to these low levels of chemicals. They're not the safest and purest products, and parents ought to know that."
In addition, government studies have not examined the effect of chemical exposure on the particular vulnerabilities of infants and children, whose bodies are still developing, the advocates said.
Several Democratic lawmakers said the report is evidence that the nation's chemical regulation system needs to be changed.
"The fact that we are bathing our kids in products contaminated with carcinogens shows how woefully out of date our cosmetics laws are and how urgently they need to be updated," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (Ill.). "The science has moved forward; now the FDA needs to catch up and be given the authority to protect the health of Americans."
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) called the findings "horrifying" and said she intends to introduce legislation that would require stronger oversight of the cosmetics industry.
The report can be found at http://www.safecosmetics.org/toxictub.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


9 Comments so far
Show AllBuy organic. Contact our legislators and tell them we want proper labeling of cosmetics and food.
E Z,
Yes organic is awesomely better in uncountable ways, _ b u t _ please do not be under an illusion of a 'toxic free' zone being there.
Certainly manufactured products are much more likely to breakdown in unpredictable ways, and be loaded with unknown unhealthy novel items -- but nature is bountiful in zillions of poisons, pesticides, herbicides, and deadly breakdown products too.
If you're unfamiliar with the story of the potato, here's an eye opener for you:
The eyes of potatoes ( as are sprouts ) are loaded with strychnine ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strychnine ) to prevent rot while the new shoots grow, from old ruins. Many cooks will cut out those eyes, to minimize the dosage, but many have no clue.
When scientists investigated making more rot and infestation resistant potatoes, they discovered a product that vermin and fungus totally avoided -- but so should people, as it was totally toxic to humans.
Nature's conundrum is actually kind of hilarious, don't eat and we surely die -- eat and we will also die ( but when ) … This is also why a diet of great variety is best.
Did you ever read the obit of that dude who had the odd predilection to roost and eat lots of apple seeds ?
Namaste
"contain TRACE amounts of two chemicals that are BELIEVED to cause cancer". Now it would contain MEASURABLE amounts of substances KNOWN to cause cancer i would have read further. Just more posturing "by a health advocacy group".
Ok. So I read to the end, and from "trace" and "believed to" we got to "bathing our kids in products contaminated with carcinogens".
What are you an expert ?
FYI
formaldehyde ( in our bodies ) breaks down itself into METHANOL, which does cause blindness and death.
BTW, death from cancer isn't the only way to die.
Nope, I'm not an expert at all. That's why I almost skipped the whole thing. Now if they would have said Baby Bubble Bath causes cancer I would have been alarmed.
what's the quantity of formaldehyde needed to cause blindness or death? and does it have to be ingested or does it absorb thru the skin?
Well it's tough out here in the real world, and although I'm not an expert on this particularly -- I do understand that the process of reaching scientific understanding is long, episodic, and convoluted ( much worse, when actively thwarted for profiteering ).
Relative problems are illustrative of other unknown issues, and seldom is any exact dosage relationship and injury ever found -- there are nearly infinite variations between people and all of the possible interactions of foods and drugs.
People who eat dirt can gain many health advantages over those who are meticulously clean, some countries and places take great pride in the healing qualities of their clays.
Many households unknowingly bring pesticides and toxic cleaners into contact with their babies, but humans are usually able to thrive regardless.
Obviously, too much ( unwarranted ) caution about too many issues is ineffective, counterproductive, abusive, and frustrating -- while too little is possibly much worse. Balance is a major part of LIFE.
¿ Which would you rather ?
__ too much
__ too little
Namaste
I'm glad you are getting my point. whoever tested this got to a result and published it. whoever is alermed about the findings, can ask someone who is in the know how dangerous the products are.
However, just a few paragraphs later we have politicians being "horrified" and thinking we are bathing our children in carcinogen laced bubble baths.
Guess what? They're gonna propose new legislation to have no traceable amount of whatever in the soap. The soap is gonna cost more. A few years later when testing capabilities are more advanced and smaller amounts can be detected they're gonna be at it again. Guess who pays for that?
Make your own house cleaning and hygene products with:
Vinegar... Baking soda... Castille soap... Essential oils...
Any store bought product is mostly water & petro-chemicals...
Really appreciate this post. It’s hard to sort the good from the bad sometimes, but I think you’ve nailed it!
baby skincare
http://www.naturewithin.com.au/