

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The latest report by The Cornucopia Institute, an organic industry watchdog, uncovers serious problems in cosmetics industry regulations. Regulatory weaknesses and loopholes allow for the use of questionable, even harmful ingredients in personal care products, such as toothpastes, that could negatively impact the health of the users.
![]() |
Behind the Dazzling Smile: Toxic Ingredients in Your Toothpaste, describes how the quality of "natural" toothpastes varies significantly between brands and how these personal oral care products commonly include nonessential ingredients that may be harmful.
"The cosmetics industry is no different, and may be worse, than leading food companies when it comes to gimmicky ingredients and misleading health claims," asserts the report's lead author Jerome Rigot, PhD, a policy analyst at The Cornucopia Institute. "However, we have created a useful web-based tool to help discriminating consumers see through marketing hype and make the best decision for their family when buying toothpaste."
The report spotlights dangerous endocrine disruptors, inflammatory agents, and carcinogens found in popular toothpastes, even many marketed as "natural."
Cornucopia delivered its study on dangerous compounds in toothpaste to the desks of Dianne Feinstein (D-California) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), urging passage of important legislation proposed by the senators that would require the Food and Drug Administration to evaluate the safety of ingredients in everyday personal care items, like deodorant, shampoo and toothpaste.
![]() |
Following the sweeping overhaul of chemical regulation signed into law last month with the Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (updating the Toxic Substance Control Act), consumers might expect that shampoo, lotion, and toothpaste will be free of toxics soon, but they would be wrong. The new law only applies to products regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). All cosmetics and personal care products, such as toothpaste, fall under the Food and Drug Administration and remain essentially unregulated.
Cornucopia's new report and scorecard educate consumers on the potential risks of common toothpaste ingredients. The online scorecard is easy to use while shopping, highlighting some of the best toothpaste brands, many of which contain organic ingredients.
The Institute, an organic industry watchdog, began investigating toothpaste as an extension of their work focusing on the potentially carcinogenic food additive carrageenan. Carrageenan is a non-necessary additive that reliably produces inflammation in the body and yet it is still commonly found in organic foods, like cream, chocolate milk, and yogurt. Carrageenan is also found in natural brands of toothpaste.
Cornucopia found that even many of the toothpastes that claim to be "natural," and sold at premium prices, contain dangerous chemicals including endocrine disrupters and carcinogens, including carrageenan.
This investigation reveals toothless governmental oversight that asks the cosmetics industry to self-regulate. In fact, the FDA readily admits it:
"Firms and individuals who market cosmetics have a legal responsibility to make sure their products and ingredients...are safe under labeled and customary conditions for use, and that they are properly labeled. Under U.S. law, cosmetics products and ingredients do not need FDA approval before they go on the market. The one exception is color additives, ...which must be approved for their intended use."1
"The FDA does not require impurities, including several potential contaminants such as 1,4-dioxane or ethylene oxide, both carcinogens, to be listed as ingredients on the labels of personal care products because these toxic chemicals are produced during manufacturing," confirmed Rigot. "Even though technology (such as vacuum striping) to remove them exists, many companies don't use it, because regulators do not force them to do so!"
The FDA restricts or prohibits just 11 synthetic ingredients in cosmetics2. Compared to that, the European Union (EU) prohibits over 1,300 ingredients and restricts an additional 250 ingredients for use in personal care products3. As a result, the U.S. lags significantly behind other countries on cosmetics safety, allowing many hazardous chemicals that are banned in Canada, Japan and Europe4.
In fact, many toothpastes sold in Europe, and other countries, by American corporations are created with different, safer formulations for international markets than the same products sold in the U.S., to accommodate stricter cosmetics laws.
"If a company truly cared about the safety of its products, or the health of its customers, it would formulate its products not according to a given country's regulations, but rather to ensure the safest possible product with the highest quality ingredients regardless of where the products are sold," asserts Mark Kastel, Senior Policy Analyst at The Cornucopia Institute.
Slick packaging and misleading health claims are among a variety of marketing ploys used to induce customers to purchase oral care products that, in reality, may be detrimental to their health. Some of the hazardous ingredients and contaminants found in toothpastes are irritants, allergens, endocrine disruptors, or carcinogens.
Furthermore, a majority of "natural" brands don't include any certified organic ingredients in their formulations. Too often the "natural" depiction of a toothpaste brand does not guarantee that the highest quality and safest ingredients were used or that it does not contain potentially toxic compounds. Also of concern, "natural" herbal extracts, if not certified organic, likely contain pesticide residues.
"How 'natural' is a flavor when it is obtained by concentrating ingredients obtained from pesticide-intensive agriculture?" asks Terry Shistar, PhD, member of Beyond Pesticides' board of directors.
The natural label is often used as a marketing strategy to appeal to the increasing number of consumers expressing interest in healthier products, from food to drinks to personal care items.
"Consumers are increasingly choosing a certified organic diet to reduce their overall toxic load and to secure food that is nutritionally superior," stated Kastel. "Many are now realizing that anything they put on their skin, or use in their mouths like mouthwash and toothpaste, will end up in their bloodstream. And many of these synthetic compounds are the last thing we want to expose our families to, especially children."
Cornucopia's extensively researched report and toothpaste brand scorecard spotlight the most problematic ingredients to be avoided, which are commonly present in some of the most popular "natural" and premium brands as well as familiar mass-market brands like Colgate and Crest. These include synthetic preservatives such as sodium benzoate and potassium sorbate, surfactants like sodium laureth sulfate, which may contain a toxic, cancer-causing contaminant5, and artificial flavors and colors that have been tied to behavioral problems in children.
Scientists at Cornucopia found that a majority of well-known "natural" toothpaste brands, such as Tom's of Maine, Jason, Desert Essence, and Kiss My Face, contain carrageenan, a non-nutritive thickening and emulsifying agent extracted from seaweed. "Peer-reviewed published research has established that food-grade carrageenan has the potential to cause intestinal inflammation, diabetes and even cancer," says Linley Dixon, PhD, scientist at The Cornucopia Institute.
The report emphasizes, "Considering that the oral mucosa is one of the most absorbent areas of the body, it is certainly not desirable to use toothpastes containing potentially toxic contaminants that may pass directly into the bloodstream from the mouth environment."
The Cornucopia scorecard rated Dr. Bronner's line of toothpaste at the top of the "five-brush" category (on a scale of 1-5), finding it to be among the best and safest products available in the market. "In addition to Dr. Bronner's, whose formulation is based on certified organic coconut oil, there are number of other excellent products that depend primarily on organic ingredients and/or natural clay, that would contribute to oral health without posing unnecessary risks," concluded Rigot.
The Cornucopia Institute's report and scorecard, Behind the Dazzling Smile: Toxic Ingredients in Your Toothpaste, is available at: www.cornucopia.org.
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
Immigration agents "murdered two people on video since the beginning of the year, and the Trump administration still lied about what happened and tried to justify it," said one critic. "I don't think cameras are the solution."
As the Hennepin County medical examiner on Monday classified Alex Pretti's death as a homicide, US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said members of her department who are on the ground in Minnesota will be issued body-worn cameras—a development that came amid a congressional funding fight and was met with mixed reactions.
President Donald Trump and Noem this year have sent thousands of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents to the Twin Cities, where they have fatally shot Pretti and Renee Good, both US citizens acting as legal observers. Noem announced on social media Monday that she met with the heads of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
"Effective immediately we are deploying body cameras to every officer in the field in Minneapolis. As funding is available, the body camera program will be expanded nationwide. We will rapidly acquire and deploy body cameras to DHS law enforcement across the country. The most transparent administration in American history," the department chief wrote, also thanking the president.
Noem's revealed the move as Congress was in the process of reopening the government after a weekend shutdown. The package would give federal lawmakers until mid-February to sort out a battle over DHS funding. Democrats have fought for policies to rein in the department since ICE officer Jonathan Ross killed Good last month, and demands have mounted since Border Patrol agent Jesus Ochoa and Customs and Border Protection officer Raymundo Gutierrez killed Pretti.
Responding to the secretary on social media, House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) said, "The funding is there, and every officer operating in our communities should be wearing a body camera."
"However, this alone won't be enough for Homeland Security to regain public trust or to ensure full transparency and accountability. Secretary Noem must be removed from office," DeLauro added. There have been growing calls to impeach her.
Pointing to extra money that ICE got in the budget package that congressional Republicans and Trump forced through last summer, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said: "You got $75 billion in the Big Bad Betrayal bill. You've got funding 'available' right now. And... release the Pretti bodycam footage NOW."
Congressman Don Beyer (D-Va.) also took to social media to call for releasing the bodycam footage from the Pretti shooting and stressed that funding is already available:
As the Associated Press reported:
Homeland Security has said that at least four Customs and Border Protection officers on the scene when Pretti was shot were wearing body cameras. The body camera footage from Pretti's shooting has not been made public.
The department has not responded to repeated questions about whether any of the ICE officers on the scene of the killing of Renee Good earlier in January were wearing the cameras.
Bystander footage of the Minneapolis shootings has circulated widely and fueled global demands for ending Trump's "Operation Metro Surge" in Minnesota as well as arresting and prosecuting the agents who shot and killed both legal observers.
Some Americans and a growing number of Democratic lawmakers are also calling to abolish ICE. Author Chantal James declared Monday: "We didn't say bodycams on ICE. Their murders are already on video. We said no more ICE."
Critics of the administration cast doubt on whether adding more bodycams to the mix will reduce violence by DHS. Campaign for New York Health executive director Melanie D'Arrigo said that immigration agents "murdered two people on video since the beginning of the year, and the Trump administration still lied about what happened and tried to justify it. I don't think cameras are the solution."
Todd Schulte, president of FWD.us, a a policy organization focused on harmful criminal justice and immigration systems, shared an image emphasizing that "surveillance is not accounability" and a fact sheet about body cameras his group put out last month.
"In the wake of the killing of Michael Brown in 2013, policymakers and police departments held up body-worn cameras as the path forward. Editorial boards joined the chorus," the fact sheet states. "Over a decade later, with 80% of large police departments in the US now having acquired body-worn cameras, it's safe to say body-worn cameras have not delivered on their lofty promise."
"The evidence that body-worn cameras reduce use of force is mixed, at best," and "footage ≠ transparency or accountability," the document details. Additionally, "contrary to their stated purpose, body-worn cameras are actually thriving as tools to surveil and prosecute civilians."
Body cameras are surveillance camerasBody cameras are surveillance camerasBody cameras are surveillance camerasBody cameras are surveillance camerasBody cameras are surveillance camerasBody cameras are surveillance cameras
— Evan Greer (@evangreer.bsky.social) February 2, 2026 at 7:03 PM
After a masked federal immigration agent told a legal observer in Maine that she was being put in a database for purported "domestic terrorists," independent journalist Ken Klippenstein reported last week that federal agencies are using multiple watchlists to track and categorize US citizens—especially activists, protesters, and other critics of law enforcement.
Trump administration immigration enforcers shot the 37-year-old nurse multiple times and then allegedly denied him medical care.
A county medical examiner's office in Minnesota on Monday ruled the death of Alex Pretti, the 37-year-old nurse fatally shot last month by Trump administration immigration enforcers in Minneapolis, a homicide.
The Hennepin County medical examiner said that Pretti's cause of death was homicide by multiple gunshot wounds. Homicide is a medical description that does not imply criminal wrongdoing; the Trump administration said last week that it has launched a civil rights probe into the January 24 incident in which agents shot Pretti seconds after disarming him of a legally carried handgun.
On Sunday, ProPublica revealed that US Border Patrol agent Jesus Ochoa and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer Raymundo Gutierrez shot Pretti, who was reportedly known to federal officials after a previous encounter in which immigration enforcers allegedly broke his rib.
A physician who rushed to the scene of the shooting and tried to save Pretti's life said in a sworn statement that agents denied the victim medical care and instead "appeared to be counting his bullet wounds."
As they did with Renee Good, the 37-year-old mother and poet who was also shot dead by a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent in Minneapolis last month, President Donald rTrump and some of his senior officials attempted to smear Pretti as a “domestic terrorist”—a move consistent with the administration’s designation of left-wing activism as terrorism.
Last week, US District Court Judge Katherine Menendez—an appointee of former President Joe Biden—rejected a bid by state and local officials in Minnesota to halt Operation Metro Surge, the Trump administration's name for the ongoing anti-immigrant blitz in the Twin Cities.
This, even as Menendez acknowledged that the operation "has had, and will likely continue to have, profound and even heartbreaking, consequences," and that “there is evidence that ICE and CBP agents have engaged in racial profiling, excessive use of force, and other harmful actions."
Immigrant advocates renewed calls to end ICE and the Trump administration's broader anti-immigrant crackdown in the wake of the Minnesota medical examiner's homicide determination.
Author Chantal James took aim at Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's Monday announcement that every officer with her department deployed to Minneapolis will be equipped with a body-worn camera.
"We didn't say bodycams on ICE," she wrote on Bluesky. "Their murders are already on video. We said no more ICE."
Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), whose district includes Minneapolis, said on Bluesky: "Abolish ICE. There’s no reforming it. There’s no compromise. There’s only one way to rein in ICE’s terror campaign. Abolish it."
"The unilateral court victories are evidence of what we've known all along—Donald Trump has it out for offshore wind, but we aren’t giving up without a fight," said a Sierra Club senior adviser.
While President Donald Trump's administration on Monday again made its commitment to planet-wrecking fossil fuels clear, a Republican-appointed judge in Washington, DC dealt yet another blow to the Department of the Interior's attacks on offshore wind power.
US District Judge Royce Lamberth, an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan, issued a preliminary injunction allowing the developer of the Sunrise Wind project off New York to resume construction during the court battle over the department's legally dubious move to block this and four other wind farms along the East Coast under the guise of national security concerns.
Lamberth previously issued a similar ruling for Revolution Wind off Rhode Island—which, like Sunrise, is a project of the Danish company Ørsted. Other judges did so for Empire Wind off New York, Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind off Virginia, and Vineyard Wind off Massachusetts, meaning Monday's decision was the fifth defeat for the administration.
Ørsted said in a Monday statement that the Sunrise "will resume construction work as soon as possible, with safety as the top priority, to deliver affordable, reliable power to the State of New York." The company also pledged to "determine how it may be possible to work with the US administration to achieve an expeditious and durable resolution."
Welcoming Lamberth's decision as "a big win for New York workers, families, and our future," Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul stressed that "it puts union workers back on the job, keeps billions in private investment in New York, and delivers the clean, reliable power our grid needs, especially as extreme weather becomes more frequent."
Despite the series of defeats, the Big Oil-backed Trump administration intends to keep fighting the projects. As E&E News reported:
White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers reiterated in a response Monday that Trump has been clear that "wind energy is the scam of the century."
"The Trump administration has paused the construction of all large-scale offshore wind projects because our number one priority is to put America First and protect the national security of the American people," Rogers said. "The administration looks forward to ultimate victory on the issue."
The Interior Department said it had no comment at this time due to pending litigation.
Still, advocates for wind energy and other efforts to address the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency are celebrating the courts' consistent rejections of the Trump administration's "abrupt attempt to halt construction on these fully permitted projects," as Hillary Bright, executive director of the pro-wind group Turn Forward, put it Monday.
"Taken together, these five offshore wind projects represent nearly 6 gigawatts of new electricity now under construction along the East Coast, enough power to serve 2.5 million American homes and businesses," she noted. "At a time when electricity demand is rising rapidly and grid reliability is under increasing strain, these projects represent critically needed utility-scale power sources that are making progress toward completion."
"We hope the consistent outcomes in court bode well for the completion of these projects," Bright said. "Energy experts and grid operators alike recognize that offshore wind is a critical reliability resource for densely populated coastal regions, particularly during periods of high demand. Delaying or obstructing these projects only increases the risk of higher costs and greater instability for ratepayers."
"After five rulings and five clear outcomes, it is time to move past litigation-driven uncertainty and allow these projects to finish the job they were approved to do," she argued. "Offshore wind strengthens American energy security, supports domestic manufacturing and construction jobs, and delivers reliable power where it is needed most. We need to leverage this resource, not hold it back."
Sierra Club senior adviser Nancy Pyne similarly said that "the unilateral court victories are evidence of what we've known all along—Donald Trump has it out for offshore wind, but we aren't giving up without a fight. Communities deserve a cleaner, cheaper, healthier future, and offshore wind will help us get there."
"Despite the roadblocks Donald Trump has tried to throw up in an effort to bolster dirty fossil fuels, offshore wind will prevail," she predicted. "We will continue to call for responsible and equitable offshore wind from coast to coast, as we fight for an affordable and reliable clean energy future for all."
Allyson Samuell, a Sierra Club senior campaign representative in the state, highlighted that beyond the climate benefits of the project, "we are glad to see Sunrise Wind's 800 workers, made up largely of local New Yorkers, get back to work."
"Once constructed, Sunrise Wind will supply 600,000 local homes with affordable, reliable, renewable energy—this power is super needed and especially important during extreme cold snaps and winter storms like Storm Fern," Samuell said in the wake of the dangerous weather. "Here in New York, South Fork has proven offshore wind works, now is the time to see Sunrise, and Empire Wind, come online too."