SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Corporations' 'Trade Secrets' Trump Public Health
New database created to let consumers know if personal care products contain carcinogens, but 'trade secrets' claim lets companies skirt transparency
Jan 31, 2014
Corporate power seems to be thwarting the public's right to know if the personal care products they use contain potentially harmful ingredients.
As a result of the California Safe Cosmetics Act, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) earlier this month rolled out a searchable database through which consumers could see if their personal care products contain carcinogens or reproductive toxins.
Yet an analysis of the database conducted by Women's Voices for the Earth, an organization working to eliminate the toxic chemicals that harm public health and communities, revealed this week that 22 companies are requesting trade secret status for nearly 1,500 products, exploiting a loophole that allows them to keep the ingredients hidden from consumers.
Consumers searching the database may see "trade secret" listed for an ingredient instead of a chemical, thereby preventing full disclosure.
One egregious example the analysis found was make-up and fragrance maker Shiseido, which claimed trade secret status on ingredients in almost 400 of their products. Indeed, if a user searches "trade secret" on the database, pages upon pages of Shiseido products appear.
Among the companies using the trade secret status are well-known names like the Colgate-Palmolive Company and the Dial Corporation, as well as the CHI Organics brand.
"Trade secret status should never be allowed to conceal harmful chemicals such as carcinogens or reproductive toxins from consumers," said Erin Switalski, Executive Director of Women's Voices for the Earth.
"We understand and respect the need for companies to have trade secret protections for the few select chemicals needed to a product's competitive advantage, but we do not believe that these business needs should ever trump public health," Switalski said.
The organization is urging consumers who use products made by the 22 companies to call them to ask why they are keeping this information from consumers.
__________________
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Corporate power seems to be thwarting the public's right to know if the personal care products they use contain potentially harmful ingredients.
As a result of the California Safe Cosmetics Act, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) earlier this month rolled out a searchable database through which consumers could see if their personal care products contain carcinogens or reproductive toxins.
Yet an analysis of the database conducted by Women's Voices for the Earth, an organization working to eliminate the toxic chemicals that harm public health and communities, revealed this week that 22 companies are requesting trade secret status for nearly 1,500 products, exploiting a loophole that allows them to keep the ingredients hidden from consumers.
Consumers searching the database may see "trade secret" listed for an ingredient instead of a chemical, thereby preventing full disclosure.
One egregious example the analysis found was make-up and fragrance maker Shiseido, which claimed trade secret status on ingredients in almost 400 of their products. Indeed, if a user searches "trade secret" on the database, pages upon pages of Shiseido products appear.
Among the companies using the trade secret status are well-known names like the Colgate-Palmolive Company and the Dial Corporation, as well as the CHI Organics brand.
"Trade secret status should never be allowed to conceal harmful chemicals such as carcinogens or reproductive toxins from consumers," said Erin Switalski, Executive Director of Women's Voices for the Earth.
"We understand and respect the need for companies to have trade secret protections for the few select chemicals needed to a product's competitive advantage, but we do not believe that these business needs should ever trump public health," Switalski said.
The organization is urging consumers who use products made by the 22 companies to call them to ask why they are keeping this information from consumers.
__________________
Corporate power seems to be thwarting the public's right to know if the personal care products they use contain potentially harmful ingredients.
As a result of the California Safe Cosmetics Act, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) earlier this month rolled out a searchable database through which consumers could see if their personal care products contain carcinogens or reproductive toxins.
Yet an analysis of the database conducted by Women's Voices for the Earth, an organization working to eliminate the toxic chemicals that harm public health and communities, revealed this week that 22 companies are requesting trade secret status for nearly 1,500 products, exploiting a loophole that allows them to keep the ingredients hidden from consumers.
Consumers searching the database may see "trade secret" listed for an ingredient instead of a chemical, thereby preventing full disclosure.
One egregious example the analysis found was make-up and fragrance maker Shiseido, which claimed trade secret status on ingredients in almost 400 of their products. Indeed, if a user searches "trade secret" on the database, pages upon pages of Shiseido products appear.
Among the companies using the trade secret status are well-known names like the Colgate-Palmolive Company and the Dial Corporation, as well as the CHI Organics brand.
"Trade secret status should never be allowed to conceal harmful chemicals such as carcinogens or reproductive toxins from consumers," said Erin Switalski, Executive Director of Women's Voices for the Earth.
"We understand and respect the need for companies to have trade secret protections for the few select chemicals needed to a product's competitive advantage, but we do not believe that these business needs should ever trump public health," Switalski said.
The organization is urging consumers who use products made by the 22 companies to call them to ask why they are keeping this information from consumers.
__________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.