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
For Immediate Release
March, 09 2010, 12:41pm EDT
Contact:
Phone: 218-226-4164
Procter & Gamble Agrees to Reformulate Herbal Essences Due to Toxic Contaminant
On Friday March 12, 2010, the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), a
watchdog group with over 850,000 members, and The Green Patriot Working
Group (GPWG), led by environmental health consumer advocate David
Steinman (in cooperation with The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (CSC), a
national coalition of health and environmental groups) will announce
the details of an agreement from Procter and Gamble (P&G) to
reformulate 18 products from its top-selling Herbal Essences brand to
reduce levels of the carcinogenic petrochemical 1,4-dioxane.
WASHINGTON
On Friday March 12, 2010, the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), a
watchdog group with over 850,000 members, and The Green Patriot Working
Group (GPWG), led by environmental health consumer advocate David
Steinman (in cooperation with The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (CSC), a
national coalition of health and environmental groups) will announce
the details of an agreement from Procter and Gamble (P&G) to
reformulate 18 products from its top-selling Herbal Essences brand to
reduce levels of the carcinogenic petrochemical 1,4-dioxane. In
addition, they will announce new results from a continuing study that
has tested over 150 consumer products for the toxic chemical, which is
a contaminant and therefore not listed on product labels. This year, 20
laundry detergents were tested, including major "natural" and
conventional brands. Ironically, the seven laundry detergent brands
from P&G had by far the highest levels of 1,4-dioxane overall. The
independent third-party laboratory, Exova, known for rigorous testing
and chain-of-custody protocols, performed all testing.
P&G's promise to reformulate its Herbal Essences line follows a
notice of intent to file a lawsuit filed by the GPWG against P&G
(as well as lawsuits filed by the California Attorney General's office
in June 2008 directed at other manufacturers) for dangerous levels of
1,4-dioxane as established by proposition 65. The OCA, CSC, and GPWG
consider cooperation from industry leader P&G (with a 40% share of
the hair care market in 2003) to be a significant step forward in the
campaign for all brands to remove unnecessary 1,4-dioxane and other
carcinogenic and harmful chemicals from consumer products.
Press Conference Details
WHO:
David Steinman, founder, the Green Patriot Working Group
Ronnie Cummins, executive director, Organic Consumers Association
In cooperation with the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and Clean Water Action
WHEN: Friday, March 12, 2010 9:00am PST (prior to the opening of Natural Products Expo West)
WHERE: Ramada Plaza Hotel, 515 W. Katella Ave. Anaheim CA, 92802, California 1 Room
BACKGROUND
1,4-dioxane is generated as a byproduct of ethoxylation, a cheap
shortcut used by companies to provide mildness to harsh cleaning
ingredients, which requires use of the cancer-causing petrochemical
ethylene oxide. 1,4-dioxane is considered a chemical "known to the
State of California to cause cancer" under proposition 65, and is also
suspected as a kidney toxicant, neurotoxicant and respiratory toxicant,
among others, according to the California EPA. While previous press
conferences on this topic have revealed the presence of 1,4-dioxane in
personal care and household cleaning products (including products
targeted at babies and children) and tracked improvement as certain
"natural" and conventional brands reformulated, this year's press
conference will focus on the problem of groundwater and reclaimed water
contamination resulting from the toxin's presence in laundry
detergents, and health risks from the chemical's presence in drinking
water. David Steinman is the author of Diet for a Poisoned Planet and
formerly represented the public interest on a committee at the National
Academy of Sciences.
Further Resources
Green Patriot Working Group/History of Study, Definition and Scientific References: https://www.1-4dioxane.com
Campaign for Safe Cosmetics: https://safecosmetics.live.radicaldesigns.org/article.php?...
Environmental Working Group: www.ewg.org/chemindex/chemicals/23481
OCA/Myths and Facts about 1,4-dioxane: www.organicconsumers.org/bodycare/DioxaneFacts080314.pdf
Lawsuits from the CA Attorney General's office: www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_12797.cfm
Clean Water Action: www.cleanwateraction.org/currents/summer2009/how-safe-you...
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is an online and grassroots 501(c)3 nonprofit public interest organization, and the only organization in the U.S. focused exclusively on promoting the views and interests of the nation's estimated 50 million consumers of organically and socially responsibly produced food and other products. OCA educates and advocates on behalf of organic consumers, engages consumers in marketplace pressure campaigns, and works to advance sound food and farming policy through grassroots lobbying. We address crucial issues around food safety, industrial agriculture, genetic engineering, children's health, corporate accountability, Fair Trade, environmental sustainability, including pesticide use, and other food- and agriculture-related topics.
LATEST NEWS
'Don't Believe It': Senate GOP Claims Huge Public Land Sell-Off Would Alleviate Housing Crisis
"This isn't about building more housing or energy dominance. It's about giving their billionaire buddies YOUR land and YOUR money."
Jun 12, 2025
Senate Republicans unveiled legislation Wednesday that would require the sale of millions of acres of U.S. public land in Western states, a proposal that conservation groups slammed as a giveaway to corporate interests and the rich disguised as an attempt to alleviate the housing crisis.
The bill released by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is a piece of the GOP's sprawling budget reconciliation package, which the party hopes to send to President Donald Trump's desk in a matter of weeks.
The measure directs the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to "dispose of 0.5-0.75% of certain BLM land and the Forest Service to dispose of 0.5-0.75% of certain National Forest System Land," and would give Trump administration officials wide latitude to determine whether public land sell-offs would "address local housing needs (including housing supply and affordability) or any associated community needs."
Analysts have rejected the notion that selling federal land to developers is a viable solution to the U.S. housing crisis, arguing that the proposal "is little more than a Trojan horse for a fringe, anti-public lands agenda."
"It's a travesty that Senate Republicans are putting more than 3 million acres of our beloved public lands on the chopping block to sell at fire-sale prices to build mega-mansions for the ultra-rich."
The Senate's proposal, spearheaded by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), represents a more extreme version of a provision that was removed from the House version of the GOP reconciliation package last month amid widespread backlash.
"Senate Republicans have finally said the quiet part out loud: They want to put millions of acres of our public lands up in a fire sale, destroy the investments that have created thousands of manufacturing and clean energy jobs—including in their home states—and obliterate programs that lower energy costs for everyday Americans," said Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), the ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
“In the days ahead, you'll hear a lot of excuses from Republicans trying to cover for what they're doing. Do not believe it," Heinrich continued. "This isn't about building more housing or energy dominance. It's about giving their billionaire buddies YOUR land and YOUR money."
Patrick Donnelly, Great Basin director at the Center for Biological Diversity, warned that the Senate legislation "is just open season on public lands."
"It's a travesty that Senate Republicans are putting more than 3 million acres of our beloved public lands on the chopping block to sell at fire-sale prices to build mega-mansions for the ultra-rich," said Donnelly.
The legislation also instructs the U.S. Interior Department, currently led by Big Oil ally and drilling proponent Doug Burgum, to "immediately resume quarterly onshore oil and gas lease sales" and requires "a minimum of four oil and gas lease sales" each fiscal year in Wyoming, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Nevada, Alaska, and "any other state in which there is land available for oil and gas leasing under the Mineral Leasing Act."
Burgum has described public land as "an incredible asset on America's balance sheet" that could be used "to solve our nation's affordable housing crisis."
In a statement on the legislation, the Sierra Club highlighted a provision that would enact "a harmful 'pay to pollute' scheme allowing a methane gas export company to pay a fee in exchange for LNG projects being automatically deemed in the public interest."
Athan Manuel, director of the Sierra Club's Lands Protection Program, said that Senate Republicans "are taking a second bite at a rotten apple."
"The American people made it clear last month that they will not tolerate selling off our public lands to billionaires and corporate polluters," said Manuel. "But Donald Trump and Mike Lee seem to have missed the memo. This bill would give billionaires and corporate polluters free rein to drill, mine, and log these treasured landscapes without oversight or accountability, and sell millions of acres of public lands to private developers, locking out American families forever."
"The American people will remind Trump and his congressional allies that our public lands shouldn't have a price tag on them," Manuel added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Judge: Trump Admin Can't Hold or Deport Mahmoud Khalil 'On Rubio's Say-So'
"This is the news we've been waiting over three months for. Mahmoud must be released immediately and safely returned home to New York to be with me and our newborn baby, Deen," his wife, Noor Abdalla, said.
Jun 11, 2025
The Trump administration cannot detain or deport former Columbia University student and Palestinian solidarity advocate Mahmoud Khalil over the claim that he poses a threat to U.S. foreign policy, a federal judge ruled on Wednesday.
"The court finds as a matter of fact that [Khalil's] career and reputation are being damaged and his speech is being chilled—and this adds up to irreparable harm," U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz of New Jersey wrote in his preliminary injunction.
While judges have ordered the release of other noncitizen student protesters detained by the Trump administration, the ruling marks the first from a federal court to state that the administration cannot deport or detain noncitizens by arguing they pose a threat to foreign policy under the Immigration and Nationality Act, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New York said in a statement.
"Today's ruling is a huge win for the Constitution and the rights of citizens and noncitizens alike."
"This is the news we've been waiting over three months for. Mahmoud must be released immediately and safely returned home to New York to be with me and our newborn baby, Deen," Noor Abdalla, Khalil's wife, said in response. "True justice would mean Mahmoud was never taken away from us in the first place, that no Palestinian father, from New York to Gaza, would have to endure the painful separation of prison walls like Mahmoud has."
Khalil, a green card holder married to a U.S. citizen, has been held in a detention facility in Louisiana since he was seized by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from his New York City home in early March, missing the birth of his son. He has not been charged with any crime.
Instead, Secretary of State Marco Rubio argued that Khalil's participation in student Palestine solidarity protests threatened U.S. foreign policy interests, citing Section 1227 of the U.S. Code.
Farbriarz determined late last month that Rubio's argument was "likely" unconstitutional, but stopped short of granting Khalil a preliminary injunction releasing him from detention. Since then, Khalil's legal team filed new evidence detailing the "irreparable harm" he has experienced due to his detention.
"We are relieved that the court documented what was obvious to the world, which is that the government's vindictive and unconstitutional arrest, detention, and attempted deportation of Mahmoud for his Palestinian activism is causing him and his family agonizing personal and professional harm," said Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights—one of the organizations involved in Khalil's defense. "We look forward to his reunion with his wife and newborn son, and for this remarkable, brilliant man to reclaim his life and his reputation."
Brett Max Kaufman, a member of Khalil's legal team and senior counsel in the ACLU's Center for Democracy, said: "Today's ruling is a huge win for the Constitution and the rights of citizens and noncitizens alike. No one should be imprisoned or deported for their political beliefs, and the three months that Mahmoud has spent in detention are an affront to the freedoms that this country is supposed to stand for."
Fellow legal team member Ramzi Kassem, the co-founder and director of CLEAR, said, "This vindicates what Mahmoud has maintained since day one—that the government cannot detain or deport him based on Rubio's say-so."
Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said: "We welcome this ruling as yet another example of our nation's judicial system pushing back against the Trump administration's unconstitutional effort to silence all those who speak out against Israel's genocide in Gaza, and against our government's unconscionable complicity with that genocide. Mahmoud Khalil's unlawful and cruel detention deprived him of his liberty and of being with his wife when she gave birth to their first child. This government's war on First Amendment rights must be challenged by all Americans who value free speech and the Constitution."
Yet while Farbiarz's injunction offers hope to Khalil and his supporters, it does not yet guarantee Khalil's freedom. Farbiarz gave the administration until 9:30 am Friday morning to appeal the ruling, after which time it would take effect.
There is a potential opening for the administration to continue to fight Khalil's release.
As Farbiarz noted, the Trump administration also alleges that Khalil falsified his green card application by omitting his previous work at the Syria Office at the British Embassy in Beirut and with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. However, the judge argued that it was unlikely that this was the underlying cause for Khalil's detention.
"The evidence is that lawful permanent residents are virtually never detained pending removal for the sort of alleged omissions in a lawful-permanent-resident application that the petitioner is charged with here. And that strongly suggests that it is the secretary of state's determination that drives the petitioner's ongoing detention—not the other charge," Farbiaz wrote in granting the injunction.
Still, The New York Times reported that it was "not clear that [Khalil] would be released on Friday if the government were to argue that those allegations were, in fact, the reason for his detention."
Khalil's legal team and family vowed to keep working for his release.
"Today was the first step to justice, but we will not stop fighting until Mahmoud is home with his wife and child," Dratel & Lewis associate Amy Greer said.
Noor Abdalla concluded, "I will not rest until Mahmoud is free, and hope that he can be with us to experience his first Father's Day at home in New York with Deen in his arms."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Completely Reprehensible': Trump EPA Attacks Bedrock Power Plant Pollution Rules
"If these reckless rollbacks are allowed to stand they'll only fan the flames of extreme heat and wildfires, and they'll trigger more child deaths, more cancers, more lung diseases, and more heart attacks."
Jun 11, 2025
Advocates for public health and the planet denounced a Wednesday announcement by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to decimate regulations on power plant pollution, calling the repeal effort a "completely reprehensible" assault on natural ecosystems and communities nationwide.
"EPA is proposing to repeal all 'greenhouse gas' emissions standards for the power sector under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and to repeal amendments to the 2024 Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS)," the Environmental Protection Agency confirmed in a statement.
The move is a direct attack on Biden-era regulations aimed at curbing emissions of greenhouse gases and other toxic chemicals from coal-, oil-, and gas-fired power plants, which EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin claimed are inhibiting U.S. fossil fuel production and increasing energy costs.
Meanwhile, Moms Clean Air Force director Dominique Browning put out a statement slamming the announced repeals as "a reckless betrayal of EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment."
"Rolling back these protections is ugly and unpatriotic and would make our air filthy and toxic, piling on to this administration's ballooning record of flagrant disregard for protecting people's health," she said. "The proposed elimination of the carbon pollution standards is based on a fictitious and cynical claim by this administration that power plants are not a significant form of climate pollution. This is blatantly false."
"This is a cynical—and dangerous—attempt to stop the remarkable progress America has made in cleaning up climate and air pollution," Browning added. "It is also based on another falsehood: the energy emergency. There is no energy emergency. There is a climate emergency that is growing more severe."
Center for Biological Diversity environmental health attorney Ryan Maher also framed the administration's moves as dishonest.
"As Trump and his EPA continue to shovel dirty old coal down our throats, they're now adding more toxic heavy metals like mercury, lead, and arsenic to the mix," Maher said. "They had to fire hundreds of scientists to advance these destructive policies because they know the facts are indisputable. If these reckless rollbacks are allowed to stand they'll only fan the flames of extreme heat and wildfires, and they'll trigger more child deaths, more cancers, more lung diseases, and more heart attacks."
Similarly warning of the climate and health consequences of the repeals, Sierra Club climate policy director Patrick Drupp declared that "it's completely reprehensible that Donald Trump would seek to roll back these lifesaving standards and do more harm to the American people and our planet just to earn some brownie points with the fossil fuel industry."
"This administration is transparently trading American lives for campaign dollars and the support of fossil fuel companies, and Americans ought to be disgusted and outraged that their government has launched an assault on our health and our future," Drupp added, pledging that his group "will not stand by and let this corrupt administration destroy these critical, lifesaving guardrails."
Trump and Zeldin's long-feared rollbacks could be finalized by the end of this year, according toThe Washington Post. However, legal battles are expected. Julie McNamara from the Union of Concerned Scientists' Climate and Energy Program said Wednesday that "these actions can, should, and will be challenged in court."
"These are astoundingly shameful proposals. It's galling to watch the U.S. government so thoroughly debase itself as it sacrifices the public good to boost the bottom line of fossil fuel executives," she said, highlighting the global impacts of the repeals.
McNamara warned that "there's no meaningful path to meet U.S. climate goals without addressing carbon emissions from coal- and gas-fired power plants—and there's no meaningful path to meet global climate goals without the United States."
Manish Bapna, president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council, shared some specifics: "Power plants are the largest industrial source of carbon emissions, spewing more than 1.5 billion tons of greenhouse gases annually."
"The EPA claims this pollution is insignificant—but try telling that to the people who will experience more storms, heatwaves, hospitalizations, and asthma attacks because of this repeal," he said. "What's more, the EPA is trying to repeal toxic air pollution standards for the nation's dirtiest coal plants, allowing the worst actors to keep poisoning the air."
"Ignoring the immense harm to public health from power plant pollution is a clear violation of the law," he concluded. "Our lawyers will be watching closely, and if the EPA finalizes a slapdash effort to repeal those rules, we'll see them in court."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular