Mid Brain reports:
You hear it on the news, read it in print and are inundated with stories on the Internet about how chemicals in the products you use every day are toxic. 
General population opinion
We’ve previously discussed what consumers believe about cosmetics and cancer. This study found a large number of people believed personal care products contained dangerous chemicals.
Scientific opinion
Now here is an interesting survey that looked at what experts who dedicate their lives to studying the topic think about how dangerous are the chemicals used in cosmetic products. Note, these scientists do not work for cosmetic companies.
Here are some findings from a survey conducted by George Mason University researchers. The survey included 937 member of the Society of Toxicology. This group is composed of scientists who specifically test chemicals to determine the risk of human exposure. Some of the more interesting findings are below.
Cosmetic product safety
26% believe cosmetics pose a significant health risk.
10% believe organic/natural products are safer
23% say the US regulatory system is inferior to Europe’s.
A significant majority of toxicologists reject the idea that cosmetics pose a significant risk and even fewer believe organic products are safer.
Specific chemical risks
- 9% see Bisphenol A as a high risk.
which means 91% don’t see it as a problem
- 11% see phthalates as a high risk
Opinion of how risks are communicated
- 79% say the Environmental Working Group overstates health risks of chemical exposure.
- 97% say the media doesn’t distinguish good studies from bad studies.
- 80% say the media overstate chemical risks
Survey Summary
This survey really doesn’t “prove” anything about the risk of chemical exposure to cosmetic products. Surveys can never prove science.
However, it does show that most toxicologists do not consider cosmetic chemicals to be a significant concern. Remember these are the scientists who are most aware of the studies and in the best position to make sound judgments.
So who are you going to believe?
Scientists who study these things or political action groups who cherry-pick data to push their views? Or even worse, the marketing companies that are trying to convince you to buy their products?
Beauty Brains Bottom Line
When you aren’t an expert in a topic, it’s best to listen to the people who are. In this case, the experts say chemicals in cosmetics do not pose a significant health risk. I’m convinced, how about you?
Do you worry about the chemicals in your cosmetics? If so, why is your opinion different than the majority of toxicologists who study this stuff?
{ 37 comments… read them below or add one }
I think people worry about this stuff waaay too much. We’re not going to live forever ya know. There’s no way to be certain about anything we put on or in our bodies so whatever feels right on you shouldn’t stress you out that much. But I would agree that these toxocologist are much more trustworthy than companies that finance their own studies.
SERIOUSLY! Everyone thought the world was flat. Did that make it true!?!
The truth is until the many industries REALLY want to know, and are willing to conduct thorough enough research considering the impact of the total toxic load the plastics we are putting into our pores, breathing into our lungs, and putting into our GI tract, has on the body (specifically called into question the endocrine system). Until that day when science has taken the pain staking steps to research a newly emerging issue, me, you, they don’t have the necessary information to have this discussion.
I understand you want to vent your beliefs. I just think your trying really hard to convince the validity of your reasoning. You don’t need to convince anyone of anything.
had cystic breast – got rid of parabens in cosmetics and now I don’t have it
What other people believe does not concern me – results concern me
toxic load is a huge problem for people with sensitive bodies.
I don’t leave my health to experts regardless what they think they know
fact is if you say why enough around experts it isn’t too long before you hit arrogance or an honest “gee we don’t know” and fact is we know less about our bodies and how they work than we don’t know.
So take care of yourself and forget what other people think
@Rox – thanks for your comments. Take a look at our post on the difference between causation and correlation. You are correct that experts are not 100% certain about anything. No knowledge is 100% certain. But science provides answers based on the best evidence. There really is no more powerful system for figuring out what’s true.
@Eve – What would you consider “thorough” research and what makes you think it hasn’t already been done? The people who study these things (and are not paid by industry) don’t seem to agree with you.
Perhaps it’s having a chemist for a father that makes me tend to take everything the news and general public say with a grain of salt. I know many scientists are self serving arrogant jerks who’ll say anything for money. But the majority are like my dad – good, hardworking people whom just want to make the world a better place. So for the most part I defer to the scientists when it comes to chemicals. And if I’m ever in doubt I know I can just go to my dad and ask him. He’s always honest with me.
Though sometimes he does so much science speak I want to scream and keep asking for the “For Dummies” version.
Basically what I’m saying is I’m really offended by what Rox and Eve have to say.
Evem perhaps you can tell us about all the painstaking steps you’ve taken to research this issue that makes you superior to the obvious relative lack of painstaking steps taken by the people who spend their lives taking them.
And BTW, it was the common idiots who believed the Earth was flat. The scientists were the ones WHO PROVED IT WASN’T and many of them got burnt and exiled for their pains by the common idiots.
Well, I study human biochemistry. Is that good enough for you? Geesh, honestly being a chemist doesn’t mean anything. You still don’t know everything b/c it is nearly impossible to know everything. Every scientist is supposed to believe that the knowledge we learn is subject to change.
That is what allowed the “scientists” to realize the earth was round.
Be offended all you want. There is very good medical research regarding this. I won’t be supplying you with any of it b/c honestly I would never dream of trying to slant your point of view.
Why not try the same thing yourself.
No Eve, it’s not. What do you study, where have you studied, what degree do you have.
Also:
There is very good medical research
regarding this. I won’t be supplying you with any of it …
Yes, and I’m an Olympic figure skater, but I simply choose not to demonstrate it to anyone.
Janis, drink your water from the plastic bottle , eat your food wrapped in plastic, and swath yourself with gunk… go for it
I’ll provide my social security # next.
Thanks for the laugh.
I find it interesting the way you? (the study?) placed the emphasis:
26% believe cosmetics pose a significant health risk.
10% believe organic/natural products are safer.
23% say the US regulatory system is inferior to Europe’s (system).
These can also be read:
74% believe cosmetics DO NOT pose a significant health risk.
90% DO NOT believe organic/natural products are safer.
77% say the US regulatory system is NOT inferior to Europe’s (system).
Would that change anyone’s mind?
I have friends who perceive homeopathy makes them well, that pork products make mucus (whatever *that* means), that drinking anything but purified water will open their immune systems to toxins. Pointing out that millions of people live long healthy lives while drinking tap water and taking antibiotics — things they themselves did for years before they chose to change — doesn’t make a difference. We believe what we want to believe. Personally, I’ll take science.
@Lauri,
I had the same thought when I read the numbers on the study. And you are right, the reverse could’ve been reported. But I didn’t want to change the way the data was presented so as not to bias it.
You’re right that people will believe what they want. On some rare occasions, people can see studies, or data, or something and change their minds. But this is exceedingly rare. No one ever wants to think that they are wrong.
Yeah right Eve, and I’m a super model.
My father is a PhD chemist. Not some internet fraud. He admits science doesn’t know everything. I know science can’t explain everything. But I trust what my father says more then what some whiner on the internet claims.
Oh, and BTW, the whole “people believed the world was flat” thing is largely a myth. The majority, including uneducated people, knew the earth was round just from seeing the moon and sun. It was a matter of how big around the world was they fought about.
http://www.bede.org.uk/flatearth.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth
Beauty Brains, thanks again for clearing up this issue. I’ve been following you for a couple of years now & have been sharing your excellent book with all my friends. In this day & age when we’re bombarded with shamelessly biased information on everything, it’s so refreshing to find an honest source.
As demonstrated by some of the self-righteous posts, people do believe what they want.I have a friend who has rejected her doctor’s advice & proven medication in favor of a “nutritionist” who fills her head with all the popular scare tactics about toxicity in everything we eat, drink, & slap on our faces. A very routine surgical procedure would completely cure her problem but she really believes that cutting “toxic” foods from her diet & doing yoga every other day is going to fix everything. And this is a bright, well-educated woman who should know better. It’s sad to see people like that fall victim to popular stupidity.
I must admit I wasn’t expecting a forth of professionals (not people off the street)to believe cosmetics pose a significant health risk. I thought the percentage would be much lower!Now I AM kinda worried!
Actually, I was surprised the number was that high too. But everyone has a different level of risk that they are willing to accept.
It’s unfortunate someone would listen to a ‘nutritionist’ over a doctor but that’s how some people want to live their lives. I’m reading an excellent book called ‘Blind Spots – Why Smart People Do Dumb Things’. It’s excellent and helps explain how someone could come to exactly the conclusion you report.
I wonder how this myth got started. I remember hearing it in 5th grade when we learned about Columbus
BB – The way I understand it, when there was this so-called “war” between science and religion some “scientist” made up this “fact” as a way to show that “all religious people are ignorant.”
Course that’s a whole other thing I won’t get into. All I’ll say about it is my father sees no real conflict between science and religion and that’s how I view it too. That’s how I’d prefer to leave it. I have a “don’t try to convert me and I won’t try to convert you” attitude.
People like to start myths though. Go take a look at Snopes.com sometime.
Kind of wish I could edit my comments.
That’s not to say one or two people, including religious leaders, didn’t believe that. However they were discounted by even the “unwashed masses” as being stupid.
Then again, there are people whom believe Elvis is alive and working for Burger King.
It’s people like that the tabloids count on.
Back in the day, smoking was regarded as good for your health. This belief was common until enough research was done and enough time passed to prove that it damaged the body and caused cancer. I don’t completely trust that the scientists involved in this study aren’t being paid by cosmetic companies. Until more research is done to show what synthetic chemicals can do over time, I will not trust any products containing them, especially if i have a choice to use earth-based products.
Robin, you do know that earth-based products are made of chemicals, right? Lead, mercury, and plutonium aren’t synthetic, so they must be safe. Just because something’s syntesized in a lab doesn’t mean it’s bad. My medication is synthetic and I’m grateful for it. On the other hand, some of the most complicated concoctions on earth come from nature and we still don’t understand them, like snake venom and spiderwebs.
Science has come a long way since we regularly used things like asbestos and DDT. Makeup used to be dangerous, but just like building materials they’ve advanced to be more safe.
If scientists and experts were really bothered by toxicity of cosmetics like we are worried about prescription medicine, then there would be an FDA section for it.
Robin, you’re right that researched proved smoking was bad for you.
And it was probably proved by SCIENTISTS.
Well, I guess I’ll jump right in. My opinion: there are dangerous toxins in cosmetics. No matter what toxicologists say, I would say that 100% of humans would not voluntarily participate in a study in which they use a specific ingredient being tested everyday over an extended period of time- i.e. this ingredient could kill you. To my knowledge, testing of ingredients is done in vitro or on animals in large quantities over a very short period of time. I believe that most humans would not dowse ourselves in extreme quantities of phthalates as part of our daily routines. However, we do expose ourselves to small amounts over extended periods of time. In my opinion, no test other than one conducted in a manner that reflects the actual way an ingredient is used portrays a useful statistic of whether an ingredient is toxic or non-toxic.
@Cassandra – thanks for your comments. If your conclusions are not based on science (like those of toxicologists), what do you base your conclusions that there are dangerous toxins in cosmetics on? Do you have a special background that would make you more knowledgeable than the majority of toxicologists who come to a different conclusion?
Also, you’d be surprised to know that there are many human volunteers for testing cosmetic ingredients. Month long patch tests on human volunteers are not uncommon.
Sorry, forgot to include the link. Check out this blog for valid information on what is toxic in some cosmetic products.
http://mreblow.wordpress.com/2009/12/17/the-dirty-dozen/
interesting to me is that the european union has banned 450 chemical products commonly used in cosmetics and america’s FDA has only banned 6. what’s happening there do you think?
julia, what’s happening is that European nations have long taken a different approach to chemicals than the U.S. The principle embraced outside the U.S., especially in years past, was “assume harmful until proven otherwise,” in contrast to the “better living through chemistry” approach in the U.S. While there were notable tragedies, such as thalidomide, in European countries, they tended to be more cautious about humans and chemicals.
I stumbled upon this and, as a historian, just wanted to clarify: The Greeks figured out the Earth was round. The assumption that pre-Columbus Europeans thought the earth was flat is from the mis-reading of Medieval and Early modern maps. 19th and early 20th century scholars assumed that medieval Europeans depicted their world as 2 dimensional disks with “here there be monster” because they didn’t know better and assumed the earth was flat because of the view of the horizon. In reality, the monsters claim was based on recognizing that there were living creatures at sea but that they didn’t know what they were, and the medieval disk-shaped worlds were allegorical rather than meant to be literal.
The assumption that Europeans thought the earth was flat until Columbus sailed is a myth that was propagated in 20th century (maybe 19th as well) schools as a way of demonstrating the alleged superiority of humans in the modern age by comparing them to the “backwards” middle ages. A nice whiggish progressive story, but doesn’t hold up to the historical evidence.
*the more you know…
It’s certainly truth. The same way go for the toy imported from China.
I really don’t think toys can pose a significant health risk. Especially there is no child will “eat” a toy and I heard no news about child died because of playing with toy from China at all.
Well I have read several of your sources and your links and I am still not convinced that chemicals are not harmful…You do not offer proof that chemicals are safe, you skirt the subject with an opinion you have obviously already formed. What is the purpose of your site? Persuasion to do what? Believe petrochemicals are safe for consumption? To Continue purchasing products not Proven Safe? Makes me wonder who sponsors your views? Some Corporat
I was happy to find your site…considering it is for Beauty and Brains. Yay! I have reviewed your links and resources to find real information about cosmetic ingredients. I find that you do not make the case that the ingredients found in most beauty products in the US are safe. Yes, perhaps we cannot quantify data on the use of beauty products to one particular brand or single component but that does not mean that ingesting petrochemicals is safe nor does it mean that petrochemicals are not causing damage to our organs and our brains not to mention the environment. What is the purpose of your site? To persuade women to turn a blind eye? Which they may get from their cosmetics. To ignore the intuitive thinking that is warning us that rubbing gasoline on our face and bodies is not proven harmful? Come on…If you are sponsored by Corporations who promote ignorance in consumerism then stop the masquerade…If you don’t….provide a more subjective viewpoint balanced with investigative reports.
You did not include this information on your postings….I think others might be interested that the House and Senate take issues of petrochemicals more seriously than others.
I still believe you are sponsored by the industries that try to inhibit research of the damage of the cosmetic ingredients they use.
“The cosmetic industry and petrochemical companies have fought efforts in Congress to reform cosmetic industry regulations, which were first drawn up in 1938 and have remained virtually unchanged.
Both the House and Senate are considering bills to ban bisphenol A in food and beverage containers. The bills, by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., would protect pregnant women, their children and other consumers from the hormone-disrupting chemical that is used in plastic baby bottles, food containers and in the lining of food cans.”
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/12/02/MN5I1ATVS2.DTL#ixzz1OPWxqC2l
Oh Yes, and By the way…You are saying that your site and book are sharing information reviewed by “cosmetic scientists” Really?! Cosmetic Scientist?? Is that akin to Makeup Artist?? Come on now…Which Corporations sponsor you?
@Jill: I’m sorry to hear you disagree with our views on the safety of cosmetic ingredients. Just to be clear, we’re not suggesting women turn a blind eye to these safety concerns. All we’re suggesting is that they’re not scared away by junk science. I’m sorry if we didn’t make that clear in our post.
By the way, no corporations sponsor us – we make a little bit of money from the ads on our site but no one tells us what to write. (However, if you know of any evil corporations that would pay us big bucks to spread their propaganda, we’re willing to consider any reasonable offer.)
Finally, Cosmetic Scientist is simply the term used in the industry to describe the chemists who formulate and test cosmetic products. A Makeup Artist, according to Wikipedia, is “an artist whose medium is the human body, applying makeup and prosthetics for theatrical, television, film, fashion, magazines and other similar productions including all aspects of the modeling industry.” So you see, they’re really quite different!
Thanks for taking the time to comment.
{ 1 trackback }