We spend a lot of time discussing what should or shouldn't go into our health and beauty products but we never discuss why it's important. What are you looking for in a "natural" product and why? Are concerned with your personal health? Animal rights? The environment? Are you making a statement? Is a product that is 90% natural better than a product that's %80 natural? Are you just concerned with eliminating certain suspect ingredients like parabens or does it have to be all natural all the time?
Let's keep this philosophical and avoid discussions about specifics brands. Think of it as an opportunity to design your own line of products. What are you looking for and why?
I'll start. It's safety first for me. I think all products need preservatives. According to my husband, I "interact with a lot of products." I have no idea when I got many of them. Shampoos and conditioners are moved in and out of rotation on a regular basis. I change moisturizers and cleansers with the seasons so they're like to get shoved to the back of the closet for 6 or 7 months at a time. I'm pretty good about tossing eye makeup after a few months but I tend to hang on to lipsticks and lip gloss for longer than I should. Because of my pack rat tendencies, a well preserved product is a top priority. I'd rather take my chances with parabens than with God-knows-what type of microbial growth.
I just avoid "natural" products because there is no real regulation. It's not like kosher stuff with someone standing by to strictly regulate. You can have just one "natural" ingrediant and call it natural, then charge twice what you'd charge for the same product without that "natural" ingrediant. It's just a ploy to get people to spend more. Period. I feel sorry for those ignorant enough to fall for it instead of learning to read and research first.
Personally I have been on the search for synthetic free products for years. I am realistic in that we live in a chemical world, but I do feel I can have some control over what I put into my body (food and drinks) and also what I apply to my skin(skincare and cosmetics). I love the idea of using ingredients that humans have been ingesting, using on their skin, using medicinally and for beauty successfully for thousands of years. In my opinion, ingredients like flowers, herbs, extracts and nut oils are more benefitial to the human body than synthetic ingredients. Last, but not least, I like the idea of producing less chemicals and pollutants that inevitably end up in our air, water and soil. The production of organic products is immensely better for our environment.
Unfortunately I was disappointed again and again and had basically given up that truly natural and organic products existed. Several months ago, I read a post on a BB forum that informed me that some companies are producing their producs to meet the government standards of organic food. The certification is granted by government bodies (USDA Organic, ACO Australian Certified Organic and Japan - Japan Certified Organic are the ones I know for sure). If you feel you want natural and have been unsure that you have been getting all natural, a seal from the government where the product is produced is the only way to assure you that organic standards were upheld from the growth of the ingredients, to the manufacturing, to the bottling and shipping. Its an extremely difficult process to produce such products. The company I work with was the first to attain the certification back in 2001 with a skincare line. We have had new formulations since then have taken years for review and approval by the USDA organic program and we must patiently wait for the process and final certification before we can bear the USDA Organic seal on those items. The farmers that produce the ingredients must be approved, the manufacturing processes and facility must be approved, the packaging and shipping must be approved to the strict regulations of organic food. Look for the seal and you will know its really organic and natural.
JamiSings, there is actually no government regulation currently in the US for the cosmetics industry at all (natural or chemical products). No one regulating this industry period. The FDA will only act when there are alot, ALOT of complaints about a company/product in order for them to investigate. Otherwise its a free for all across the board.
Designer - that's why I don't believe in buying "organic" makeup. No regulation. At least kosher has to go through a strict regulation. Not government, of course, but religious. Rabbis trained in making sure things are kosher. There's even different types of makeup you have to use on the Sabbath as opposed to regular days so as to avoid "work."
I don't keep kosher, mind you, but I know kosher stuff is cleaner then even stuff approved by the FDA or USDA. The rules are so strict that with kosher products you can be sure you're getting what you're paying for. Organic stuff, you're not. You're just getting a catch phrase to steal your money.
@designer856 - It's not exactly true that there is no regulation of the cosmetic industry.
For example, the FDA says this about its role in regulating cosmetics.
And there is more that the FDA does in regards to cosmetics. http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/default.htm
Most legitimate companies in the cosmetic industry follow the regulatory guidelines established by the PCPC. This includes suggestions on the quality of raw materials used, the ingredient labeling, and even safety testing.
To say it is a "free for all" is just not correct.
Hey Left-
I apologize, you are correct in that free for all was an incorrect statement. Thanks for the links. They are helpful in describing exactly what the FDA is currently doing, which in my opinion is not nearly enough.
This is from the first link you sent, the second section down from the top:
"Cosmetic products and ingredients are NOT subject to FDA premarket approval authority, with the exception of color additives. However, FDA may pursue enforcement action against violative products, or against firms or individuals who violate the law."
So essentially they are reactive, not proactive with product safety. I think that should be the other way around.
You could certainly make a case for it if cosmetics were harming people. There is no proof that the current level of regulations is hurting anyone. So, why should the government try to fix a problem that doesn't exist?
that's interesting I didn't know about the governmental seal thing placed on products? But as far as all natural products go, I try to avoid chemicals in products if I have an alternative that is of the same quality and price, but if there isn't i'm not afraid of using products that could be "harmful" according to a couple of studies out there. Until there is concrete proof these products are harmful to us or our environment I will continue to use them.
You are absolutely right. The proof doesn't exist yet. With the studies being so new, we have created more questions than answers so far.
There has been action taken on the part of our government. They are studying bioaccumulation, so the fact that they even took notice and are collecting info is of interest. Especially since its the Center for Disease control conducting the study... not the FDA. Everyone is in agreement that chemicals are building up in our bloodstream, organs and tissues and we are not sure what that means. There is a boom in the use of synthetic chemicals and a boom in certain diseases like cancer, alzheimer's and autism. I would hate to just assume safety and then be proven wrong. I'd rather limit exposure until we know more. In this world its unrealistic to avoid chemicals completely, but if there is a way to cut down... I'm all for it.
FACTS THE BEAUTY INDUSTRY DOES NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW
1-Cosmetic products and ingredients are not subject to FDA (Food and Drug Administration) premarket approval authority. Only six out of more than 1500 dangerous ingredients are banned for use in cosmetics by the FDA, the other 1494 ingredients can be and are used in most lotions.
Although there are literally hundreds of ingredients used in cosmetic lotions that are potential irritants, toxins and cancer producing, the FDA lists only a few color additives and just six substances which cannot be used in beauty lotions or oils. Those six volatile substances are bithionol, mercury compounds, halogenated salicylanilides, chloroform, methylene chloride and cattle intestines.
2-If you read the ingredient list and most of the names are terms you never heard of; do not use the product.
With little regulation, you have little protection. Many beauty product manufacturers fill their bottles with low cost synthetics or waste products that can have harmful side effects, especially with long term use of the product.
3-The ingredient list, by law, is always shown in descending order of volume content. The further down on the list: the less of that ingredient is in the lotion. In too many cases, most of the good ingredients are at the bottom of the list. One trick used to avoid listing a good ingredient in the order of actual volume in the lotion is by listing it separately as an Active Ingredient. That way it can be removed from the standard listing requirements and even allows the manufacturer to list the rest of the ingredients alphabetically. Active ingredient listing for a medication makes sense, but for a beauty lotion it usually means they do not want you to see where it fits in the volume list. The only exception may be the sunscreen ingredient, of which most are harmful to your skin anyway.
In many cases, to get the customers attention the manufacturer will highlight a particular ingredient as part of its advertising. If that item is not at or near the top of the ingredient list, you can be sure that it represents a very small portion of the total content. Most beauty products use low cost synthetic chemicals and water as the major components of their lotions. They will highlight an in-vogue component to attract and draw in the customer. However, since there are no FDA regulations as to how much of a percentage of the product has to contain a certain ingredient in order for it to be highlighted, the manufacture can take an expensive ingredient or two, put a fraction of a percent of it in the lotion and still lay claim to its benefits.
4-The number one ingredient by far, in over 90% of beauty products, including even the most expensive beauty creams, is plain old fashioned water with no cosmetic value. Your $20, $40 or even $60 bottle of beauty lotion can be up to 50% water.
In order to keep costs done and thin out their product, most beauty cream manufacturers use water as a major ingredient. There may be times when small amounts of water are helpful in bringing the lotion to a smooth flowing consistency. However, if water is the first ingredient in the list, and therefore the highest percentage by volume as compared to any other ingredient, you can be sure you are paying too much for too little.
Your body is already over 50% water by weight. Women have a slightly less volume of water as do men. Yes, the water content decreases as you get older which accounts for some of the drying out of your skin. However the small amount you would add by using a lotion with water in it is relatively insignificant. As stated earlier, this added water can actually be harmful if it is not locked into the body via the use of a humectant ingredient. Humectants both lock in water and attract it from other sources such as the atmosphere. Many body lotions do add a humectant, but that does not require the need of additional water to be smoothed onto your body. There is enough water in the air or already on your body to satisfy the needs of most. Many companies use urea and/or glycerin as a humectant ingredient. Urea can either be derived from animal urine or synthetic ammonia and carbon dioxide. In either case, even though your body produces its own Urea, a foreign produced Urea added to your body can serve as an irritant, and even as a toxin to your system. It can also be damaging to body organs and reproductive systems. Another common Humectant is glycerin. Glycerin can be derived from animal by products or plants such as coconut and palm. Glycerin has been linked to cancer and irritations. A natural Humectant is honey and appears to have no known side effects.
Hey designer I am insulted by your comment on a "boom" in cancer and autism without any research to back it up. I think it is more likely that these things have always been around and they medical world was not advanced enough to treat it or even make an accurate diagnosis. The thing that really got to me is I have high functioning autism and I don't like being put into a box, and have you ever even talked to someone with autism and asked them their opinion. I do not consider it a disorder. I embrace it because its part of who I am. It is not baggage that I live with it is a way of experiencing, feeling and learning.
"If you read the ingredient list and most of the names are terms you never heard of; do not use the product."
This is variable, it depends on what your knowledge of chemistry is. Does that mean only cosmetic chemists can use cosmetics? I'd rather be safe from mold and disgustingness with parabens anyday.
"The only exception may be the sunscreen ingredient, of which most are harmful to your skin anyway." SUNSCREEN IS ONE THE BEST WAYS TO PREVENT SKIN CANCER! This is ignorance what this article has said! Also they use water in the product as a solvent.
Rozy - I totally agree with you about people making decisions to buy a product based on their ability to read/recognise a product name. I'm not sure people should base the products they buy on how literate they are... On that note, I wonder how many people recognise tocopheryl acetate as Vitamin E.
I personally do not strive to use all natural products. I believe if you want to be all natural, you should LIVE all natural - find a nice cave to live in (No electricity! Harnessing electricity is not natural unless you are an eel) and live naturally there. :)
Here is a perfect example of why I don't use all natural products-- Comfrey has recently been recognized as being potentially toxic and is banned in some countries. I would much rather ditch the comfrey and instead use its effective ingredient, allantoin, and so skip comfrey's toxic ingredients. It is less 'natural' but much safer and more effective, IMO. As someone with terribly sensitive skin and lots of allergies, I prefer my ingredients list short and effective, rather than all natural. I react just as badly to natural products as conventional ones.
I'm sticking to the middle like glue, of course ingredients should be processed exactly enough to work best in whatever different uses they may be applied to. So I hate what I call hard core hippie stuff (and always say no one ever buys it again). But part of what I don't like there is sad, like making a good essential oil seem like it's trying to attack you. I do love the natural stuff for what it really can do, like the way natural oils may lack the smoothness of mineral or synthetic (mineral isn't natural how, again?), but make up for it with fatty acids that can help with cell regeneration and softening, and other things like ellagic acid and phytoestrogens, etc. So, you know, use both.
I do believe firmly that most things work better closer to their most natural state, as much as practically possible, and that includes knowing that natural state can have downsides too (I do think banning comfrey is hysteria, but then people who know far more science than I do have been accusing the EU of that a lot lately - and it can be an irritant for a few people).
Anyway, I love this place, and guess I found an odd place for a first post - thanks for having an awesome resource for those of us with endless questions!
Just chipping in on the preservatives issue - there are more interesting 'natural' preservatives coming onto the market all the time now which have had the necessary testing undertaken to demonstrate their efficacy at halting microbial growth in water-based products. I personally prefer the 'natural' skincare and beauty industry because I do have a greater understanding of those particular ingredients, but that doesn't mean I want rampant microbial growth in my moisturiser either. :)
I think it's unfair to tarnish the entire natural beauty industry as not caring about preservatives because you can formulate some very clever products that will be based on predominantly, if not all, natural ingredients and still address all safety concerns. Furthermore, I live in the EU and under the EC Cosmetics Regulations (or the EU Cosmetics Directive) you need to have safety assessments undertaken for every product you intend to bring to market - be that mainly 'natural' or 'synthetic'. If a product contains a lot of water, you'll need to undertake further testing to demonstrate its stability. Just because something is 'natural' doesn't mean that it's formulated by some quack in a room chanting homeopathic slogans over a bottle. :D
I do believe the chemicals and damage to the environment are killing us, more so through diet (American, it's awful) and contributing to the rampant compromised immune health concerns and sensitivities - there's plenty of science to back that up, it's just such a political football.
So while my least favorite thing about parabens is that they're bad for the environment when they're rinsed back to it, I don't think it can hurt us (after chasing that down like crazy, since it's the first thing you run into, and I bounced around awhile before basically settling), as much as it helps as a preservative, or for most people (read, without compromised immune concerns) really at all.
That said, I actually love the hysteria or "green movement" in cosmetics as much as I paradoxically can hate it - because it shows increased awareness of environmental concerns and our personal connections to that, however sloppily humans manage things sometimes. So I think in the long run, on a sociocultural scale, it's doing good.
After working for years in the holistic health field, and hearing more people than I can count tell me my work was the first thing, usually after years of searching and lots of money spent, to actually relieve their pain, I might be considered radical in support of things natural. Which is silly, since the way shiatsu works is understandable - but of course they've invented ridiculous new forms of it, and I was lucky to have an instructor who helped out when they were short of doctors in WW2. It just also taught me to be the first person to spot the ubiquitous bad trends that are so much more common than the amazing good things I've seen.
Now starting to learn about cosmetics has taught me there's just no line, that it's more like a squiggly wild-shaped difference that blurs a lot. Also I love homeopathy, it's just incredibly hard, here at least, to find it well done, and worthless otc.
I've seen so many natural preservatives that are shown to work great, but sigh, they do cost so much more. Ideally I'd like to see us go in that direction, but doubt if industry will allow it very easily.
Parabens are natural! (at the least they can be) and biodegradable! Personally I am not willing to pay extra to get a product with a "special" preservative when there are perfectly good parabens for cheaper. (quote) 'natural' preservatives coming onto the market all the time' I think they are so stupid when we already have something that works and I think its a waste of time when they could be innovating and making things that dont suck and actually have evidence to work. Please dont attack me this is an opinion thread. kbai.
Biodegradable, really? I heard they kill fish, to be specific, and we are running out of fish in their natural environments. But maybe the source was just wrong, think it was at Truth in Aging, which is good, but not a science blog, or pretending to be or anything.
I know we've forced the big companies (including those considered "natural") to replace parabens with stuff that's likely not as good, or releases formaldehyde, etc., which may be fine, but would outweigh arguments against parabens. Mostly interesting for showing the power consumers have - now if we'd just apply that to sustainable energy instead!