Industry Press Conference Sets the Record Straight

July 22nd, 2010 at 7:16 am by Stacy Malkan

Let’s jump right to the best part. Of all the strange things I heard yesterday from the cosmetics industry, this  quote from doctor-for-hire Richard Adamson was most bizarre. “We humans are all chemicals put together and formatted in a very sophisticated manner by our maker and by evolution.”

Yes he really said that, at a press conference. What does he mean? Maybe he’s trying to say that only God can give you cancer? He certainly doesn’t think cosmetics will, according to his testimony at yesterday’s hastily organized press event put on by the Personal Care Products Council (to which they neglected to invite certain top reporters who are following the story — guys, come on.)

The event was billed as “setting the record straight” about the Story of Cosmetics and the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010. (Click here for MP3 audio of the press conference put on earlier in the day by bill sponsors Rep. Jan Schakowsky and Rep. Edward Markey, actress Fran Drescher, EWG and Breast Cancer Fund.)

Key points made at the industry conference: They are really eager to get to work with Reps. Markey and Schakowsky and already have a meeting scheduled on the Hill. (John Bailey and lobbyist John Hurson had to leave midway through the event for a meeting with bill sponsors, but weirdly, when a reporter asked them specifically who they were meeting with, they wouldn’t say and told the reporter to “look at the bill.”)

Bottom line, they don’t like this bill: it will dump an unnecessary amount of data on FDA, they couldn’t deal with it, they’d have to build a new building to put all the researchers. Safety standard would ban a glass of water. Ridiculous to require everyone in supply chain to register with FDA. Would make it virtually impossible to put products on market. Removing trade secrets is huge problem. Bill is not scientifically responsible.

They don’t like the movie either. “They’re really mad about the movie,” says my source. According to a statement read by press person Kathleen Dezio (former beverage industry apologist for benzene in soda), the film is a “harsh unscientific shockumantary that bears no resemblance to the real story of cosmetics. It is repugnant and incredibly offensive to suggest that cosmetic companies would manufacture, and FDA would allow them to market, products that are dangerous or contain toxins that cause cancer or any other disease.”

They took special exception to the “cheap attack” in the video about the industry’s philanthropy efforts to raise money for cancer. “In fact, through its Look Good. Feel Better program, the industry has helped 700,000 women in the U.S. overcome the appearance-related side effects of cancer treatment,” Dezio said.

“The ‘real’ story of cosmetics is that of an industry with a proven, lengthy track record of responsibility and safety and a strong commitment to making the lives of consumers better.”

So there.

NEW: Great NYT blog by David Herzenhorn The Nanny and the Senators

Beauty Industry’s Top 5 Excuses for Toxic Products

July 21st, 2010 at 11:13 am by Stacy Malkan

Today I finally got to debate with John Bailey, former head of FDA office of cosmetics and current cosmetics industry spokesman, in a fantastic hour on Democracy Now! with Amy Goodman. Actress Fran Drescher and EWG’s Jane Houlihan joined the fun to help promote Annie Leonard’s rocking new film the Story of Cosmetics.

And right now, I am listening to Rep. Jan Schakowsky tell reporters about the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 – a landmark bill that is the first major effort in over 70 years to overhaul cosmetics regulations.

What a day! This is the culmination of nearly a decade of work by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and the growing concerns in the mainstream scientific community about the cancer risk of the thousands of unregulated chemicals, such as those we put on our bodies every day.

So what is the beauty industry’s response to the growing concerns? It’s worth remembering they have been gearing up for years — hiring lobbyists and launching PR campaigns – for this legislative fight. Also see chapters 8 and 9 of my book for more lobbying tricks from the chemical/cosmetics industries and details about my undercover trip to an industry conference in 2006 when John Bailey and the companies joked about how “user friendly” he was to industry during his 30-year tenure at FDA — and their plans to ward off regulations.

Here’s a look back at some of the greatest hits of lame industry arguments about why it’s OK to keep making toxic products.

1. Toxic chemicals are just like salt.

According to John Bailey, hazardous chemicals can be compared to salt in cooking – small amounts are fine. “A little salt on your peas or tomatoes can be good. But a lot of salt can have adverse health effects on your blood pressure, and too much can be fatal,” Bailey explained to the New York Times.

Bailey made the comment after reports first broke that popular children’s bath products were contaminated with 1,4 dioxane, a petrochemical listed as “known to cause cancer” by the state of California.

Cancer-causing chemicals on the baby’s head are like salt on your peas? Um, no. Industrial chemicals derived from oil byproducts, mixed together with other toxic substances (like say, the formaldehyde that is also found in many kids’ bath products) are nothing at all like salt. There’s nothing here that’s “good for you.” There’s no reason on Earth for baby shampoos to contain carcinogens.

2. Toxic chemicals in cosmetics are like caged tigers.

This pearl of wisdom comes from Proctor & Gamble toxicologist Tim Long, as quoted in Mark Schapiro’s excellent book, “Exposed: The Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Products and What’s at Stake for American Power.

“Imagine you encounter a tiger in the wild, and then encounter another tiger behind its protective enclosure in a zoo,” Long said. The wild tiger is inherently dangerous, but a tiger behind bars is not dangerous at all. “It’s the same thing in products. There may be inherent toxicity to a particular chemical, but if you use it under certain conditions the exposure is minimal and they present no risk.”

This unsettling parable takes us to the heart of the industry’s reasoning: the little bit of toxic chemicals in this product is OK as long as the product is used as directed, and if we pretend that people aren’t being exposed to that same nasty chemical from a dozen other products, and if that exposed person happens to be just like the 200 pound male who is the model for most chemical risk assessments, if that chemical has even been studied at all.

Thanks, but I’d rather not have flesh-eating tigers in cages all over my bathroom sink.

3. Parabens aren’t as potent as birth control pills.

“The potency of parabens in products such as deodorants is a million times lower than in the birth control pill and that is considered safe,” Dr. Christopher Flower of the industry trade association told the Daily Mail.

Comparing a widely used cosmetic ingredient to a sterilizing pharmaceutical drug doesn’t seem like the smartest angle. But then, it is true that parabens – the most commonly used preservative in beauty products – can mimic estrogen in the body, and therefore have the potential to interfere with normal bodily functions such as, say, breast development or reproductive capacity.

The amount of parabens in any one product may be low – or maybe not; there’s no way to know since companies don’t have to disclose ingredient concentrations. And unfortunately, since most products on the market contain parabens, most consumers are being dosed with these hormone-disrupting chemicals dozens of times a day, every day, from babyhood throughout their lives.

4. Lead is only a problem for kids.

When reports broke that popular lipsticks are contaminated with lead, a few industry types made the point that lead (a known neurotoxin) is a health concern mostly only for kids, and kids don’t wear lipstick. Yes they do (see this cute little girl in our ad). But more importantly, I’d like to ask these guys: Where do you think kids come from?

They come from the bodies of women, millions of whom wear lipstick every day. If we want to protect children from toxic substances, we need to protect women — all women who are, may be or may one day want to become pregnant.  Lead builds up in the body and stays in the body for a long time, so lead smeared on the lips several times a day (as the package instructs) is not a good thing.

You’d think companies that claim to have the power to erase years from our lives could figure out how to make lipstick without lead.

5. The FDA is protecting consumers, so there’s no need to worry.

“Certainly within the cosmetics law, there are sufficient checks and balances that will ensure that products and their ingredients are safe,” John Bailey from the trade association told National Public Radio.

Sufficient checks and balances? Where? FDA has no authority to require companies to safety test their ingredients and no power to require recalls of unsafe products, according to the agency’s own website. Cosmetics are the least regulated products at FDA. Instead of government oversight, cosmetics companies get to make the rules themselves.

Do we really want these guys deciding which chemicals are safe to put on their bodies? That’s the system we currently have — the industry gets to decide for itself what’s safe. We have the opportunity to change that right now. Please call your Congressional representative today and urge them to co-sponsor and support the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010. As Rep. Ed Markey said, there is a real chance to pass this legislation due to the massive broad-based from all corners. Please join us! www.safecosmetics.org

Making of The Story of Cosmetics with Annie Leonard

July 19th, 2010 at 12:38 pm by Stacy Malkan

Monday, July 19, 2010 — People have been asking me how the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics was so fortunate to hook up with Annie Leonard to create the upcoming film, “The Story of Cosmetics.” It was luck mixed with a bit of divine intervention.  I’m lucky enough to live in Berkeley in the first place  (where Annie herself convinced me to move years ago) and was at a party where I heard about early plans to create a series of short films based on “The Story of Stuff” — Annie’s viral video that has been viewed more than 12 million times and inspired front-page stories in New York Times, LA Times, and coverage on Colbert and Good Morning America.

The SOS team was looking to work with established campaigns to delve further into key issues raised in the original film, and they thought the cosmetics story would be an ideal way to illustrate the problem of  “toxics in, toxics out” — i.e., when you put toxic chemicals into products like, say,  baby shampoo, you end up with toxic baby shampoo … and toxic babies (“duh,” as Annie says in the film).

From there, the fundraising prowess of SOS executive director Michael O’Heaney and CSC coordinator Lisa Archer got the project off the ground, and the creative genius of Annie, Jonah Sachs and Louis Fox (masterminds of the viral hits the Meatrix and Store Wars) gave it flight. Watching these three work together on filming of Story of Cosmetics was truly a highlight of my career. A huge thanks also to Erica Priggen, Allison Cook, Heidi Quante and the rest of the staff at Free Range Studios and Story of Stuff, and to the whole team at Campaign for Safe Cosmetics: Lisa, Mia, Jane, Janet, Stephenie, Shannon, Marisa, Cindy, Alex, Leeann, Bill, Nancy, Ian, Jamie, Genevieve and to ALL of you who work with us. What a priviledge to work with such a talented and dedicated group of people!

We are all proud to present to you the Story of Cosmetics (coming July 21) and ask you to blog, Facebook, tweet it out to everyone you know. And please join us in giving the beauty industry a makeover!

NEW: See Parents magazine August issue for major story about cosmetics, chemicals and your health.

For information about booking interviews or speaking engagements with Stacy Malkan

July 18th, 2010 at 9:42 am by Stacy Malkan

Stacy Malkan is co-founder of the national Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and author of the award-winning book, “Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry.” She is a leading expert on toxic chemicals in beauty products, chemical regulatory policies, and how to find safe green alternatives. Stacy is frequently interviewed by major media including New York Times, Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle and USA Today. Television appearances include Good Morning America, ABC 7 Chicago and ABC’s View from the Bay. Stacy is a former journalist and she published an independent newspaper in the Colorado Rockies from 1994-2000. She currently lives in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Limited speaking engagements available Fall 2010 and Spring 2011. To book speaking gigs with Stacy contact: Jodi Solomon’s Speaker’s Bureau.

For press interviews: contact Stacy here.

Reviewer comments

“The uplifting story of activism by women and teens who have been fighting for safe cosmetics against a billion-dollar industry.” — Wall Street Journal

“An encouraging and empowering story!”LA Times blog

“Read this book! It is educational, unsettling, and inspiring. Personally, I have made several changes in the products I use and the quantity.” Kaffeine Buzz

“Check out this book!” EcoSmart Consumer

“A must read for anyone who uses any type of cosmetic/beauty/personal care product.” Threadbanger

“This is an outside-the-box book that reads like a captivating novel and lands much to close for comfort… It is a must-read.” Alive Magazine, April 2008.

“Great Reads of Winter 2008!” MS magazine

Articles by Stacy Malkan

Petroleum in Perfume, Huffington Post

Pretty In Pink? Companies market make-up to girls as young as 3, and the health implications are huge, Natural Solutions magazine

Roses are Red, Lipstick (Still) has Lead, Alternet

Panic in the Organic Aisle, Conscious Choice magazine

Toxins to be Pulled from Cosmetics, Yes Magazine

Petroleum in Perfume

May 17th, 2010 at 7:21 pm by Stacy Malkan

May 17, 2010 – Something doesn’t smell right, and not just in the Gulf. The destruction of life caused by the oil spill has everyone’s attention; what many people don’t realize is that the toxic effects of oil addiction are hitting much closer to home …

You may notice it in the funny, unpleasant feeling you get when standing in an enclosed space with somebody who is wearing too much perfume. If so, you’re not alone…

Read more on my Huffington Post blog. Comment on the blog at Huff Post, or any of the postings here, and be entered to win a free copy of my book “Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry”

Please Make the AXE Stench Go Away!

May 12th, 2010 at 5:29 pm by Stacy Malkan

May 12, 2010 – The things I do for the cause. Today, during a TV interview about the new “Not So Sexy” fragrance report, the reporter asked me to spray some perfume in the air for the cameras. Anything for the b-roll!

Going for maximum visuals, I reached for the super propellant body spray. Old Spice was jammed by a safety lock, so, next thing I know, I’m shaking up the swarthy black-and-blue can of Axe deodorant and blasting a jet stream of chemicals into my living room.

Big mistake! The air was suddenly noxious, my eyes watered. “I can’t even smell it,” the reporter said. “Just wait,” I replied. “The cloud is coming your way.” A moment later she was making an uncomfortable face.

Now, three hours later, the potent scent still lingers on my clothes and skin (and I didn’t even spray the stuff on my body!) — and I’m wondering if there’s any connection to the scratchy throat thing I have going on.

OK, yes, I have a bias: I’m sensitive to fragrances. And I’m not alone: a significant percentage of the population reports adverse reactions to fragrance exposure.  

While it’s nice to have one, I don’t need a peer-reviewed study to tell me that. Most people I’ve talked to about the new fragrance report – from scientists to reporters – have mentioned they get weird reactions to fragrance, too.

If I were a cosmetic industry exec today, I’d be thinking about how to fix that problem. I’d be gathering together my best heads to say, hey, let’s figure out how to make perfumes that don’t contain 10 allergens, a bunch of estrogen mimics, and a whole lot of petrochemicals that haven’t been assessed for safety (these are the average findings for the tested fragrances; Axe actually fared somewhat better – see results).

Yes I’d do that instead of sending out weird press releases with air quotes, or telling reporters that consumers wouldn’t be able to understand labels that included fragrance chemicals.

It’s tempting to air vent some Axe into their next crisis management PR meeting, and see how that goes over. Coughing fit anyone? Or maybe just some hot girls falling at their feet.


Teens: We Love You Even More Without Lucious Lips

May 11th, 2010 at 6:40 pm by Stacy Malkan

Cupcake body lotion and luscious berry lip gloss: just think of them as the gateway drugs for the future self-conscious product addicts of America. Many of us have been through these phases.  The difference is, it’s all happening so much sooner now. As New York Times just reported, cosmetic use is rising sharply among tweens ages 8-12.

This is disturbing in more ways than one. First, as I noted in the Times piece, young people are facing relentless cultural pressure to look older and grow up sooner. (Seriously, check out the former and current casts of 90210 to see how times have changed.)

Not only is the beauty industry (and the popular culture it spawns) getting inside kids’ heads, but – insidiously — inside their bodies as well. A recent study of teenage girls found their urine contained an average of 13 hormone-disrupting cosmetic chemicals, including phthalates, triclosan, musk chemicals and parabens. Not exactly the way nature intended.

Is this a problem? The President’s Cancer Panel thinks so. Just last week, the panel released a stunning report warning that cancer cases caused by unregulated chemicals have been vastly under-reported. The panel urged immediate action, and recommended that pregnant women, small children, and couples planning families avoid hormone-disrupting chemicals due to cancer risk.

Let’s add teenagers — who are piling on more stinky body sprays than ever — to the list. Those hormones are racing for a reason, and teenagers’ developing bodies are uniquely vulnerable to toxic exposures.

So, no thanks, cupcake body lotion. Let’s keep our young people young – and unpolluted with toxic cosmetic chemicals – for as long as possible.

Stacy Malkan, 5/12/10

BREAKING NEWS: See the new Campaign for Safe Cosmetics report about hidden toxic chemicals in celebrity fragrances, men’s colognes and teen body sprays: www.safecosmetics.org/notsosexy.

Best of Green 2010 and more campaign news

April 9th, 2010 at 11:16 am by Stacy Malkan

Proud to be a Treehugger! Congratulations to EWG’s Skin Deep and my book “Not Just a Pretty Face” for winning Best of Green 2010 Awards from Treehugger.com. They had this to say about my book: “The page-turner offers a gripping account of the five-year campaign by environmental and health groups to pressure the United States’ cosmetics industry to use safer ingredients in products we use every day.”

Pesticides in hand soap? Gross, and toxic: This week, the FDA raised concerns about the health effects of triclosan, an anti-bacterial chemical used in an alarming number of personal care products (even though FDA says plain old soap and water is just as effective). The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is now petitioning Walmart to get triclosan off its shelves.

UPDATE: U.S. Congressman Ed Markey is now calling on major companies to get rid of triclosan.

Giving Procter & Gamble a Makeover: The campaign to clean up P&G products continues with my new crazy sexy blog post. Also see the excellent comment from a P&G employee on my NJPF blog. I’d love to hear your thoughts: can corporations full of good people change the world? Or do we need to free the economy of the corporations and turn it back to the good people?

UPDATE: Oh, P&G, when will you get it. I was sad to see your new “future friendly” Earth Day pledge, which gets my vote for Queen of the Greenwash efforts. We should all save water and energy by buying P&G products???

Join us for more fun on the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics Facebook page and on Twitter @safecosmetics and @nontoxicissexy

- Stacy Malkan, 4/9/10

Step Right Up to the Feminist Carnival

April 2nd, 2010 at 11:29 am by Stacy Malkan

Thanks to Virginia for posting the Feminist Blog Carnival Beauty Edition — and for including my Love Letter to Drew Barrymore and my colleague Jamie Silberberger’s piece about protecting nail salon workers from the toxic trio.

It’s an honor to be in the company of so many sheroes! I will be spending some quality time at the feminist carnival this week reading all about body image after breast cancer, the ridiculous beauty standards of video games, Kotex anti-ads and Jessica Simpson’s new beauty reality show.

We’ve got a lot of work to do ladies!

Here is another great meta blog site: Feminist Blogs: Independent alternatives to the malestream media. And since we’re on the topic, my favorite quote from my favorite feminist book and inspiration, the Beauty Myth by Naomi Wolf:

“After the success of the women’s movement’s second wave, the beauty myth was perfected to checkmate power at every level in individual women’s lives … If we are to free ourselves from the dead weight that has once again been made out of femaleness, it is not ballots or lobbyists or placards that women will need first; it is a new way to see.”

Stacy Malkan – 4/2/10

Dear Drew Barrymore: Please Support Safe Products

March 23rd, 2010 at 1:30 pm by Stacy Malkan

You are beautiful, successful and on top of your game. You are a celebrated actress, a respected producer, and will soon make your directorial debut. How encouraging that a woman such as yourself, who hails from an iconic Hollywood family, has emerged as a woman of power in the film business for other young women to emulate.

Your career has no doubt been supported by a team of trusted advisors who help guide you to make the best decisions. How puzzling and disturbing, then, that they have apparently advised you to support a line of products made with ingredients linked to cancer, reproductive problems and neurodevelopmental defects.

Even more troubling: You agreed to front the Cover Girl “Dare to Be Beautiful” ad campaign, a rather patronizing new marketing blitz that “defends beauty’s honor,” presumably from sour feminists and environmentalists, like us.

“Some people have tried to make beauty an ugly word. They say it’s cold, false, intimidating. We say: stand up to that! Stand up for beauty that makes you LAUGH, that makes you THINK, that makes you get out there and create some beauty of your own!” cries the Cover Girl “Declaration Cloud.” (via Virginia’s awesome beauty-schooled blog.)

How about: Stand up for beauty that ISN’T TOXIC to our bodies and our souls; for beauty that is HONEST about what people really look like, and doesn’t contain chemicals that can damage our health and our children.

Drew, you look great in that lipstick, but tests conducted by Campaign for Safe Cosmetics found Cover Girl lipsticks to be contaminated with lead, a substance that is highly toxic to the brain, builds up in the body over time, and can pass through the placenta to a developing child.

Your eyes do look fab in those eye shadows (and without them), so it’s unfortunate that some Cover Girl make-ups contain multiple carcinogens, allergens and hormone disruptors, and rack up high toxicity scores on Skin Deep.

The fact is, Cover Girl by Procter & Gamble can do a lot better to support the true beauty they claim to defend.

Please Drew, think about the power you have to insist that Cover Girl and other cosmetics companies stop using toxic chemicals. Being truly “Beautiful” means having integrity and leadership to stand up to companies that make products that are not as safe as they could be.

There are plenty of make-up manufacturers who have taken great care to formulate products that are safe. We’d love to see you use your celebrity to promote cosmetics that are healthy and free of toxic chemicals – and then you are really going to ROCK it.

Stacy Malkan, 3/23/10