Posted: 02/09/2007--25/11/2008 || Rate this Article: 3 || Views|| Sign In || Register ||Hello Guest
For the longest time, companies that make everything from after-shave to lip gloss have conducted safety testing on grooming products and shipped the cosmetics to stores to be sold to consumers, all with very little government involvement. And over the years, there have been few health or safety problems associated with the myriad grooming products and cosmetics on the market. Nevertheless, momentum has been building for greater oversight of the chemicals in everyday products, with the European Union and California taking the lead in imposing new rules for monitoring what is in the perfumes, creams, nail polish and hair sprays that are sold.
The California Safe Cosmetics Act, which took effect on Jan. 1, requires cosmetics companies to tell state health authorities if a product contains any chemical on several government lists covering possible cancer-causing agents or substances that may harm the reproductive system. The cosmetics industry is already taking steps to heighten self-monitoring, though representatives said the ingredients that the California law regulates pose no risk to human health when used topically in the small quantities found in some cosmetics.
Indeed, no rigorous large-scale clinical trials have been conducted that would indicate that cosmetics trigger major diseases in humans. But some small case reports published in medical journals suggest that a few substances used in cosmetics may affect hormone function in humans.
Scientists are particularly interested in a group of chemicals called phthalates used in some nail polishes, fragrances, medical devices and shower curtains some of which have had an effect on the reproductive systems of lab animals and can be absorbed and excreted by the human body.
Although the cosmetics industry considers the phthalates used in its products to be safe, some companies have voluntarily removed dibutyl phthalate, which California considers harmful to the reproductive system, from their nail polishes. But some environmentalists are pressing for a deeper analysis of the possible long-term effects of exposure to these chemicals. Some have formed a group called the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and natural beauty to publicize their concerns, using the Internet to highlight ingredients and manufacturers. Their efforts have raised the possibility that the cosmetics industry eventually could be subject to greater government regulation, with perhaps mandatory testing and product approval.
Since 1938, when Congress gave the Food and Drug Administration limited authority over beauty products, cosmetics has been a largely self-regulating industry. Prescription and over-the-counter drugs must submit safety data to the agency before it approves them for sale to the public. But cosmetics do not need agency approval because they are defined as topical products (like moisturizer or mascara) that alter neither the structure nor the function of the skin.
Beauty manufacturers are required to ensure the safety of their cosmetics before they go on sale, but the federal agency has never defined safety, according to an agency spokeswoman. That has left it to the beauty industry to settle on a definition, with the overall standard being that products are safe for use if they do not irritate the skin when applied as directed. By that standard, the industry has a long record of safety, with about six billion products manufactured annually worldwide, and only rare reports of problems like allergic reactions.
Print article ||Send to friend ||Publish this Article ||Author feedback || Add new Comment ||Article Comments
