10 Responses to “6 Toxic Ingredients You Should Avoid in Cosmetics”
-
Welcome to Ecouterre.com, your online guide
to the best ideas, innovations and emerging
trends in eco fashion, sustainable style,
organic beauty and ethical apparel.get the free Ecouterre newsletter
-
follow ecouterre on:
-
Ecouterre Featured Stories
-
-
Ecouterre on Facebook
-
Ecouterre Video
-
-
Hi! Thanks for posting this useful information. Just an FYI, I chose to “Like” this article so that it would post to my Facebook wall and I could share with friends. However, the thumbnail that is shown next to it isn’t the best choice. A set of breasts covered by a white bikini top is not really the type of pics I display, lol. Didn’t know if you were aware.
Always useful such articles, thanks! But how come you don’t mention aluminium, which is present in so many deodorants?!
I usually respect your articles and stance on ethical fashion and beauty. However, your wording in this article is very misleading and irresponsible. You say, “Asbestos-containing talc” can cause cancer, but the American Cancer Society website you link to says, ” Talc that has asbestos is generally accepted as being able to cause cancer. This type of talc is not used in modern consumer products. The evidence about asbestos-free talc, which is still widely used, is less clear.” Which has a very different meaning. The wording you have chosen implies that asbestos can contain talc and that talc is the toxic ingredient. In reality, the toxic ingredient is asbestos that can be (but is no longer) found in some talc. I think you should review this article with a fine-tooth comb and rewrite in a way that is more accurate and less fear-mongering.
Love this post! There are so many harmful ingredients out there, it is a jungle to navigate the labels. If you are worried about the chemical’s affects on your body then my advice in to choose all natural products.
Hi Elised; re-read our story. We do make the distinction between asbestos talc and asbestos-free talc (the latter isn’t entirely in the clear but we do note that evidence is fuzzier.)
Yes, but you imply that the talc is the toxic ingredient when the dangerous compound is actually the asbestos. It seems you did not understand my criticism. While it may not be your intention, you are promoting an irrational fear of talc itself. If you were truly concerned for your reader, you would make clear the ways which talc can actually be cancerous or dangerous: excessive inhalation (as experienced by talc miners) or careless use of talc on the genitals can lead to ovarian cancer.
There’s obviously a lot of different opinions regarding this subject. In 1993 the National Toxicology Program reportedly found that cosmetic grade talc, without any asbestos-like fibers, caused tumors in animal subjects. With that said, I don’t believe we are promoting an irrational fear of talc at all. It’s true that the evidence is fuzzy, but if talc in any way can lead to cancer, why would anyone want to take a risk using a product containing talc when there are so many other natural options.
I don’t feel any more afraid of the talc portion of the article by the way it was written, than any of the other chemicals mentioned. The article seemed pretty clear to me.
“The wording you have chosen implies that asbestos can contain talc and that talc is the toxic ingredient.”
Actually, their sentence is, technically, correct. Punctuation makes a difference, elised:
– asbestos containing talc = asbestos that contains talc
– asbestos-containing talc = talc that contains asbestos
Yes, I know, late comment.
Fear is good. I don’t want anything that is “expected to be toxic or harmful” on my face or near my eyes. Genitals schmenticals, elised, skin is the body’s largest organ.