addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

South Ashevilles Ayurveda Raw /Vegan/Veggie Folk! Message Board › Videos From A to Z Safety 1st

Videos From A to Z Safety 1st

Chef N.
Group Organizer
Arden, NC
Post #: 1,066
If you want to know about Neways!


Chef N.
Group Organizer
Arden, NC
Post #: 1,097

Toxic Burden: Women Put 515 Chemicals on Their Faces Every Day

Filed Under Women's Health

cosmetics(NaturalNews) A study published by Bionsen, a company in the United Kingdom that sells aluminum-free body products, found that the average woman applies 515 chemicals to her face a day. Makeup, perfumes, lotions, mascara, and other beauty products all contribute to the toxic brew that is causing health problems for many women.

The study revealed that the typical woman uses about 13 different beauty products a day. Most of these products contain at least 20 ingredients and additives, many of which can have a detrimental effect on the body and skin. Perfumes alone were found to contain up to 400 different ingredients.

Other products that were tested include lipstick, body lotions and mascara which contained an average of 30 ingredients each. Aside from aluminum, many of these products contain other harmful ingredients like synthetic dyes, fragrances, and parabens. When applied continually, the many beauty products that women use are exposing them to wide range of carcinogens.

The perpetual advent of new and innovative beauty products has led to a massive increase in product usage over the years. What was once a basic cleansing protocol has turned into a lifestyle of trying the latest and greatest products in an effort to maintain youthful beauty. As a result, women are exposed to more toxic carcinogens from beauty products than ever.

An Environmental Working Group (EWG) study from 2006 found that less than one percent of all cosmetic products are made from ingredients that have all undergone safety assessments. The great majority of products contain known carcinogens, reproductive toxins and various other harmful chemicals that cause serious diseases like cancer.

The EWG study found that the average person uses up to 25 personal care products per day. Among these, about 200 different chemicals will have been added to scent, preserve, synthesize and stabilize them for consumption. Many of these ingredients will end up causing hormonal disruption and immune dysfunction. In younger people, developmental problems are likely to result from excessive product use.

Makeup usage among younger girls has also increased. About 90 percent of 14-year-old girls now use makeup, according to a research study conducted by Mintel Internation Group in 2004. Sixty-three percent of girls as young as seven are now using lipstick, eyeliner, eye shadow and mascara.

As consumers are becoming more aware of many beauty product ingredients and the harm they are causing, product manufacturers are beginning to remove many of them from their formulations. Those concerned would do best to purchase only products that have minimal or no toxic ingredients. Greatly reducing one’s cosmetic arsenal is the next best option.

Sources for this story include: http://www.telegraph....­­

Chef N.
Group Organizer
Arden, NC
Post #: 1,098

OCA Files Legal Complaint with USDA Re: Organic Body Care and Cosmetics Labeling Fraud

Filed Under Organic

organic-prductsThe Organic Consumers Association (OCA), along with certified organic personal care brands Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, Intelligent Nutrients, and Organic Essence, today filed a complaint with the USDA National Organic Program (NOP), requesting an investigation into the widespread and blatantly deceptive labeling practices of leading “Organic” personal care brands, in violation of USDA NOP regulations. The complaint, filed collectively on behalf of 50 million consumers of organic products, argues that products such as liquid soaps, body washes, facial cleansers, shampoos, conditioners, moisturizing lotions, lip balms, make-up and other cosmetic products produced by twelve different corporations have been advertised, labeled and marketed as “Organic” or “Organics” when, in fact, the products are not “Organic” as understood by reasonable consumers.

“Unfortunately, the hands-off regulatory approach by the USDA’s National Organic Program during the Bush years failed to protect consumers from deceptive labeling in the personal care marketplace,” said Ronnie Cummins, Executive Director of the Organic Consumers Association. While the USDA enforces strict standards for the labeling of organic food, the NOP has not enforced the organic regulations in regards to personal care. “Given the increased resources and staffing at the National Organic Program under Obama, we’re optimistic that the situation will be rectified before too much more damage is done,” added Cummins.

“Consumers who pay a premium for high-end organic products expect the main cleansing and moisturizing ingredients of a product labeled ‘Organic’ to be made from certified organic agricultural material produced on organic farms, and not from petrochemicals or pesticide and herbicide-intensive conventional farming,” explains Horst Rechelbacher, founder of Intelligent Nutrients (and founder and previous owner of Aveda Corp).

The corporations named in the complaint are The Hain Celestial Group, Inc.; Kiss My Face Corporation; YSL Beaute, Inc. (”YSL”); Giovanni Cosmetics, Inc. (”Giovanni”); Cosway Company, Inc. (”Cosway”); Country Life, LLC (”Country Life”); Szep Elet LLC (makers of Ilike Organic Skin Care); Eminence Organic Skin Care, Inc.; Physicians’ Formula Holdings, Inc. (makers of Organic Wear); Surya Nature, Inc.; Organic Bath Company, Freeman Beauty Division of pH Beauty Labs, Inc. (makers of Freeman Goodstuff Organics).

David Bronner, President of Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, stated, “Yesterday we re-filed our lawsuit in federal court against culprit companies under the Lanham Act for false advertising. One way or another, the era of ripping off organic consumers in personal care will soon come to an end.”

Ellery West, founder and owner of Organic Essence adds, “The predatory marketing practices of companies that take advantage of consumer trust in the organic label are cheating not only organic consumers but also small certified companies like ourselves.”

On November 5, 2009, the USDA National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) formally recommended that the National Organic Program regulate personal care to ensure that any use of the word “organic” on a personal care product is backed up by third-party certification to USDA organic standards. Immediately following the recommendation, the OCA launched a consumer boycott of the major “Organic” cheater brands, and has produced a list of USDA certified organic brands that are true to their claims and are safe for organic consumers.

Chef N.
Group Organizer
Arden, NC
Post #: 1,107
Chemical Exposure Linked to Attention Deficit Disorder in Children

Filed Under Children's Health, Emerging Diseases

Child with learning difficultiesChildren exposed in the womb to chemicals in cosmetics and fragrances are more likely to develop behavioral problems commonly found in children with attention deficit disorders, according to a study of New York City school-age children published Thursday.

Scientists at Mount Sinai School of Medicine reported that mothers who had high levels of phthalates during their pregnancies were more likely to have children with poorer scores in the areas of attention, aggression and conduct.

Children were 2.5 times more likely to have attention problems that were “clinically significant” if their mothers were among those highest exposed to phthalates, the study found. The types of behavior that increased are found in children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and other so-called disruptive behavior disorders.

“More phthalates equaled more behavioral problems,” Stephanie Engel, a Mount Sinai associate professor of preventive medicine and lead author of the study, said in an interview Thursday. “For every increase of exposure, we saw an increase in frequency and severity of the symptoms.”

The connection was only detected for the types of phthalates used in perfumes, shampoos, nail polishes, lotions, deodorants, hair sprays and other personal care products. No behavioral effects were found for the phthalates used in vinyl toys and other soft plastics.

A federal law that went into effect a year ago bans phthalates in children’s vinyl toys and other products. But there are no U.S. restrictions on phthalates in cosmetics and other personal care items. They are, however, banned in cosmetics sold in Europe. Manufacturers of the products maintain that the chemicals are safe after being widely used for about 50 years.

Scientists said the study has uncovered a new problem that could be related to phthalates - effects on a child’s developing brain. Until now, most research has focused on their potential to block male hormones and feminize boys or contribute to male reproductive problems.

“Clearly environmental toxicants play a role in child neurodevelopment, and phthalates, in particular, have been understudied in this area,” Engel said.

Dr. Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician at Mount Sinai and director of the Children’s Environmental Health Center, called it “a new area of concern” about phthalates.

“Clearly it needs to be replicated, as does any study that breaks new ground, but the study itself is very well done and very credible,” he said.

The research involved 188 children between the ages of 4 and 9 who were born between 1998 and 2002, according to the study published online in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives. Most were from East Harlem or the Upper East Side of Manhattan, and three-quarters of them were low-income.

The children’s scores were based on the answers that their mothers provided to standardized questions commonly used by psychiatrists and other clinicians to help diagnose attention deficit disorders. The mothers responded to 130 questions designed to detect problematic behaviors on a 4-point scale ranging from “never” to “almost always” and to 86 questions on another test designed to measure cognitive function, such as memory.

Some effects were stronger in boys than girls, but the associations to the chemicals were still considered significant in the girls, Engel said.

The researchers did not use doctors or other clinicians to evaluate the children. Instead, the findings were based on the mothers’ evaluations.

“A parent’s report about a child’s behavior is certainly subjective,” Engel said. But she added that mothers have been found to be very accurate in assessing poor conduct, aggression and attention problems.

Chef N.
Group Organizer
Arden, NC
Post #: 1,108
The mothers were tested for phthalates during pregnancy, the most sensitive time for a child’s brain development. In a study published last year, Korean researchers linked childhood exposure to phthalates to ADHD.

Shanna Swan, a University of Rochester epidemiologist whose research linked phthalates with feminized genitalia in baby boys, called phthalates a “complicated picture” for scientists to unravel because there are many different compounds and so many potential effects to look for. But she said she found it “very interesting” that Engel and her team found “so many negative associations” for the phthalates with low molecular weights – the ones used in personal care products.

Swan was surprised that most of the effects were correlated with a phthalate metabolite, called MMP, that is found in the lowest concentrations in people.

“It is not a metabolite usually thought of as toxic,” said Swan, director of the Center for Reproductive Epidemiology at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry.

The researchers said they do not know how prenatal exposure to phthalates may lead to behavioral problems. But they theorize that it may be because the chemicals disrupt thyroid hormones, which are critical to an infant’s brain development.

In April, the Mount Sinai team reported effects in the same group of children when they were newborns. The girls - but not the boys - with high exposure to phthalates had differences in alertness and orientation, two indicators of neurodevelopmental effects in infants, according to that study published in the journal Neurotoxicology.

The new study raises the question of whether phthalates and other hormone-disrupting chemicals could be playing a role in the increasing rate of attention deficit disorders diagnosed in children. Phthalates have been around for about 50 years, and it is unknown whether people’s exposure has increased.

“The percentage of kids diagnosed with behavioral problems has increased over time and it’s not clear why,” Engel said. “It would be a stretch to attribute it all to endocrine disruptors. There are probably multiple different causes.”

Nearly every human tested has traces of phthalates in his or her body, and women are most highly exposed.

“There is sufficient evidence to be concerned about phthalates, and it’s prudent to reduce exposure as much as possible,” Engel said. “But they are so ubiquitous right now it’s hard to eliminate exposure without regulatory action.”

Engel said people should “press legislators” to restrict phthalates in adult, as well as children’s, personal care products.

Fetuses are “uniquely vulnerable, particularly for endocrine disruptors,” she said. “But we are very concerned about the problem of post-natal exposure as well. The kids continue to be exposed as they grow up.”

Consumers who want to learn more about the ingredients of their brands of cosmetics can use a database compiled by the Environmental Working Group at http://www.cosmeticsd...­. However, manufacturers don’t always list phthalates on their labels.

Phthalates are solvents that are often used in cosmetics because they help retain fragrances and help lotions penetrate the skin. Many nail polish manufacturers have already eliminated phthalates, which had been commonly used to make the polish flexible and durable.

The principal author of the study was Mary Wolff, director of Mount Sinai’s Center for Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research. The team also included two researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and a Cornell University scientist.

This article originally ran at Environmental Health News, a news source published by Environmental Health Sciences, a nonprofit media company.

Chef N.
Group Organizer
Arden, NC
Post #: 1,158
COSMETIC ALERT! Why You Should Dump These Cosmetics Today...


One of Neways Scientific Board Members is Dr. Samuel Epstein!
Check out my site
Powered by mvnForum

Our Sponsors

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy