The new potential law is causing a high level of confusion amongst the French cosmetic industry, generating disbelief from the opposition and satisfaction from some consumer advocacy groups, and natural and organic cosmetic makers.

The French Chemical Industry Reacts

The Union of Chemical Industries (UIC), a French association representing the French chemical industry, feels the law is a “disproportionate reaction… and excessive degree of precaution, completely disregarding the proper scientific processes and the careful logic applied by the European regulations.”

Opponents to the bill said that toxicity studies of endocrine disruptors “still rely on the definition of daily intake, while potential cocktail effects or the effect of small doses have been hardly or not studied.”

To further strengthen the opposition’s scientific and technical case, they endorsed evidence from INSERM and the ANSES of which neither have made their final risk assessment.  Moreover, REACH, the European Community Regulation on chemicals and their safe use, does not ban all use of endocrine disruptors.

In addition, the UIC is concerned about the ramifications of the law whereby they feel many of the applications which use phthalates, Parabens and derivatives of alkylphenols are not technically substitutable.

Support from NGOs and Organic Companies

The position of consumer advocacy groups, NGOs, and organic and natural cosmetic companies is obviously very different, especially regarding possible substitutes. They welcome the strong stance the French deputies have taken and would very much like to see the bill pass through the senate and become a law.

The vote and potential new law strengthens the manufacturing and branding strategies of organic and natural cosmetic manufacturers. The majority of the natural and organic cosmetic industry has already stopped using or has always refused to use Parabens and other endocrine disruptors in their products.

Yet research gaps do exist, and further studies are required for both sides to be fully supported by scientific evidence. For example, Parabens have been thoroughly tested for acute toxicity, and for this reason the proponents feel it has remained an acceptable preservative. However, very few studies show the consequences of the accumulation of small daily doses absorbed through the skin.

To Be Determined

Nothing is final and the bill faces many potential outcomes. If senators approve the bill as it is written it would become a law applicable upon publication in the Official Journal. However, it could also be rejected, or a vote could be enacted to amend the bill’s text.

Regardless of the outcome, it is a courageous step for French Deputies and hopefully it will reverberate to other countries and governing bodies. After all, it seems the French government is putting the consumers’ best interests first by eliminating ingredients with potential harmful effects. If the bill becomes a law, gone will be the day when big companies dictate regulation and safety standards despite of deep vested interests.

The average adult uses nine personal care products a day, with roughly 120 chemicals spread among them, many of which are incompletely tested for toxicity. That is why Natural Cosmetic News wants to provide you with a list of 15 toxic chemicals to avoid in personal care products. And be aware, just because a company claims to be natural does not mean there really are. Read the ingredients list, and use a discerning eye.

Natural Solutions magazine, in collaboration with Whole Foods Market, has created the following list of toxic ingredients that you don’t want in your personal care and cosmetic products.

1. Synthetic fragrances often contain phthalates (pronounced THAY-lates), synthetic chemicals commonly used to stabilize fragrances and make plastic more pliable. These endocrine disrupters mimic hormones and may alter genital development. Avoid products that list fragrance as an ingredient unless the label states that it’s derived from essentials oils,
or look for a phthalate-free label on the packaging.

2. Parabens, ubiquitous in skincare, preserve other ingredients and extend a product’s shelf life–but these antimicrobial chemicals also have hormone-disrupting effects.

3. Ureas, formally known as diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, or DMDM hydantoin and sodium hydroxymethyl-glycinate, are preservatives that have the potential to release formaldehyde in very small amounts and are a primary cause of contact dermatitis.

4. 1,4-dioxane, a chemical carcinogen, is created when ingredients are processed with petroleum-derived ethylene oxide. Common ethoxylated compounds include sodium laureth sulfate and polyethylene glycol (often listed as PEG). To avoid it, skip any product with the following ingredients: myreth, oleth, laureth, ceteareth (or any other -eth), PEG, polyethylene, polyethylene glycol, polyoxyethylene, or oxynol.

5. Petrochemicals are derived from crude oil. Petroleum-based ingredients such as petrolatum, mineral oil, and paraffin (derived from nonrenewable sources) form a barrier when applied to the skin that does not allow it to breathe and can clog pores.

6. MEA/DEA/TEA are “amines” (ammonia compounds) and can form harmful nitrosamines when they come in contact with nitrates. Used as foaming agents, synthetic stabilizers, and to adjust the pH of cosmetics, they can cause allergic reactions, eye irritation, and dryness of the hair and skin.

7. Sulfates, such as sodium lauryl and sodium laureth, are harsh detergents that give cleansers, soaps, and shampoos their latherability. Often derived from petroleum, sulfates can also come from coconut and other vegetable oils that can be contaminated with pesticides. Sulfates can cause eye irritation and skin rashes.

8. Chemical sunscreens, such as oxybenzone and octyl methoxycinnamate, have been shown to disrupt endocrine activity. Titanium dioxide and zinc oxide are safer alternatives.

9. Quats, such as benzalkonium chloride, steardimonium chloride, cetrimonium bromide, and cetrimonium chloride, give a positive charge to conditioners in order to prevent static. They are necessary for conditioners, but we have allowed only the mildest quats in our Beauty With a Conscience standard: guar hydroxypropyltrimonium chloride, hydroxypropyltrimonium oligosaccharide, and SugaQuats.

10. Antibacterial compounds, such as triclosan and chlorphenesin, do not break down in the environment and may contribute to bacterial resistance.

11. Synthetic polymers, such as sodium polyacrylate and carbomer, come from petroleum and give viscosity to skincare products. They are highly processed and their manufacture
creates toxic by-products.

12. Synthetic colors are made from coal tar. They contain heavy metal salts that may deposit toxins onto the skin, causing skin sensitivity and irritation. Animal studies have shown almost all of them to be carcinogenic. They will be labeled as FD&C or D&C, followed by a color and a number.

13. Chelators, such as disodium EDTA and tetrasodium EDTA, are used in personal care products to remove impurities from low-quality raw materials. They do not readily biode-
grade in the environment.

14. Nanos are a new technology with inconclusive but potentially hazardous study results. Research suggests that when tiny nano particles penetrate the skin, they may cause
cell damage.

15. Animal testing: A grim history of cruelty to animals lies behind many cosmetic ingredients. But scientists are developing new technologies to test cosmetics before a European Union ban on animal testing begins in March 2009.