| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Mon Sep 24, 2007 12:20 pm  |
Something to consider Next time you go shopping forLipstick......
This comes from someone Who works in the breast cancer unit at Mt. Sinai Hospital , in Toronto From: Dr. Nahid Neman
Recently a lipstick brand called "Red Earth"
Decreased their prices from $67 to $9.90.It contained lead.Lead is a chemical which causes cancer.
The lipstick brands that contain lead are:
CHRISTIAN DIOR
LANCÔME
CLINIQUE
Y.S.L
ESTEE LAUDER
SHISEIDO
RED EARTH (Lip Gloss)
CHANEL (Lip Conditioner)
MARKET AMERICA-MOTNES LIPSTICK.
The higher the lead content,The greater the chance of causing cancer.After doing a test on lipsticks,It was found that the Y.S.L. Lipstick
Contained the most amount of lead.
Watch out for those lipsticks Which are supposed to stay longer.If your lipstick stays longer, it isBecause of the higher content of lead.
Here is the test you can do yourself:
1. Put some lipstick on your hand.
2. Use a Gold ring to scratch on the lipstick.
3. If the lipstick colour changes to black,
Then you know the lipstick contains lead.
This information is being circulated at
Walter Reed Army Medical Centre Dioxin Carcinogens cause cancer,Especially breast cancer |
|
|
|
|
|
Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:05 pm |
Absolutely False!
This is "internet rumor" at its very worst. There is NO lead in ANY lipstick on the market today. Lead is not an ingredient in any lipstick and is NOT ALLOWED to be in any cosmetic product.
Please do not spread this insidious gossip any further....
John |
_________________
President and Chief Formulator for "Never Over The Hill Cosmetics" |
|
havana8
Moderator
 
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 3449
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:13 am |
Looks like there is a BIT of truth behind the emails. Just thought I would put it out there since this "myth" is so circulated on EDS.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/12/news/companies/lipstick_lead/index.htm?cnn=yes |
_________________
27~Texas~Oily~ fair~ breakout prone~ easily congested~Cysts caused by emotional stress~ Using Ayurvedic skin care and philosophy~ Dry brushing body and face~ On strict less is more routine~ We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars~ Oscar Wilde |
|
|
|
|
Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:33 am |
| Liv Luvs LS, I got this message via my email not too long ago. Someone told me it's not true. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Oct 12, 2007 11:58 am |
I saw the news item on this today, which noted that about 40% of the lipsticks tested had no detectable levels of lead at all, and that others had small levels of up to .6 parts per million.
Now, I agree that if it is possible to make lipstick without lead--and since nearly half of all lipstick is without lead, it is possible--then manufacturers ought to do so.
But let's keep things in a bit of perspective. The main health dangers associated with lead consumption are to children and to fetuses. The FDA permits candy--often consumed in large quantities by kids--to have up to .1 part per million of lead. That means that the FDA doesn't think that consuming lead-containing candy with .1 parts per million is a health hazard to the population most vulnerable to lead hazards. The very worst lipstick in the study had about 6 times the amount of lead allowable in candy. But keep in mind that candy is eaten by the handful. Has anyone ever eaten even as much as a whole tube at at time? Not to mention a dozen tubes at at time?? Of course not.
Bottom line for me. I might choose to avoid lipstick during pregnancy--not because it is truly a health hazard but because I would feel better eliminating even tiny possible risks during pregnancy. But there's simply no way to spin this as a meaningful health hazard for the general lipstick wearing public. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:11 pm |
That is quite an eye opener. Thanks for sharing that article with us vonstella. |
_________________
As I am getting older I realize my biggest beauty secret is smile more and frown less. Be aware that wrinkles do not make a person unattractive. Cynicism, unforgiveness, anger and jealousy are the real culprits. Sixty something  |
|
|
|
|
Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:54 pm |
FDA to Look at Claims of Leaded Lipstick
The Associated Press
Friday, October 12, 2007; 2:54 PM
WASHINGTON -- The Food and Drug Administration said Friday it would look into claims from an advocacy group that certain lipsticks contain potentially dangerous levels of lead.
Similar claims in the past have not been confirmed, the agency said.
The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics said that a third of the 33 red lipsticks examined by an independent lab contained a level of lead exceeding 0.1 parts per million _ which is the FDA's limit for lead in candy. The FDA does not set a limit for lead in lipstick.
The organization commissioning the lipstick study says its goal is to pressure companies to remove toxic chemicals from their products and replace them with safer alternatives. The lead tests were conducted by an independent laboratory last month on red lipsticks bought in Boston, San Francisco, Minneapolis and Hartford, Conn., the organization said.
The FDA said concerns about lead in lipstick have been raised occasionally in the print media and on the Internet.
"These concerns have not generally been supported by FDA's own analysis of products on the market. In the present case, we are looking into the specific details of the issues raised," said Stephanie Kwisnek, a spokeswoman at the FDA. "We will need to confirm the factual basis of these reports independently in order to determine what action, if any, may be needed to protect public health."
The trade association representing the cosmetic industry acknowledged "negligible" levels of lead in some lipsticks, but said it is not intentionally added.
"Consumers are exposed daily to lead when they eat, drink water and breathe the air," said John Bailey, an executive vice president at the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association. "The average amount of lead a woman would be exposed to when using cosmetics is 1,000 times less than the amount she would get from eating, breathing, and drinking water that meets Environmental Protection Agency drinking water standards." |
_________________
late 20s in nyc |
|
|
|
|
Sat Oct 13, 2007 11:01 am |
I had always thought that this was a myth but it looks like there might be a bit of truth to it. I'll be curious to read what the FDA says after doing more research on this.
I was disappointed that even Burt's Bees Merlot Lip Shimmer was on the list (not high on the list but high enough for me...) As I have kids who are always getting into my purse, I decided to throw mine away, just in case.
After doing a little research on this, I found this piece on someone's blog about a woman who just wrote to Burt's Bees that was rather interesting.
http://dadtalk.typepad.com/dadtalk/2007/10/heres-what-burt.html |
_________________
normal to dry skin, slightly sensitive, early 40s |
|
|
|
|
Sat Oct 13, 2007 12:56 pm |
I saw it on CTV.ca as well, Maybelline has 2 lipsticks I use that exceed the acceptable levels of lead...they will be in the garbage!
I am, however, shocked to see that even high end brands such as Christian Dior, contain that kind of unsafe level of lead...
I am in the process of switching to Jane Iredale anyway so this is a good excuse to throw out all the cheap stuff!  |
|
|
|
|
|
Sat Oct 13, 2007 7:03 pm |
| Now I'm confused and concerned. Should we test all our lipsticks with gold, or is there a definitive list of culprits? |
_________________
I’m 60, never smoked, eat healthy, fitness center + hiking, lots of water and nutrients, size 4 jeans , some lower facial sagging, but it’s improving with AALS, Clarisonic, Remergent, L2K, (including her new hand held devices), Ageless exercises, peels, OCM, etc. “This is my face; deal with it.” Annette Bening |
|
|
|
|
Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:49 am |
| Paula Begoun already addressed this rumour and it's false. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mon Apr 25, 2011 8:37 pm |
| looks like Avon isn't on this list...or Covergirl, Loreal |
_________________
What the Cheese and Biscuits???? |
|
|
|
|
Mon Apr 25, 2011 8:44 pm |
http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/Transparency/Basics/ucm194557.htm
Is there lead in lipstick?
Lead is an unintended contaminant or impurity that can be present at very low levels in some color additives and in other common ingredients, such as water, that are used to produce cosmetics. FDA recently conducted a test of the lead levels of specific lipsticks. Findings showed that the levels of lead found in these lipstick samples were extremely low, and FDA does not believe that any of the products tested pose a safety concern. The results of this test are available in the article, “Determination of total lead in lipstick,” published in the July-August 2009 issue of the Journal of Cosmetic Science.
FDA intends to conduct further testing of lipsticks marketed in the United States, and will assess whether any further FDA action is warranted based on its findings.
To learn more, see Lipstick and Lead: Questions and Answers. For information on other cosmetic products, ingredients, and potential contaminants, see Product and Ingredient Safety. |
_________________
I'LL SEE YOU ON THE DARKSIDE OF THE MOON.... |
|
|
|
|
Tue Apr 26, 2011 7:08 pm |
| I would also worry about the lead in cheap jewelery- a lot of the cheaper items contain lead and other bad chemicals. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Apr 26, 2011 7:33 pm |
| Not sure how many of you know, but a couple months back, there was a huge recall on those re-usable bags which happened to contained a lot of lead... one of which was the lululemon bags |
|
|
|
|
| Fri Apr 19, 2024 6:53 am |
If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.
Click Here to join our community.
If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site. |
|
 |
|
