Do you have Lead in your Lipstick
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » EDS Lounge

free skin care · Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:53 pm

It was on the news tonight and I just had to get a link to the story. I noticed that the colours mentioned most were the red which are so popular now.

http://www.safecosmetics.org/your_health/poisonkiss.cfm

Quote:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 11, 2007
CONTACT:
Cindy Luppi, 617-338-8131, ext. 208, cluppi@cleanwater.org; Stacy Malkan, 202-321-6963, smalkan@hcwh.org, Marisa Walker, 415-346-8223, ext. 17, marisa@breastcancerfund.org

NEW PRODUCT TESTS FIND LEAD IN LIPSTICK

Top brands L’Oreal, Cover Girl and Christian Dior test positive for lead

Boston – Toys made in China aren’t the only products laced with dangerous heavy metals: lipstick manufactured in the United States and used daily by millions of American women also contains surprisingly high levels of lead, according to new product tests released today by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics. The lead tests were conducted by an independent laboratory over the month of September on red lipsticks bought in Boston, Hartford, Conn., San Francisco and Minneapolis. Top findings include:

More than half of 33 brand-name lipsticks tested (61 percent) contained detectable levels of lead, with levels ranging from 0.03 to 0.65 parts per million (ppm). None of these lipsticks listed lead as an ingredient.

One-third of the tested lipsticks exceeded the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s 0.1 ppm limit for lead in candy – a standard established to protect children from directly ingesting lead. Lipstick products, like candy, are directly ingested into the body. Nevertheless, the FDA has not set a limit for lead in lipstick, which fits with the disturbing absence of FDA regulatory oversight and enforcement capacity for the $50 billion personal care products industry.

The good news is that the tests show it is possible to make lipstick without lead: 39 percent of lipsticks tested had no detectable levels of lead, and cost doesn’t seem to be a factor. Some less expensive brands such as Revlon ($7.49) had no detectable levels of lead, while the more expensive Dior Addict brand ($24.50) had higher levels than some other brands.

Among the top brands testing positive for lead were:
-L’Oreal Colour Riche “True Red” – 0.65 ppm
-L’Oreal Colour Riche “Classic Wine” – 0.58 ppm
-Cover Girl Incredifull Lipcolor “Maximum Red” – 0.56 ppm
-Dior Addict “Positive Red” – 0.21 ppm

Lead is a proven neurotoxin that can cause learning, language and behavioral problems such as lowered IQ, reduced school performance and increased aggression. Pregnant women and young children are particularly vulnerable to lead exposure. Lead easily crosses the placenta and enters the fetal brain where it can interfere with normal development. Lead has also been linked to infertility and miscarriage.

“Lead builds up in the body over time and lead-containing lipstick applied several times a day, every day, can add up to significant exposure levels. The latest studies show there is no safe level of lead exposure,” said Mark Mitchell, M.D., MPH, president, Connecticut Coalition for Environmental Justice.

“The cosmetics industry needs to clean up its act and remove lead and other toxic ingredients from their products,” said Stacy Malkan, author of the just-released book, “Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry.”

“Repeated, daily exposures to low levels of lead add up – and they add up on top of lead from paint and drinking water, which is especially a problem in low income communities. There’s no excuse for lead in lipstick or toys. Companies should act immediately to reformulate lead-containing products,” Malkan said.

The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is calling on the industry to reformulate products to remove lead, to require suppliers to guarantee that raw materials are free of lead and other contaminants, and to join the campaign in demanding that the FDA more strictly regulate personal care products.

The full report, “A Poison Kiss: The Problem of Lead in Lipstick,” including complete test results, is posted atwww.SafeCosmetics.org.

Read more about lead in lipstick atwww.NotJustaPrettyFace.org.

###
Founding members of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics include: Alliance for a Healthy Tomorrow, Breast Cancer Fund, Clean Water Fund, Commonweal, Environmental Working Group, Friends of the Earth, Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition, National Black Environmental Justice Network, National Environmental Trust and Women's Voices for the Earth.

For more information and background on the campaign, seewww.SafeCosmetics.org.

free skin care · Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:21 am

I also saw this on the local news.I use lighter colors, but you never know. All companies of cosmetics should be held accountable for what goes into their products. Confused

I guess as consumers we have to read and be more aware of what we're putting on our bodies.

free skin care · Sun Oct 14, 2007 3:09 pm

I only just knew about this on Friday. Although I dont wear lipstick, I am worried that it is not just lipsticks that contain lead and that other products we use on the face and body can contain lead.
It is also very shocking to read that Dior has been tested positive for lead as it is such a HUGE luxury brand. Shock

Thanks for bringing this to all our attention

free skin care · Sun Oct 14, 2007 6:36 pm

yeahyeah your right. If we look at all the cosmetic products we use in a days time the possibilities are troubling to say the least.

free skin care · Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:40 pm

Please keep everything in perspective and do the math when you see things like this. Look I know too much lead is bad. But, did you know there is detectable amounts of lead in your drinking water? It's just not enough to cause harm...

Everything is a poison, but it is all DOSE related. You can be poisoned by too much water!!

OK, so if they found 1 ppm of lead (probably residual in the iron oxide pigments) then here is the math. If each lipstick weighs about 5 grams then there would be about 0.005g worth of lead in it. Now if you EAT about 1 lipstick every other day for an entire YEAR you would ingest about 1 gram of lead which probably isn't good.

But, who EATS lipstick??!! Most of it is NOT ingested, and a typical lipstick can last about a month. So, the real amount of lead that a user might truly ingest is about 15 milligrams by my rough estimation, or about 15ppm. That's not very much at all.

I probably absorb more than that when I spill a little of the leaded racing gas on my hand that I use in my race car.

Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:01 pm

John, thank you for this response, as I agree with everything thing you've stated!

John C. Hill wrote:

Please keep everything in perspective and do the math when you see things like this. Look I know too much lead is bad. But, did you know there is detectable amounts of lead in your drinking water? It's just not enough to cause harm...

Everything is a poison, but it is all DOSE related. You can be poisoned by too much water!!

OK, so if they found 1 ppm of lead (probably residual in the iron oxide pigments) then here is the math. If each lipstick weighs about 5 grams then there would be about 0.005g worth of lead in it. Now if you EAT about 1 lipstick every other day for an entire YEAR you would ingest about 1 gram of lead which probably isn't good.

But, who EATS lipstick??!! Most of it is NOT ingested, and a typical lipstick can last about a month. So, the real amount of lead that a user might truly ingest is about 15 milligrams by my rough estimation, or about 15ppm. That's not very much at all.

I probably absorb more than that when I spill a little of the leaded racing gas on my hand that I use in my race car.

free skin care · Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:38 pm

And what about cumulative effect - some from your lipstick, some from your water, some from candies, etc.

I am sorry, but I do think every little bit counts. As far as I am concerned I have RO water filter, so I do not have lead in my drinking water, and also avoid any lipstick that may contain anything harmful.

There is now even a medical area, called environmental medicine, that some of the top (like UPenn) medical schools try to teach and do research in. So far every time a particular substance is deemed safe - it means when it was measured by itself during usually a short period of time. No one did a research stating yes - that if you accumulate that amount during your life time in these quantities and in combination with these other substances that it is still safe. So it is basically - use your own common sense.

There is a book, by a medical doctor, Shelly Rogers "Detoxify or Die", where she cites studies after studies and what they had found.
I highly recommend it.

I also go by the advice of Dr. Bob Marshall, who is a Ph.D. in Biochem and who taught for years at Perdue Med. School, and who also thinks that it is quite dangerous to absorb all these chemicals from the skincare and makeup (organic or not) during many years. He had combined the list of chemicals that he had found to be better avoided. I do not recall all of them, but can try to get the list.

I think to just brush the warning off is too cavalier an approach.

Lucy.

free skin care · Tue Oct 16, 2007 2:17 pm

sigma, it is prudent to be a smart consumer and I follow my own set of rules carefully. But, there is hardly anything I purposely avoid for the fear that 50 years from now I might die from it. Heaven knows, I might be involved in a car wreck 3 hours from now on the way home, but I'm not giving up driving.

The bottom line is this, if everything has become so toxic, and we are filling ourselves up with toxins, why is the population of the world getting older and older on average in almost every industrial country (but not necessarily in the 3rd world countries that don't have these products), and why do people live longer than ever before in recorded history. Shouldn't we be dropping off like flies from all of these so-called toxins that we've all be exposed to since we were babies?

John

free skin care · Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:07 pm

John,

I do suggest that you read that book by Dr. Rogers. She answers every question that you had asked, and gives lots of studies (like the results of under skin fat biopsies study they did in NYC from supposedly healthy individuals , etc. - very interesting reading, just a bit repetitive).

No one knows his fate, you are quite correct.

So there are nothing we could do about it (just pray and hope). However, when there are things that can be done - it is a different story.

Most of our exposure had happened only lately (past 20-30 years) once many of these synthetic materials had been invented. At the same time had the antibiotics (penicillin and others ) had been invented at the beg. of the 20th century, who knows, may be that generation would have lived to be 120? So you can not compare apples and oranges. There are many advancements in technologies, sciences, medicine, you name it. On the other side - water contamination, soil contamination, etc.

True impact of many new things is not yet fully known (like the latest controversial European cell phone study, that states that they are indeed causing cancer?).

It is also known that people in Quanza (and some parts of Caucasian mountains) live to the very "ripe" age of 120+, men have kids in their 90s, and they are generally very healthy, and do not need antacids, Tylenol, etc.

I think it is an individual's choice.
People have the right to make their own mistakes and some will pay for that.

What I do disagree with - is to claim that something is safe, when it may or may not be.

It is also a well known fact that in some countries chlorine is no longer used for disinfecting water (a carcinogen). Does it mean we have to move there? Absolutely not, but a person may decide to put a water filtering device to avoid massive skin exposure during lengthy showers or may choose to ignore it. I am all for personal, but educated choice.

For myself - I do have both filters (and my skin and hair loves the better water),and I am careful with what I use.

I am not fanatical about it, but neither am I blind to it.

Lucy.

free skin care · Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:46 pm

Cool Lucy, all of your points are well taken.

I just feel the urge to jump in and defend the chemical industry (of which I am part) that really has done a lot of good things for humanity over the years. It just seems so easy to punch on the "chemicals" when indeed everything on this planet is either an atom or combination of atoms that combine to form a chemical. I honestly believe in the DuPont advertising line "Better Living Through Chemistry".

The automobile crash bag that saved one of the chemists who works here the other day from a head on crash is just one such example. I am glad my friend in still alive, and I used to make the propellant for automobile crash bags all through the 90s when I worked for TRW. One of the chemicals in that formula is sodium azide. Look it up. In relatively small doses it drops your blood pressure severely and can cause death. But, when blended with cupric oxide and pressed into pellets, it saved my friend's life.

John

free skin care · Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:07 pm

John,

I am not at all against chemicals or technology.

I am not a chemist by education or profession (more mathematics and Computer Science), but there are so many "harmful" natural substances - I believe many poisons (thinking of Catherene Medici, pardon the spelling), some drugs (cocaine, gashih, etc.); red yeast rice does not really differ from lipitor - has all the same side effects. So natural does not necessarily mean harmless.

No need to defend the poor discriminated chemists. And I am very happy for your friend as well (and since I drive every day to my job in NYC - having all the possible airbags does makes me feel a bit safer) . I am also all for technology, but I am against many pesticides, against antibiotics for simple colds, when there are more healthful solutions.

I believe the lead is in most colorants (especially red - please, feel free to correct me), and that is why it is in lipsticks. If there is a better alternative for a preservative then paraben - I am all for it. But even paraben is better then staph infection.

I am just all for educated choices, not mass hysteria, nor uneducated acceptance, nor cavalier disregard for the issue.

BTW, there is more and more talk about genetic + Environmental causes for many nasty diseases (MS, autism, and cancer). Who knows what will be discovered tomorrow?

Meanwhile, I do use water filters, some reasonable approach to food preparation ( no microwave for me, but yes to non-stick for omelets once a week), only containers with recycle number of #1 or #2 to keep food in (to avoid out-gassing), etc.

The book I mentioned is quite informative, and if you have a few minutes you may find it quite interesting , especially for a chemist (these parts were lost on me).

Best of luck and health,
Lucy.

Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:14 am

Paula Begoun's latest Special Report....

Lethal Lipsticks?
http://www.cosmeticscop.com/bulletin/101807-full.htm#1

free skin care · Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:46 am

I think one should be concerned with lead and harmful chemicals everywhere - water, air, food, skin care, etc.

But just shrugging it off because some paid consultant somewhere said something .... I am sorry that does not impress me. Nor does Paula Begoun.

It is obvious to anyone that some of the lipstick does get in with food, drink or saliva. Is it in minuscule amount? Absolutely,
Is it harmful? That is what is unknown - over how many years, what is the exact amount when it becomes harmful, nor it is known how much lead (or any other substance) did you get from other sources, so every bit may count.

I think it is great that they raised the concern. I do not approve of mass hysteria, but plain ignorance does not impress me either. Common sense and educated choice is the way to go, in my opinion.

Automatic Message

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.