PERSONAL CARE TRUTH RESPONDS TO COSMETICS BILL H.R. 2359: SAFE COSMETICS ACT OF 2011

For Immediate Release

July 12, 2011

Contact: Lisa M. Rodgers, 864.445.9494

lisa@personalcaretruth.com

@prsnalcaretruth

 

 

PERSONAL CARE TRUTH RESPONDS TO COSMETICS BILL H.R. 2359: SAFE COSMETICS ACT OF 2011

 

SALUDA, SC – Personal Care Truth, a group of independent cosmetic business owners who represent the interests of the cosmetic industry as a whole, today shared its response to H.R. 2359: Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011, a bill recently introduced by Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), and Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), to address what it believes to be misinformation included in the bill.

Personal Care Truth believes the bill holds universal flaws that could impact the entire cosmetics industry, including large and small businesses.  While Personal Care Truth is pleased that Congress is taking a proactive approach at looking at the cosmetics industry, there are several concerning issues in the bill, including:

  • Label Confusion: The bill shows no exceptions for contaminants that occur in nature and appear in botanicals.  The process of labeling all components and contaminants of each ingredient will be nearly impossible.
  • International Confusion: This bill pertains to US-made cosmetics only, causing a serious divide in the international cosmetics industry.
  • Aromatherapy:   The required labeling information will make it very difficult to recognize the sole essential oils used versus the constituents and contaminants involved.
  • Authoritative Source: The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel is the authoritative voice on this issue and was not consulted for this bill.
  • Duplication of Registration: In Section 619 of the bill, the manufacturer and distributor of a cosmetic are required to have a registration number, causing additional layers of unnecessary bureaucracy that will ultimately increase costs for consumers.
  • Enhanced Business Risks: In Section 620, any person believing that a cosmetic is adulterated or misbranded has the right to turn the company into the Secretary, opening up businesses to frivolous lawsuits for personal gain.
  • Adverse Health Effects: This term is not appropriately defined in the bill.  Small allergic reactions could then be considered adverse health effects, which would be nearly impossible to avoid in every cosmetic user.

 

“Personal Care Truth opposes the H.R. 2359: Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011 because it is unworkable, far reaching, and will do absolutely nothing to make cosmetics safer than they already are,” said Lisa Rodgers, co-founder of Personal Care Truth.  “We support safe cosmetics and certainly believe the FDA could use more transparency; however, we should be focusing on improving current legislation instead of completely changing it to serve the goals of non-governmental organizations that have yet to present the science to support their claims.”

Personal Care Truth believes there will be significant impacts from the H.R. 2359: Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011 on small businesses, including the high costs of complying with the bill requirements.  What’s more, due to the differences in regulation, consumers could wrongly get the impression that larger cosmetics companies are safer than small businesses, soapers and crafters.  All businesses will also be required to disclose their supply sources to the government, opening their business up to sharing trade and product secrets.

The H.R. 2359: Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011 also calls for intensive pre-market testing, a major barrier to entry for small businesses and cost-prohibitive to current small cosmetics companies.  In addition, all Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) will be required to be available in various languages, again bringing unnecessary costs to the small business.

“I am in 100% support of safe cosmetics, but not the proposed bill (HR 2359) as written,” said Kristin Fraser Cotte, co-founder of Personal Care Truth.  “Targeting an industry with a proven track record of safety with unrealistic and unnecessary regulations will cost an incredible amount to implement, which we will all end up paying the price for when we go to purchase daily personal care necessities like soap.”

To oppose the H.R. 2359: Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011, please sign the petition entitled Oppose H.R. 2359: Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011 at http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/no-2-sca-2011/ and follow #no2sca on Twitter.

Please see the attached addendum for additional thoughts on the H.R. 2359: Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011 from esteemed members of the personal care industry.

To learn more about Personal Care Truth, please visit www.personalcaretruth.  Or follow us at @prsnalcaretruth, and on LinkedIn and Facebook – key words Personal Care Truth.

 

About Lisa M. Rodgers

Lisa M. Rodgers serves as CEO and Founder of Cactus & Ivy, and has recently taken a more active role as Co-Founder of Personal Care Truth.

            About Kristin Fraser Cotte
        
    Kristin Fraser Cotte is the CEO and Founder of The Grapeseed Company – creating premium eco-friendly skin and personal care from locally grown, certified organic and natural ingredients.

# # #

ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS ON THE BILL FROM INDUSTRY LEADERS

 

Robert Tisserand

Bio available – http://personalcaretruth.com/experts/robert-tisserand/

“The Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011 may be well intentioned (who doesn’t want safe cosmetics?), but it is most certainly naïve and impractical. It bears little resemblance to cosmetics legislation in other countries or regions and would be massively expensive to implement. In fact, as currently written, it would be the end of the US cosmetics industry, since the safety requirements could not be met by any product or substance known to mankind. There’s no point in cutting out the tumor if you kill the patient while doing so.”

 

Cindy Jones, Ph.D.

Bio available – http://personalcaretruth.com/experts/cindy-jones/

“As a small scale manufacturer of cosmetics and a former cancer research
scientist, safe cosmetics are a must to me, but this bill will not lead to
safer cosmetics.  We first need compliance with current FDA requirements
and with the Consumer Packaging and Labeling Act. Enforcement of these alone would greatly benefit the industry and the consumer. Then we need science-based legislation and research to verify safety of cosmetics, not knee-jerk reactions and scare tactics.

“Rep. Schakowsky states that there are a ‘growing number of reports of
serious health problems arising from the use of dangerous chemicals in
personal care products.’ I would like to know what reports she is
referring to, because I am not aware of any credible reports and I would be very interested in reading them.

“The exclusion of small businesses from registering with the FDA will be
devastating to small business. All sized businesses need two-way
communications with the FDA to get timely information on potential
toxicities of ingredients and to be able to report adverse reactions to
cosmetics.”

 

Kayla Fioravanti

Bio available – http://personalcaretruth.com/experts/kayla-fioravanti/

“My entire life from the womb through this year has been shadowed by my mother’s cancer. In the womb, I shared her body with cancer, and just this year she lost her battle that spanned my lifetime. If there was one shred of scientific proof that cosmetics caused cancer, I would be championing living a cosmetic-free life by choice but never by government regulation. The Safe Cosmetics Act is over-reaching, unnecessary and ill-conceived. It will do absolutely nothing to make safe cosmetics any safer but will destroy small businesses, despite the exemption from fees and registration.”

 

Perry Romanowski

Bio available- http://personalcaretruth.com/experts/perry-romanowski/

{In reference to the quote above from Schakowsky’s office.}

“I read a claim like this and immediately a few questions occur.

1.  To which serious health problems are they referring?
2.  What evidence connects these health problems to personal care products?
3.  Where can someone find these reports?  What agency is keeping track?

“The incidences of most cancers are decreasing in the US and the population continues to get healthier.  Life expectancy continues to increase.  Where is the evidence that demonstrates the harm of personal care products?

“Regulations should be enacted to solve problems.  If new regulations would be completely enacted, what benefit would anyone notice?

Until someone can demonstrate a problem with cosmetic products it makes little sense to enact new legislation that will cost more time and money.”

Be Sociable, Share!

More about the author:  Lisa is the CEO, Founder and Creator Extraordinaire of Cactus & Ivy, a manufacturer of cruelty free and vegan spa, bath and body products. Read more from this author


  • Judith

    This is a great response!  Can you call local TV stations, radio stations, with this?  

    • http://personalcaretruth.com Lisa M. Rodgers

      Thank you Judith! We have shared our press release with all the major media outlets, and encourage those that support our position to tweet, email and Facebook the link to this page.

      • Day4dreams

        I posted on the Facebook pages for PETA, Leaping Bunny, Badger, and others…not getting much of a response.  I think there is the impression there are only a few people opposed…I hope to see more consumers as well as formulators voice their opinions!

        • Anonymous

          Peta is not against it? Animal testing is still needed for toxicology tests, I believe.

          • Day4dreams

            The people I communicated with were not aware of the proposed bill.  Many people outside the industry are unaware of this going on!!  I got a reply back today and will be sending the PETA people more information after work today.  Leaping Bunny folks were also contacted but I did not get a personal reply on Facebook. 

            I did get a FACEBOOK warning and one of my posts was removed.  Not sure where - maybe Skin Deep?  Not Campaign for Safe Cosmetics because I was banned from posting there.  I do know I am very careful to ask organizations to read why people are opposed and consider joining the effort — maybe a Neal’s Yard salesperson who got quite hostile when I debated her about the impact on their products and she claims they will be able to follow all the laws with no problem…which I know is not true, since rainwater falls on the plants that are distilled for essential oils and so they may test positive for lead since there is often lead in rainwater. But it was basically and effort at hitting my head against a brick wall.  Sue

          • Anonymous

            Does anyone have a breakdown of what is in essential oils? What contaminants are in them? What about olive oil, shea butter, etc? Would these have contaminants, too? Lead, mercury, arsenic, etc….not to be picky but if it comes from the earth it’s going to contain these things. Humans do, too, correct? In parts per million, billion? If you’re looking for them, you’ll find them. Does anyone know the cost and the process of removing the contaminants? The whole process, like is it even worth it?
            Sorry for all the goofy questions. It’s only my opinion, it just seems that when all is said and done there will be little to nothing left. Allergies, skin reactions, hormone disruptors, asthma attacks, sinus headaches, migraines, skin breakouts, rashes….whatever else has happened to someone using cosmetics or being near someone who has used cosmetics, these are health concerns. We’ve all experienced at least one of these and whatever I didn’t type. I do realize that this is probably an over-reaction or a worst-case scenario. Just thinking, typing and letting everybody know this is where I’m at. It’s one of the main reasons why I believe the EO’s/natural fragrances won’t make it past this bill. They are on the chopping block, too.

          • Day4dreams

            I honestly don’t think these contaminants are considered as big an issue in the general cosmetics community, as the media would have us believe.  We simply have to accept that we live in a polluted world and so naturally, are going to be exposed to the results of pollution in our food, cosmetics, even drinking water.  There are acceptable levels of lead in drinking water.  Lead rains down on us…that is reality. We are born polluted and we live polluted lives.  Of COURSE there are also unacceptable levels of lead and other contaminents as well – but what is an “unknown” to a very great degree is how much is too much when it comes to topical products and products which will wash off into our water system. That’s where the “everything you put on your skin absorbs into your bloodstream” team is battling with the “nothing you put on your skin presents the slightest risk to health” team.  Reality is, in my opinion, somewhere in the middle.Look at the Casey Anthony trial.  She was found not-guilty of killing her child – but everyone agrees non-guilty does NOT mean innocent. It means the state did not meet the burden of proof, proving her guilty. 

            That is where we are now with many cosmetic ingredients accused of being toxic, hazardous and causing cancer.  Many of these chemicals are not-guilty of causing any harm, disease or illness.  That’s because either we don’t have scientific proof – or – because they actually are innocent!

            What we need are more good scientific tests, then unbiased judges to look at the test results and render a verdict.  Unfortunately the public is only hearing the accusations.  And lets face it, some of them are also looking pretty guilty by association! But it is wrong to “say” something is toxic or causes cancer or other diseases unless we know to a degree of certainty that a “judge” or a “court” would find them guilty.  Equally wrong to say they “can’t” cause harm as I have read recently in regards to hair straightening products. If enough people feel sick from something…something is going on for goodness sake!

            I personally think synthetic fragrances cause illness, disease and pollution. I know there are components that do not get cleaned by wastewater treatment plants.  That is a scientific fact.  Now…I have also experienced less ill effects from synthetic fragrances that are made from chemicals derived from essential oils and which did not contain pthalates.  So I am open to the possibility that “some” synthetic fragranes might not be as bad as others.  But someone would have to show me some pretty serious scientific proof before I’d allow them in my home or expose my family to them.

            Sue

          • Anonymous

            At this moment we still have a choice.

            Both natural and synthetic fragrances bother me, depending on how my allergies are doing.

            Wonder how upset folks would be if they really knew what’s in their food. I wish they would just focus on food.

          • Sarah

            Side track–I suspect lead and mercury are mostly present due to pollution–but lead is part of the radon decay chain (from naturally-occurring uranium in granite, etc), so it’s not necessarily from pollution–and mercury is also naturally occurring (I think mostly in the earth’s crust?).  So although it’s probably safe to say the majority of what we’re exposed to of these elements is from pollution or residue from manufacturing, some was always here on planet earth.

      • http://www.facebook.com/faeriemade Tina Glenn

         LIsa, did you share that with WLOS TV 13 in Asheville NC?

        • http://personalcaretruth.com Lisa M. Rodgers

          Hey Tina – I sure did, and thanks for the heads up!

      • http://www.facebook.com/faeriemade Tina Glenn

         LIsa, did you share that with WLOS TV 13 in Asheville NC?

  • Day4dreams

    http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2011/06/24/5-reasons-why-safe-cosmetics-act-makes-sense-small-business?page=0%2C1

    Badger wrote : “This act will require suppliers, including fragrance and flavor manufacturers, to disclose ingredients. Under current regulations, such manufacturers are allowed to conceal this information as “proprietary.”".

    Me: Easy fix — stop formulating with synthetic fragrance and artificial flavors, the essential oil and natural flavor industries are proud to tell you what their ingredients are made from.

    As for formulating with other things you buy from suppliers and don’t know what is in them…how does a company legally label their products with the correct INCI ingredients if they don’t know what they are formulating with?

    Are you honestly saying Badger has been selling products having no idea what is in them?

    UPDATE: No comment, but I was replied to in a very hostile manner by them on their Facebook page.

  • Pingback: Soap Leaves » Blog Archive » 5 reasons I’m not blogging about the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011

  • Pingback: H.R.2359 Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011 « Feeds « Government News Feeds

  • Pingback: Vested Interest, Truth and Safe Cosmetics | Personal Care Truth or Scare

  • Pingback: Cosmetic safety issues heading for big debate | gallondaily