Group: Infant Care Products Contain Carcinogens
More than half the baby shampoo, lotion and other infant care products analyzed by a health advocacy group were found to contain trace amounts of two chemicals that are believed to cause cancer, the organization said yesterday.
Some of the biggest names on the market, including Johnson & Johnson Baby Shampoo and Baby Magic lotion, tested positive for 1,4-dioxane or formaldehyde, or both, the nonprofit Campaign for Safe Cosmetics reported.
The chemicals, which the Environmental Protection Agency has characterized as probable carcinogens, are not intentionally added to the products and are not listed among ingredients on labels. Instead, they appear to be byproducts of the manufacturing process. Formaldehyde is created when other chemicals in the product break down over time, while 1,4-dioxane is formed when foaming agents are combined with ethylene oxide or similar petrochemicals.
The organization tested 48 baby bath products such as bubble bath and shampoo. Of those, 32 contained trace amounts of 1,4-dioxane and 23 contained small amounts of formaldehyde. Seventeen tested positive for both chemicals.
"Our intention is not to alarm parents, but to inform parents that products that claim to be gentle and pure are contaminated with carcinogens, which is completely unnecessary," said Stacy Malkan, a spokeswoman for the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, which is calling for the government to more strictly regulate personal care products such as shampoo, lotion and makeup.
to bear in mind that none of this is an 'accident'. the people who create these products are career chemists who can in no way be unaware of the byproducts of their processes. the only mistake, or regret, that ensues comes from the revelation, the uncovering of what was all along an intentional act.
too many people having youngins.
it's better to kill them off, then to educate young people about trojans and other methods of birth control.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
an army of uneducated morons if they kill them off before they get growed up?
So these products contain "trace amounts" of something that's deemed dangerous. How do we know such tiny amounts didn't show up as a result of the testing itself? People get too concerned about these kinds of reports - and the reports are made by people who are looking for some cause to believe in and a reason for their group to exist.
Some might argue that those not worried by "trace amounts" in products may have agendas they wish to push or a liability they wish to avoid.
You can go to places like Trader Joes and the like and buy pure, vegetable-based soaps and shampoo.
I recommend their label, or Dr. Bronner's (the latter of which is 100 percent organic as well).
Because not only are we putting crap on our bodies, it's also getting washed down the drain and doing who knows what downstream..
... it's a consumer choice. My wife and I use 'green' dish soap and detergent/bleach.
We tried some 'green' hair care products and weren't satisfied with the outcome, so we're still using the chemical parade there.
"Hippy" soap as my dad calls it...is ok if you're not a person that gets really dirty and stinky...It doesn't have much effect against man funk.
Other than that, it's a fine product.
But I use Lever. I know it's made of gawd awful stuff...but I've yet to find another product that gets my stank self as clean.
soap that has Tea Tree oil in it. That's what I use as well, it's good for getting a stinky man clean and is a natural deodorant.
if people want to take the time to do the research, find recommendations, and such, another great idea is to buy soaps, shampoos, toiletries and such for small DIY businesses who make these products.
I've been reading about soapmaking lately, and there's definitely no reason to have freaking formaldehyde in baby shampoo. Holy shit this sorta thing pisses me off...
"The greatest tyranny is censoring information in order to be better able to control people." - Cristina Saralegui
A couple Golden Oldies:
"The government isn't the solution, the government is the problem!"
and
"The nine most frightening words in the english language are, 'I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help.'"
Big yuks, huh?
...is the fact that the campaign for safe cosmetics does not publish a list of products that are/were contaminated.
...How about, instead of more useless regulation, we have some consumer education so we can exercise a little free market, and they publish the goddamn test results. So I can not buy those products...?
that way I wont be smearing carcinogens on my kid while I wait for the govt congressmen to get around to regulating some overseas corporation
govt congressmen (who probly have stock in the culprit corporations that sell these poisons to us)
...freemarket? ...anyone?
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
because there IS no free market. That is the great lie.
You can't see those test results because the loser companies pay tons of money to suppress the info. It's bad for their business.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
...you got my point!
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
Anyone tested the "natural" products? Don't be surprised if trace amounts of carcinogens are found there as well. There is nothing magical about the chemistry of natural vs. synthetic molecules.
the products are cheap and readily available.
The free market will weed out the weak...if we lose several thousand American children in the process...well...we are sorrowful about that...but occassionally we must make sacrifices to preserve our FREEDOM!
"snark signing off"
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Going outside in the sun causes cancer too. Really.
... is a study on sunscreen products. That way, if you go out in the sun unprotected, you're risking cancer. If you slather this UV protective goop all over you, you're risking cancer.
and if a person isn't an MBA...then they deserve what they get if they are get stuck with an inappropriate mortgage.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
to have a smoke and drink while contemplkating the consequences of exercising their free will.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
OK, since we are talking about "trace amounts" here, how about plastic baby bottles? Plastic toys? Plastic teething rings? Plastics in general. All release carcinogenic chemicals in "trace amounts", especially if they have been microwaved.
Are we just becoming a nation of paranoids, or are we there already?
we're all weenies...and we are stupid for taking those mortgages...and we're idiots for not managing our investment portfolios every day...cause we don't need to work...we can live off our investment incomes if we do it right.
Pullllease.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
It would be nice to know the concentrations that are mentioned here as "trace amounts." If they are, indeed, trace amounts, then the risk is quite low...lower than the risk of getting hit by lightning or being hurt in a car accident. As someone mentioned, going out in the sun carries a big risk, but so does not going out in the sun to let our bodies generate Vitamin D. Using a "natural" UV disinfectant light rather than chemical cleaners exposes everyone in the house to ozone, which is pretty nasty (only useful in the upper atmosphere). Eating organic foods not exposed to pesticides is good for the health of the land and maybe for your body, but it also increases your risk to exposure to some of the nastiest "natural" toxins from molds (aflatoxin, from peanut mold, is about as toxic as a molecule can get).
So let's have this discussion, but let's get all of the information out there.
what the companies call trace amounts...other men call lethal dose.
Gee..it wouldnt be in the companies interest to either skew results (especially if they can control the parameters of the test and even have a say in reporting the findings)..naah...the free market is PERFECT.
Carry on, I'm going to test my faith in the free market and have some peanut butter snacks.
And oh yes...there is so many natural things that can hurt ya. Trees and cow farts cause most pollution don't cha know. Reagan told me!!
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
There are lots of nasty things out there, and I'd like an independent government agency testing them. I'd also like the information out there for everyone to see. Along w/ that, I'd like public education about trace amounts. We all get radiation every day from our surroundings (as did our ancestors thousands of years ago). We all get trace amounts of cyanide and formaldehyde, even if we were to eat all organic food. How do these amounts compare to what we'd get in non-factory farm food?
If they are significant amounts, I don't exposure to them, and I certainly don't want to expose my infant to them. But if they truly are trace amounts, I want to focus my energies and fears elsewhere.
...an educated and informed consumer, than I would the FDA or any other govt agency.
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
But who is going to be doing the testing, and who is going to be doing the educating? I trust the FDA more than I trust Jenny McCarthy or late night infomercials.
"...In May 1985, the FDA's regulator of blood products, Dr. Harry M. Meyer Jr., believing the companies had broken a voluntary agreement to withdraw the old medicine from the market, called together officials of the companies and ordered them to comply.[4] Cutter's notes from the meeting indicate that Dr. Meyer asked that the issue be "quietly solved without alerting the Congress, the medical community and the public"[5] while another company noted that the FDA wanted the matter solved "quickly and quietly..."
... for the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, needs to do her job and "speak up" about (which products) tested positive for carcinogens.
Just calling for more regulation (as children are being shmeared as we speak) ...is unconcienable. ...and suspicious.
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
"Our intention is not to alarm parents, but to inform parents that products that claim to be gentle and pure are contaminated with carcinogens, which is completely unnecessary," said Stacy Malkan, a spokeswoman for the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics."
At the risk of attrracting all the wrath I know I will, this statement is like Cramer from CNBC dissing a company he is shorting.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
...it can only mean that..."alarming parents" is completely uneccessary...
which begs the question, if "alarming parents" is "completely unnecessary", then isnt "more regulation"
...just as unnecessary?
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
and if you infer that you are killing your baby slowly with each bath, then it is your fault.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
don't think of a black cat....too late
phrasing matters
phrasing indeed matters, and I usally do a better job than I did @ 8:02
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
What a bunch of disingenuos horse manure. Check out the photo and headline at the home page from the "non-alarmists."
http://www.safecosmetics.org/
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
...the are not disingenuos at all...
They (safecosmetics) really do want to "scare parents" into wanting the govt to "step in" and protect them. ...and (so) they promote govt regulation...
...instead of doing the responsible thing and publishing the results of the fucking tests that show (which companies) and (what products) are fucking contaminated!!!
Safecosmetics doesn't give a flying fuck about you/me/the average consumer (or free markets!) and is probly a think tank funded operation designed to help govt regulate its way into our lives.
(so you or I dont have to be properly educated since we cant handle the truth?)
...Once again... anybody? ...how about free markets??? ...crickets....
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
I have no problem with sensible regulation of markets that are not, have never been and never will be free. You have wedded a cause as firmly as have the folk scaring parents about their babies health. At least in your case you are merely advocating
a phliosophy instead of peddling your cause by wedding it to fears about cute cuddly infants.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
...at least we agree that we dont have free markets!!!
sounds like we are in the same boat too! we are both tied up getting raped...(exept) one of us wants to escape totally (me)...the other wants to set a limit (regulate?) the size of the next dick about to get shoved up their ass. (you)
p.s.
I did (in fact) use cuddly kids to make my point earlier!
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
"1984" and "Soylent Green"~~
in other news... doesnt this sound akin to what Jack Nicholson's Joker did in the (BEST) Batman movie with the cosmetics and health care products?!?! "Love that Joker!"
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity--- BulletTooth Tony
The companies want us to believe we have to put a bunch of products on our bodies and spray the house with cleaning chemicals in order to be "clean" and "fresh" so it is very ironic that many of these products contain hazardous substances. If a child is getting rashes, I would definitely try switching the products and reducing their use, and see if that helps. Just because the mother didn't get rashes, doesn't mean the child is free from chemical sensitivies.
epilare definitiva
Comments are closed on this entry