WHAT WE PREFER NOT TO FIND IN NATURAL PRODUCTS

These are the ingredients we don’t really want to find in a natural product.  In fact, our own choice is to avoid them altogether, if at all possible.  That’s because we eat organic food, live a natural lifestyle, use eco-paints – and so it goes on.  It’s a free country.  You may choose to avoid these ingredients, too, or you may be attracted to natural and green cosmetics not because of what they leave out, but because of what they include:  active natural ingredients that will help your face, body and hair look its healthy best. 

There isn’t room in this book to list all the ‘questionable’ ingredients in cosmetics, but we have listed here those which are most widely-used, and which have question marks over them, whether from a health or an environmental point of view.  You’ll find more info on our website if you log on to www.beautybible.com/green_pages, as well as a longer list of other ingredients about which we have some concerns.  No products with two daisies (or more) in this book contain any of these ingredients.

DEA (diethanolamine), TEA (triethanolamine) and MEA (monoethanolamine);  you’ll find them listed on labels as, for example, Cocamide DEA or Lauramide DEA, etc.  These can cause allergic reactions, irritate the eyes and and dry both hair and skin.  They are ‘amines’ (ammonia compounds) which can under certain circumstances react with nitrates to form carcinogens;  Dr. Samuel Epstein, Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition in the US, has petitioned for labelling which would read:  ‘’Caution – this product may contain N-nitrosodi-ethabolamine, a known cancer-causing agent’. 

Mineral oil  This is listed as paraffinum liquidum on European labels;  petrolatum is basically the same thing.  It’s cheap, it’s been plentiful – but now the world’s oil supply is peaking (or has peaked, depending on who you ask), all that is changing.  And some believe because mineral oil is a terrific ‘barrier’, it can tamper with the body’s own moisturising mechanism, ultimately leading to chapping and dryness – the very conditions it’s used to alleviate.  Once oil’s gone, that’s it (for billions of years);  other ingredients can do the same job (if not better), and be sustainably produced, crop after crop.  We prefer them.  It’s that simple.

Imidazolidinyl Urea and Diazolidinyl Urea.  Widely used preservatives;  the American Academy of Dermatology has found them to be a key cause of contact dermatitis.

Methylisothiazolinone (MIT)  An antibacterial agent found in antimocribial soaps,  hand soaps and a surprising number of personal care products;  not only does this have the potential to cause irritation or allergic reactions, but it has also been linked with nerve damage.  The quantities in cosmetics are teensy, but we avoid this ourselves, thanks.

Parabens  These ingredients have been around since the 1920s and have become the most highly-contentious in the beauty world, with companies scrambling to emblazon their packaging with ‘paraben-free’.  Where products listed in this book contain parabens, we say so in the product write-up.  Parabens are widely-used preservatives, added to ward off bacterial growth, and are also found in food and drugs, in smaller amounts.  They’re actually a ‘family’ of preservatives which includes methyl-, propyl-, butyl- and ethyl-paraben.  But are they safe?  It depends on who you ask.  The US Food & Drug Administration points to a review of studies that says they absolutely are;  certainly, they have very low irritancy potential.  But according to Lisa Donofrio, a US dermatologist and advisor to Health Magazine, ‘Several studies, including one done at the University of Montpellier in France, have found that parabens act like the hormone oestrogen.  This concerns me since some breast cancer cells are encouraged to grow by the presence of oestrogen in the bloodstream.’  Dr. Donofrio does not recommend paraben-based products to her patients.  As the natural  beauty world becomes more sophisticated, many brands are finding alternatives to these preservatives;  if you feel concerned, it’s easier than ever to avoid them. 

Propylene glycol  This can be from a natural source – vegetable glycerine, mixed with grain alcohol – but more usually is a synthetic petrochemical mix, mixed with a water-attracting humectant;  it’s been known to cause allergic reactions such as eczema. 

PVP/VA Copolymer  A petroleum-derived chemical common to hairsprays and styling products (the word ‘polymer’ gives a clue as to its plastic-like holding powers), it can be toxic when inhaled, and damage the lungs of sensitive individuals. 

Sodium Lauryl Sulfate  This is hugely controversial.  There is some suggestion that the huge amount of publicity knocking SLS began as an unfounded ‘whispering campaign’.  The American Cancer Society actually took advertising to quash the widespread rumour that SLS causes cancer.  It doesn’t.  But it is highly de-greasing, drying and irritating to skin, interfering with the skin’s barrier system and making it easier for other ingredients to enter.  Many natural shampoo companies now trumpet their use of ‘Laureth’ ingredients, instead, but in fact (like DEA and TEA), these can react to produce nitrosamines.  The good news is that increasingly, the savvier natural beauty companies are turning to very gentle, non-irritating cleansing agents derived from corn and sugar.

Stearalkonium chloride  Developed originally as a fabric softener, it’s perhaps not surprising this is also now used in hair conditioners and creams;  it can cause allergic reactions.  Natural cosmetics use proteins or herbal ingredients, instead.

Synthetic colours  These are labelled as FD&C or D&C on the label, followed by a colour and a number (for instance FD&C Red No.6, or D&C Green No. 5).  Derived from coal tar, these are potentially carcinogenic.

Triclosan - see p. XX for more info on this.  NB TO CATH - THIS IS THE SECTION ON ANTIBACTERIAL HAND-WASHES.

GLOSSARY

Here are some of the terms – and symbols - you’ll find on packaging, demystified for you. 

Biodynamic  Biodynamic farming is based on organic principles.  Some people descriibe it as ‘beyond organics’ – because not only does biodynamic farming exclude the use of synthetic fertilisers and chemicals in crop production, but also requires specific measures to strengthen the life processes in soil and plants, such as planting by specific phases of the moon.  (When you think that the moon has the power to move billions of gallons of water across the earth’s surface to create the tides, it makes sense to us that it has the power to affect plant growth, too.)  Several ranges include Biodynamic ingredients;  Weleda is the best-known.

   
(NB to designers:  not great examples of these symbols, but lets you know what you’re looking for)

Organic The word ‘organic’, alas, is widely abused in the beauty world.  Food manufacturers can be prosecuted for using the word organic, unless they have the certification to prove your claims.  Unfortunately, in Europe, organic guidelines aren’t yet covered by law, which means a lot of abuse is going on:  we are incensed, for example, to find one brand with the word ‘organic’ in its name, four mentions of the word ‘organic’ on the front of the packaging alone – but what’s inside isn’t certified, and in reality, only the essential oils and one other ingredient (of many) are from organic sources.

Above are all examples of the organic symbols that you will find on cosmetic packaging, which means that agricultural ingredients must have been grown organically (except in a handful of cases where an ingredient is not yet available organically).  In addition, a long list of chemicals used elsewhere in the cosmetics industry is prohibited.  Unfortunately, all these standards were developed in independently – the UK for the Soil Assocation, America for USDA, France for Ecocert.  (Although the symbols can all be used on products sold in other countries.)  This means that there are subtle differences in the standards.  We consider the Soil Association symbol in the UK truly to be the ‘gold standard’ (Jo chairs their committee for organic health and beauty products so has seen first-hand the tough decision-making process);  the Soil Association, for instance, is the first in the world to outlaw the use of nanotech ingredients in cosmetics. USDA-certified products also meet extremely high standards, which is why products which hold either of these symbols get three ‘daisies’ in our book.  Ecocert and Organic Farmers & Growers, by contrast, allow sodium lauryl sulfate and parabens, in their standards.  To be certified by the Soil Association as organic, products must contain 95% or over of organic ingredients.  They can also be ‘made with’ organic ingredients if that total is 70% or over, and in that case, the percentage of organic ingredients must be declared on the front of the packaging – say, 82% or 93%... Obviously, the ultimate is 100% organic, but in reality that is very, very hard to achieve except with some oils and balms.  And yes, there is a downside:  organic ingredients tend to be more expensive than their non-organic alternatives, because there is still not a huge supply of many of them, so economies of scale can’t be achieved.

Currently, the European certification bodies are working towards a ‘harmonised’ set of standards – a right tug-of-war, we can tell you, but which will ultimately result in a set of standards which can be enforcced in law.  Meanwhile, the only way you can be completely sure that a product does contain the organic ingredients it claims it does is to look for an organic logo (see examples above).