Some of the very best PFAS ranges had been present in waterproof mascara and long-lasting lipstick
More than half the cosmetics bought within the United States and Canada are awash with a toxic industrial compound related to critical well being situations, in keeping with a brand new study.
Researchers on the University of Notre Dame examined greater than 230 generally used cosmetics and located that 56% of foundations and eye merchandise, 48% of lip merchandise and 47% of mascaras contained fluorine — an indicator of PFAS (Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), so-called “forever chemicals” which might be utilized in nonstick frying pans, rugs and numerous different shopper merchandise.
Some of the very best PFAS ranges had been present in waterproof mascara (82%) and long-lasting lipstick (62%), in keeping with the study printed Tuesday within the journal Environmental Science & Technology Letters. Twenty-nine merchandise with increased fluorine concentrations had been examined additional and located to contain between 4 and 13 particular PFAS chemical substances, the study discovered. Only one merchandise listed PFAS as an ingredient on the label.
A spokeswoman for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which regulates cosmetics, stated the company doesn’t touch upon particular research. The FDA stated on its web site that there have been few research of the presence of the chemical substances in cosmetics, and those printed usually discovered the focus is at very low ranges not prone to hurt individuals, within the components per billion degree to the 100s of components per million.
A truth sheet posted on the company’s web site says that, “As the science on PFAS in cosmetics continues to advance, the FDA will proceed to watch″ voluntary information submitted by business in addition to printed analysis.
But PFAS chemical substances are a problem of rising concern for lawmakers who’re working to manage their use in shopper merchandise. The study outcomes had been introduced as a bipartisan group of senators launched a invoice to ban the use of PFAS in cosmetics and different magnificence merchandise.
The transfer to ban PFAS comes as Congress considers wide-ranging laws to set a nationwide consuming water commonplace for sure PFAS chemical substances and clear up contaminated websites throughout the nation, together with navy bases the place excessive charges of PFAS have been found.
“There is nothing protected and nothing good about PFAS,” stated Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who launched the cosmetics invoice with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. “These chemicals are a menace hidden in plain sight that people literally display on their faces every day.”
Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., who has sponsored several PFAS-related bills in the House, said she has looked for PFAS in her own makeup and lipstick, but could not see if they were present because the products were not properly labeled.
“How do I know it doesn’t have PFAS?” she asked at a news conference Tuesday, referring to the eye makeup, foundation and lipstick she was wearing.
The Environmental Protection Agency also is moving to collect industry data on PFAS chemical uses and health risks as it considers regulations to reduce potential risks caused by the chemicals.
The Personal Care Products Council, a trade association representing the cosmetics industry, said in a statement that a small number of PFAS chemicals may be found as ingredients or at trace levels in products such as lotion, nail polish, eye makeup and foundation. The chemicals are used for product consistency and texture and are subject to safety requirements by the FDA, said Alexandra Kowcz, the council’s chief scientist.
“Our member companies take their responsibility for product safety and the trust families put in those products very seriously,″ she said, adding that the group supports prohibition of certain PFAS from use in cosmetics. “Science and safety are the foundation for everything we do.”
But Graham Peaslee, a physics professor at Notre Dame and the principal investigator of the study, said the cosmetics poses an immediate and long-term risk. “PFAS is a persistent chemical. When it gets into the bloodstream, it stays there and accumulates,” Peaslee said.
No specific companies were named in the study, although supporting material indicates that researchers tested dozens of brands, including many household names.
The study did not seek to link any health effects to cosmetics use, but Peaslee said researchers found PFAS levels that ranged from a few parts to billion to thousands of parts per billion. He called the latter totals “worrisome.”
The chemical substances additionally pose the chance of environmental contamination related to manufacturing and disposal, he stated.
The man-made compounds are utilized in numerous merchandise, together with nonstick cookware, water-repellent sports activities gear, cosmetics and grease-resistant meals packaging, together with firefighting foams.
Public well being research on uncovered populations have related the chemical substances with an array of well being issues, together with some cancers, weakened immunity and low delivery weight. Widespread testing in recent times has discovered excessive ranges of PFAS in lots of public water methods and navy bases.
Blumenthal, a former state legal professional basic and self-described “crusader” on behalf of shoppers, stated he doesn’t use cosmetics. But talking on behalf of hundreds of thousands of cosmetics customers, he stated they’ve a message for the business: “We’ve trusted you and also you betrayed us.”
Brands that need to keep away from probably authorities regulation ought to voluntarily go PFAS-free, Blumenthal stated. “Aware and offended shoppers are the best advocate” for change, he stated.
