Report finds contaminants in baby products

March 18, 2009 By Maren Wright

Protecting J.J., the 4-month-old son of Shawna Bader-Blau, is time-consuming, what with checking labels, reading safety information, buying chemical-free baby wipes and finding phthalate-free baby bottles.

"There are so many recalls, they just make you scared of everything," said Bader-Blau.

On March 12, the Silver Spring, Md., mom attended the release of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics' report on children's bath products to see if she has anything new to worry about. The group's report showed that 61 percent of baby products tested were contaminated with the cancer-causing chemicals formaldehyde and 1,4-dioxane.

"It's maddening that these chemicals aren't regulated," Bader-Blau said.

Stacy Malkan, campaign cofounder, said these chemicals aren't disclosed on product labels because they are exempt from the Food and Drug Administration's labeling laws.

The FDA has been monitoring 1,4-dioxane since the 1970s. It is a of the , but methods such as vacuum stripping, where ingredients are heated and the volatile 1,4-dioxane is lifted off, minimize the presence of the chemical.

John Bailey, chief scientist of the Product Council and past director of the FDA's Office of Cosmetics, said the reported levels of the byproduct in baby items are not hazardous. His organization represents manufacturers of cosmetic and personal care products.

"The companies take steps to get it down as low as possible, and I think the levels we're seeing here represent the steps they have taken to keep them low."

FDA spokeswoman Stephanie Kwisneck concurs.

"At this time we have no evidence that the levels of 1,4 dioxane at its current levels are harmful. We are constantly monitoring science and if new data or new information emerges we will advise the public accordingly," Kwisneck said.

Formaldehyde is an anti-microbial additive. It's not FDA-regulated, Kwisneck said, because it has not been determined to be harmful under the intended use.

The European Union does regulate formaldehyde, Bailey said, allowing cosmetics to contain 0.2 percent formaldehyde, or 2,000 ppm. The highest level found in the campaign's testing was 610 ppm in the product Baby Magic "Soft Baby Scent" Baby Lotion, well under the EU's allowance.

"This is no cause for concern," said council spokeswoman Kathleen Dezio, calling the publicity over these trace chemicals "ridiculous."

Director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Devra Lee Davis, disagrees.

"When the FDA law was passed it was an anti-poison act and the focus was to get rid of poisons," Davis said. "We are dealing now with chronic issues _ asthma, autism, cancer - where trace chemicals make a difference over time."

As proof, the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics refers to an unofficial report by a technical staff member of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission who wrote, "the presence of 1,4-dioxane, even as a trace contaminant, is cause for concern."

Consumers don't want to guess whether products are safe, Davis said, so even the presence of low levels of carcinogens should be labeled.

"The important message is that none of these contaminants are required to be on the label," said Robyn Gilden, of the University of Maryland School of Nursing Environmental Health Education Center.

Gilden, both as a mother and a nurse, wants to see new regulations by the FDA to require label lists of all personal care product ingredients.

"On their own, the industry could step up," Gilden said. "But a lot of times they won't."

___

(c) 2009, Capital News Service.


print this article email this article download pdf blog this article bookmark this article     Stumble it Digg this share on Facebook retweet share on Reddit add to delicious
Rate this story - not rated yet

Rank Filter

Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.


Display comments: newest first

  • Ashy - Mar 24, 2009
    • Rank: not rated yet
    What about formaldehyde in drugs?

March 18, 2009 all stories

Comments: 1

not rated yet
  • Stumble this up

  • Digg this

  • share this

  • hide
  • Related Stories




  • hide
  • Relevant PhysicsForums posts

Other News

Words, gestures are translated by same brain regions, says new research

Medicine & Health / Neuroscience

created 17 minutes ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 0

Your ability to make sense of Groucho's words and Harpo's pantomimes in an old Marx Brothers movie takes place in the same regions of your brain, says new research funded by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication ...


Theory about long and short-term memory questioned

Medicine & Health / Neuroscience

created 27 minutes ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 0

The long-held theory that our brains use different mechanisms for forming long-term and short-term memories has been challenged by new research from UCL, published today in PNAS.


Squeak, squeak -- can you hear me now?

Squeak, squeak -- can you hear me now?

Medicine & Health / Neuroscience

created 5 hours ago | popularity 5 / 5 (1) | comments 0

What do you get when you cross a mouse with poor hearing and a mouse with even worse hearing? Ironically, a new strain of mice with "golden ears" - mice that have outstanding hearing as they age.


Deepening the search  for clues to rheumatoid arthritis

Deepening the search for clues to rheumatoid arthritis

Medicine & Health / Genetics

created 8 hours ago | popularity 5 / 5 (1) | comments 5

(PhysOrg.com) -- The gnawing pain of rheumatoid arthritis is a signal that the body’s immune system has hit the wrong target: its own cartilage and bone.


Connection between depression and osteoporosis detailed

Medicine & Health / Psychology & Psychiatry

created 1hour ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 0

Research carried out among thousands of people has shown a clear connection between depression and a loss of bone mass, leading to osteoporosis and fractures.