Sunday, November 27, 2011

Contaminants in Bath Products Say No To Baby

This information is from the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.

Does baby shampoo need to contain cancer-causing chemicals? No – but it often does.
Product tests released by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics in March 2009 found two chemicals linked to cancer, 1,4-dioxane and formaldehyde, in dozens of bath products for babies and kids, including Sesame Street character brands and even the iconic "pure and gentle" Johnson's Baby Shampoo. None of the products tested listed 1,4-dioxane or formaldehyde on the label.
Two and a half years later, Johnson's Baby Shampoo is safer in some countries, but not everywhere. Our October 2011 analysis of this product in 13 countries found formaldehyde-releasing chemicals have been replaced in some parts of the world, but not in the U.S. or Canada, among others.
Our inquiry started in February 2007, when tests found 1,4-dioxane in 18 soaps and shampoos for kids and adults.

What's Wrong with These Chemicals?
Formaldehyde is classified as a known human carcinogen, while 1,4-dioxane is listed as "reasonably anticipated" to be a human carcinogen, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Formaldehyde can also cause skin rashes in sensitive children.
As with many chemicals of concern used in cosmetics, the companies that make these products argue that it's "just a little bit" of 1,4-dioxane or formaldehyde in the baby shampoo. But the same baby may be exposed to these chemicals from bubble bath, shampoo, body wash and many other sources over the course of one day, and these toxic exposures add up.

Why Do Products Contain These Chemicals?
1,4-dioxane is a byproduct of a petrochemical process called ethoxylation, which involves using ethylene oxide (a known breast carcinogen) to process other chemicals in order to make them less harsh. For example, sodium laurel sulfate – notoriously harsh on the skin – is often converted to the gentler chemical sodium laureth sulfate by processing it with ethylene oxide (the "eth" denotes ethoxylation), which can result in 1,4-dioxane contamination.
Formaldehyde contaminates personal care products when common preservatives release formaldehyde over time in the container. Ingredients likely to contaminate products with formaldehyde include quaternium-15, DMDM hydantoin, 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3 diol (Bronopol), imidazolidinyl urea, diazolidinyl urea and sodium hydroxymethylglycinate.
Pushing for Change

After we released our 2009 Toxic Tub report, thousands of Johnson & Johnson’s consumers  around the world expressed their concern. In addition to receiving letters, emails and calls from angry moms, nurses and other consumers, Johnson's Baby Shampoo was pulled from store shelves in China, Taiwan and Vietnam, and several governments responded.

We've been in contact with Johnson & Johnson through letters and meetings since May 2009 regarding 1,4-dioxane, formaldehyde and other chemicals in the company's products. Check out our full timeline of communications with J&J.
J&J hasn't been the only company affected. An August 2008 lawsuit was filed by the California Attorney General's office against several companies for making products with toxic levels of 1,4-dioxane.
The Good News
Yes, there's good news! Many companies in the natural products industry are quitting the ethoxylation habit, which generates 1,4-dioxane. Standards such as the Whole Foods Premium Body Care Seal do not allow ethoxylation, and many companies have been quietly reformulating to replace chemicals such as sodium laureth sulfate that are associated with 1,4-dioxane.
Product testing by author David Steinman released in March 2009 found lower levels of 1,4-dioxane than previously found in an array of products – proof that it's possible to make products without this contaminant.
Our October 2011 analysis of formaldehyde-releasing preservatives in Johnson's Baby Shampoo found that the company is using safer alternatives in some countries as well as in the "natural" version of baby shampoo marketed in the U.S. Not only is it possible to make baby shampoo with safer preservatives, Johnson & Johnson responded to our report by releasing a statement saying it is phasing out formaldehyde-releasing chemicals from its baby products worldwide. No timeline has been set for this phase-out.
What You Can Do

1. Avoid using products that list ingredients that may be contaminated with 1,4-dioxane, including:
  • sodium myreth sulfate
  • PEG compounds
  • chemicals that include the clauses "xynol," "ceteareth" and "oleth"
2. Avoid products that contain formaldehye-releasing preservatives, including:
  • quaternium-15
  • DMDM hydantoin
  • imidazolidinyl urea
  • diazolidinyl urea
  • sodium hydroxymethylglycinate
  • 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3 diol (Bronopol)
3. Ask Johnson & Johnson to make safer baby shampoo worldwide.
4. In the long run, we need laws that protect us from nasty contaminants. Write to your elected officials and ask them to clean up cosmetics.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Johnson and Johnson Baby Shampoo Is it Safe?

Why are babies in the U.S., Australia, Canada, China and Indonesia being exposed to a carcinogen in Johnson's Baby Shampoo when safer alternatives are available in other countries? We'd like to know!

More than two years ago, the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics released the groundbreaking report, No More Toxic Tub, which revealed that popular kids' bath products – including Johnson's Baby Shampoo – contained chemicals linked to cancer. We promptly asked Johnson & Johnson to reformulate its iconic baby shampoo and specifically to remove the formaldehyde-releasing chemical quaternium-15, and we've kept up the pressure on Johnson & Johnson through letters and meetings.
Fast-forward to now. Johnson’s Baby Shampoo in the U.S. and some other countries still has not been reformulated. But the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics recently discovered that J&J is selling non-formaldehyde versions of the shampoo in Denmark, Finland, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, Sweden and the U.K.

We know J&J can do better. Every baby – regardless of where she or he lives – should be protected from unnecessary exposure to carcinogens.

Read our new report, Baby’s Tub Is Still Toxic for the full story on the Johnson & Johnson double standard.

We demand safe products for all babies, in every market, at every price point. If you agree, please write to J&J today

For healthy babies and safer products,

Article from Campaign for Safe Cosmetics