I am releasing this weeks article ahead of schedule due to the urgent nature of this time sensitive information....and as I stated in last weeks article I would bring you a summary of all things instead of a play by play...But this should definitely shed some light on how fast things go once set in motion. I think you'll be amazed at what has transpired in just this past week alone.
Sounds Horrible Doesn't It?
Opposing the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 sounds like those that are against this controlling bill don't want safe cosmetics, yet nothing could be farther from the truth. This name on this bill is again based on "zero science" with the precautionary principle being emphasized.
This is the FDA Globalization Act of 2009 revamped and is the same broken record being promoted by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, which is backed by the Environmental Working Group. They have even resorted to using star power, Fran Drescher, to denounce all these toxins that are supposedly in our skincare products. Unfortunately, due to blindly propagating the disinformation fed to her, she clearly does not realize how her own line of skincare will also be targeted if this draft becomes law. For some reason this group along with their mouthpieces seem to think their products are exempt because they use all natural chemicals, when it is the synthetic chemicals which have the longest, proven safety record for decades.
Those that are familiar with the poorly written bill of 2009, along with the Colorado Personal Care Products Safety Act, which was defeated, already know how harmful this type of legislation is to small businesses, and it will do absolutely nothing for making cosmetics safer, but only remove your choices of the products you enjoy.
Simply put, if this law passes, Sterling Minerals Cosmetics and ONATI Skincare will be "NO MORE"!
Again, we have done nothing else but strive to create safe cosmetics with ourselves, our family, our friends and our customers, current and future, in mind. Nothing could be more important to us....all of us, who make incredible cosmetics and skincare products. This type of legislation is about control, power and invasion of privacy...I thought I was living in America!
Urgency Is Needed
Things move quickly sometimes, and this all unfolded in less than a weeks time. It was also no coincidence that a video release (see further below) and the preliminary hearings orchestrated by CFSC, were held last week right before our legislators depart for summer break.
These are the facts as they stand today
Read the Draft as it is currently written.
Safe Cosmetics Act 2010 (pdf)
The petition below to stop this draft dead in its tracks. We are asking all of you who love your favorite products produced by small independent manufacturers to speak up and let congress know this bill is an intrusion on the private sector and the jobs they provide, and to also say "ENOUGH" to NGO's, Non Governmental Organizations, on spreading fear and propaganda without validated science to back their theories and claims.
View full petition on left hand side, beneath the photo image. Each point of the Draft is addressed to see our opposition and reasoning behind it.
Oppose HR 5786: Safe Cosmetics Act 2010 Petition
Fear Mongering At It's Worst
This shameless video, the Story of Cosmetics, plays on our fears by using skull and crossbones on every product conceived in the beauty industry and uses terms of fear based innuendo and stoops to playing on a woman's fear who may also be a mother as though she is poisoning her baby. They would have you believe that cosmetic manufacturers are deliberately putting toxins in their products which are killing us....this is just silly isn't it?.... because think about this for a minute, if this were true, there would be no one left to buy our products, because we would all be dead!....pretty far reaching don't you think?
This video is so insulting to our intelligence, and again is a propaganda tool for CFSC, which was released coincidentally the day before the introduction of this latest Bill coming before congress. It is also done in such a manner that we are all treated as though we are 5 years old and don't have a lick of common sense or a shred of intelligence....what are they saying?....Americans are mindless lemmings and only government knows what is best for us?
To view these if you are receiving direct email or RSS feeds click here.
This video provides the counterpoints with science and facts to this unscientific "shockumentary" video you just watched. And I am grateful to them for taking the time to bring this to light so again, we, the consumer, can have a clearer understanding of the facts and not a lopsided viewpoint designed to gain sympathy and support for no other reason than to gain control over us and to spread fear!
Kathleen Dezio's Response to The Story of Cosmetics video, Spokeswoman for Personal Care Products Council.
"The content in this harsh and unscientific ‘shockumentary – genre’ video bears no relationship to the ‘real’ story of cosmetics. Our industry employs hundreds of men and women who have devoted their careers to substantiating the safety of cosmetic products. This video is an unfortunate attempt to generate fear about an alleged public health risk from cosmetics that is unwarranted. It is repugnant to suggest that cosmetic companies would manufacture, and the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) would allow them to market, products that are dangerous or contain toxins that cause cancer or any other disease. It is absurd to suggest that the men and women in our industry would market products that could cause harm to themselves and their families." (FULL ARTICLE)
Environmental Working Group: Money Is The Power
We are accused as an industry, that we are fighting their non science tyranny against us based on vested interest and money being a motivator for this fight. Here is the truth behind their vested interest to keep you scared: A bit of the "pot calling the kettle black". Without it, they would be out of a job, so what better motivator to keep you scared than these generous salaries. These people are lobbyists, and we all know what lobbyists do, they place politicians in a position of being beholding to them based on promises given.
According to their 2008 Tax Filings
In 2008 Ken Cook was paid $219.401.00 plus another $21,295.00 estimated amount of other compensation from organization and related organizations.
Richard Wiles $179,218.00 plus $20,998.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
Jane Houlihan $150,226.00 plus $19,448.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
William Walker made $136,448.00 plus 19,743.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
Susan Comfort $115,752.00 plus $7932.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
Sandra Schubert $127,229.00 plus $4884.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
Alexander Formuzis $120,592.00 plus $10,920.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
Christopher Campbell $136,909.00 plus $11,988.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
In case you got sick of reading the pay that is a total of $1,185,775.00 being paid to the top 8 employees of the Environmental Working Group just in 2008. The total estimated amount of other compensation from the organization or related organizations for the top 8 at EWG was $117,248.00. The total reported 2008 salaries for EWG was $3,203,747.00 in 2008. The 2008 total revenue at EWG was $6,242,570.00. Over half of their total revenue went into paying the employees of EWG. (FULL STORY)
The Real Costs Of Pre Market Testing
The tests it would take to get approval if Skin Deep (otherwise known as EWG) and Campaign for Safe Cosmetics force this legislation through:
$440.00 Paraben results in ppm
$950.00 Nitrosamine results in ppm
$950.00 Phthalate Free results in ppm
$700.00 per metal Heavy Metals (Lead, Arsenic, Cadmium) results in ppm
$275.00 Mercury results in ppm
$1185.00 Standard 9 Metals
$750.00 1,4 Dioxane results in ppm
$275.00 Formaldehyde results in ppm
$300.00 Ethylene Oxide results in ppm
$450.00 Residuals results in ppm
$1500.00 Fragrance allergens
$350.00 Fragrance Allergens Confirmation test per sample, per per allergen
Total $8125.00 or more pre-market testing per product
So, if you have a number of products, this type of testing will literally shutdown, not only manufacturers, but raw ingredient suppliers whom may offer hundreds of different ingredients to the manufacturer of the end products.
The Decision Is Ours
What do you want from your personal care products?
Do you want the freedom to choose?
Isn't voting with your dollar the way to send messages to businesses if you don't like what they are selling?
Do we really need more government regulation? Or regulation that dictates choice?
You should ask the hard question as to why are we being attacked as an industry when similar natural ingredients can be eaten or drank without the scrutiny of government or non governmental agencies? Remember the Phthalates story I wrote, how a single narrow study prompted congress to pass a law last year banning them in Toys, whereby putting small manufacturers of toys out of business. Lead was another concern, yet small indie manufacturers weren't using this in their toys anyway since the growing concern was based on toys coming out of China. But since they lumped the indies in with China exports, no exemption basically, due to the high cost of testing to prove indie toys were lead free and that they were already providing safer lead free toys, forced them to close up shop anyway. This is the same scenario here!
Trace elements of toxins by which they ascribe the theory, are "killing us", are the same ones found in fruits, vegetables and the water we drink....yet we continue to eat them because we also know of the benefits they provide to us in the form of antioxidants, fighting pathogens we are exposed to everyday. We simply cannot remove trace elements from all natural products since they are watered and planted in soil where much of these elements are taken up. This doesn't even account for the things we enjoy like bathing, swimming or singing in the rain, or planting our vegetable garden then enjoying them in our salad...because to eliminate these from our lives, we would need to live in a bubble.
So I ask, why is something slathered on the skin compared to something we eat as being the
perpetrator of our illnesses? This is simply not factual and those that spread this hyperbole are either misinformed, or simply choose to not find or believe the science offered to disprove their theories....since this would defeat their purpose of scaring us....and this is their agenda, to gain control over one of the safest industries to date, and dictate our choices!
And I am relatively positive no one is eating their cosmetics!
You can drink coffee, but you can't put it on your skin...you can use Olive Oil on salads and cooking, but you can't put it on your skin.....you can eat fruits or vegetables, but you can't make a mask out of it...etc. I don't see a ban on cigarettes, but yet these are proven to be carcinogenic, irrefutably so....Looks like choice to me!
Hey EWG and CFSC and Congress, we can choose, and we do so by way of educating ourselves about ingredients, not because someone or some entity thinks we are too dumb for our own good.
And a very important question: Why would Congress choose to mandate such regulations that would place a further burden on the American people by taking away the very livelihoods of small businesses needed to provide an income for their families, and to contribute to the economy by providing jobs as they are allowed to flourish.
Also, since there are choices of more organic and naturally derived products, why is new regulation and FDA laws needed? If you listen to nothing else in the video put out by CFSC pay close attention to her last statement about choice....she is essentially stating your choice will be made for you! Hmmm....makes you wonder what is really the driving force of getting this legislation passed....in other words, what's next? My choice to eat a Twinkie, or consume alcohol or soda pop will be removed because NGO's deem them harmful? Now that's scary!
Also don't be misled that European companies have complied with no problems, since this also does not address smaller companies, as they did not survive the mandates and went out of business, and others can't even get started due to all the regulation based on "precautionary principle". Last year it was toys, now it is cosmetics, what is next years agenda?....what foods and drinks we can consume, since they are already taxing those that are deemed unhealthy choices.
I sincerely hope you'll see the seriousness of their premise and say "ENOUGH" to their controlling our lives by signing the petition and to also contact your state representatives and say "NO to HR 5786".
Thank you for your support!
Here is a link where you can directly oppose this proposed legislation at Janice Schakowsky site, a proponent to the bill. Click Here The downside is they require a sign in procedure that is not as simple as our petition site, and may be one reason for lack of participation, but I invite you to overlook this and make our opinion known. If we sit on the sidelines thinking others will do it for us, that is how people lose!
Opposing the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 sounds like those that are against this controlling bill don't want safe cosmetics, yet nothing could be farther from the truth. This name on this bill is again based on "zero science" with the precautionary principle being emphasized.This is the FDA Globalization Act of 2009 revamped and is the same broken record being promoted by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, which is backed by the Environmental Working Group. They have even resorted to using star power, Fran Drescher, to denounce all these toxins that are supposedly in our skincare products. Unfortunately, due to blindly propagating the disinformation fed to her, she clearly does not realize how her own line of skincare will also be targeted if this draft becomes law. For some reason this group along with their mouthpieces seem to think their products are exempt because they use all natural chemicals, when it is the synthetic chemicals which have the longest, proven safety record for decades.
Those that are familiar with the poorly written bill of 2009, along with the Colorado Personal Care Products Safety Act, which was defeated, already know how harmful this type of legislation is to small businesses, and it will do absolutely nothing for making cosmetics safer, but only remove your choices of the products you enjoy.
Simply put, if this law passes, Sterling Minerals Cosmetics and ONATI Skincare will be "NO MORE"!
Again, we have done nothing else but strive to create safe cosmetics with ourselves, our family, our friends and our customers, current and future, in mind. Nothing could be more important to us....all of us, who make incredible cosmetics and skincare products. This type of legislation is about control, power and invasion of privacy...I thought I was living in America!
Urgency Is Needed
Things move quickly sometimes, and this all unfolded in less than a weeks time. It was also no coincidence that a video release (see further below) and the preliminary hearings orchestrated by CFSC, were held last week right before our legislators depart for summer break.
These are the facts as they stand today
Read the Draft as it is currently written.
Safe Cosmetics Act 2010 (pdf)
The petition below to stop this draft dead in its tracks. We are asking all of you who love your favorite products produced by small independent manufacturers to speak up and let congress know this bill is an intrusion on the private sector and the jobs they provide, and to also say "ENOUGH" to NGO's, Non Governmental Organizations, on spreading fear and propaganda without validated science to back their theories and claims.
View full petition on left hand side, beneath the photo image. Each point of the Draft is addressed to see our opposition and reasoning behind it.
Oppose HR 5786: Safe Cosmetics Act 2010 Petition
Fear Mongering At It's Worst
This shameless video, the Story of Cosmetics, plays on our fears by using skull and crossbones on every product conceived in the beauty industry and uses terms of fear based innuendo and stoops to playing on a woman's fear who may also be a mother as though she is poisoning her baby. They would have you believe that cosmetic manufacturers are deliberately putting toxins in their products which are killing us....this is just silly isn't it?.... because think about this for a minute, if this were true, there would be no one left to buy our products, because we would all be dead!....pretty far reaching don't you think?
This video is so insulting to our intelligence, and again is a propaganda tool for CFSC, which was released coincidentally the day before the introduction of this latest Bill coming before congress. It is also done in such a manner that we are all treated as though we are 5 years old and don't have a lick of common sense or a shred of intelligence....what are they saying?....Americans are mindless lemmings and only government knows what is best for us?
To view these if you are receiving direct email or RSS feeds click here.
This video provides the counterpoints with science and facts to this unscientific "shockumentary" video you just watched. And I am grateful to them for taking the time to bring this to light so again, we, the consumer, can have a clearer understanding of the facts and not a lopsided viewpoint designed to gain sympathy and support for no other reason than to gain control over us and to spread fear!
Kathleen Dezio's Response to The Story of Cosmetics video, Spokeswoman for Personal Care Products Council.
"The content in this harsh and unscientific ‘shockumentary – genre’ video bears no relationship to the ‘real’ story of cosmetics. Our industry employs hundreds of men and women who have devoted their careers to substantiating the safety of cosmetic products. This video is an unfortunate attempt to generate fear about an alleged public health risk from cosmetics that is unwarranted. It is repugnant to suggest that cosmetic companies would manufacture, and the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) would allow them to market, products that are dangerous or contain toxins that cause cancer or any other disease. It is absurd to suggest that the men and women in our industry would market products that could cause harm to themselves and their families." (FULL ARTICLE)
Environmental Working Group: Money Is The Power
We are accused as an industry, that we are fighting their non science tyranny against us based on vested interest and money being a motivator for this fight. Here is the truth behind their vested interest to keep you scared: A bit of the "pot calling the kettle black". Without it, they would be out of a job, so what better motivator to keep you scared than these generous salaries. These people are lobbyists, and we all know what lobbyists do, they place politicians in a position of being beholding to them based on promises given.
According to their 2008 Tax Filings
In 2008 Ken Cook was paid $219.401.00 plus another $21,295.00 estimated amount of other compensation from organization and related organizations.
Richard Wiles $179,218.00 plus $20,998.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
Jane Houlihan $150,226.00 plus $19,448.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
William Walker made $136,448.00 plus 19,743.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
Susan Comfort $115,752.00 plus $7932.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
Sandra Schubert $127,229.00 plus $4884.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
Alexander Formuzis $120,592.00 plus $10,920.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
Christopher Campbell $136,909.00 plus $11,988.00 estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations.
In case you got sick of reading the pay that is a total of $1,185,775.00 being paid to the top 8 employees of the Environmental Working Group just in 2008. The total estimated amount of other compensation from the organization or related organizations for the top 8 at EWG was $117,248.00. The total reported 2008 salaries for EWG was $3,203,747.00 in 2008. The 2008 total revenue at EWG was $6,242,570.00. Over half of their total revenue went into paying the employees of EWG. (FULL STORY)
The Real Costs Of Pre Market Testing
The tests it would take to get approval if Skin Deep (otherwise known as EWG) and Campaign for Safe Cosmetics force this legislation through:
$440.00 Paraben results in ppm
$950.00 Nitrosamine results in ppm
$950.00 Phthalate Free results in ppm
$700.00 per metal Heavy Metals (Lead, Arsenic, Cadmium) results in ppm
$275.00 Mercury results in ppm
$1185.00 Standard 9 Metals
$750.00 1,4 Dioxane results in ppm
$275.00 Formaldehyde results in ppm
$300.00 Ethylene Oxide results in ppm
$450.00 Residuals results in ppm
$1500.00 Fragrance allergens
$350.00 Fragrance Allergens Confirmation test per sample, per per allergen
Total $8125.00 or more pre-market testing per product
So, if you have a number of products, this type of testing will literally shutdown, not only manufacturers, but raw ingredient suppliers whom may offer hundreds of different ingredients to the manufacturer of the end products.
The Decision Is Ours
What do you want from your personal care products?
Do you want the freedom to choose?
Isn't voting with your dollar the way to send messages to businesses if you don't like what they are selling?
Do we really need more government regulation? Or regulation that dictates choice?
You should ask the hard question as to why are we being attacked as an industry when similar natural ingredients can be eaten or drank without the scrutiny of government or non governmental agencies? Remember the Phthalates story I wrote, how a single narrow study prompted congress to pass a law last year banning them in Toys, whereby putting small manufacturers of toys out of business. Lead was another concern, yet small indie manufacturers weren't using this in their toys anyway since the growing concern was based on toys coming out of China. But since they lumped the indies in with China exports, no exemption basically, due to the high cost of testing to prove indie toys were lead free and that they were already providing safer lead free toys, forced them to close up shop anyway. This is the same scenario here!
Trace elements of toxins by which they ascribe the theory, are "killing us", are the same ones found in fruits, vegetables and the water we drink....yet we continue to eat them because we also know of the benefits they provide to us in the form of antioxidants, fighting pathogens we are exposed to everyday. We simply cannot remove trace elements from all natural products since they are watered and planted in soil where much of these elements are taken up. This doesn't even account for the things we enjoy like bathing, swimming or singing in the rain, or planting our vegetable garden then enjoying them in our salad...because to eliminate these from our lives, we would need to live in a bubble.
So I ask, why is something slathered on the skin compared to something we eat as being the
perpetrator of our illnesses? This is simply not factual and those that spread this hyperbole are either misinformed, or simply choose to not find or believe the science offered to disprove their theories....since this would defeat their purpose of scaring us....and this is their agenda, to gain control over one of the safest industries to date, and dictate our choices!And I am relatively positive no one is eating their cosmetics!
You can drink coffee, but you can't put it on your skin...you can use Olive Oil on salads and cooking, but you can't put it on your skin.....you can eat fruits or vegetables, but you can't make a mask out of it...etc. I don't see a ban on cigarettes, but yet these are proven to be carcinogenic, irrefutably so....Looks like choice to me!
Hey EWG and CFSC and Congress, we can choose, and we do so by way of educating ourselves about ingredients, not because someone or some entity thinks we are too dumb for our own good.
And a very important question: Why would Congress choose to mandate such regulations that would place a further burden on the American people by taking away the very livelihoods of small businesses needed to provide an income for their families, and to contribute to the economy by providing jobs as they are allowed to flourish.
Also, since there are choices of more organic and naturally derived products, why is new regulation and FDA laws needed? If you listen to nothing else in the video put out by CFSC pay close attention to her last statement about choice....she is essentially stating your choice will be made for you! Hmmm....makes you wonder what is really the driving force of getting this legislation passed....in other words, what's next? My choice to eat a Twinkie, or consume alcohol or soda pop will be removed because NGO's deem them harmful? Now that's scary!
Also don't be misled that European companies have complied with no problems, since this also does not address smaller companies, as they did not survive the mandates and went out of business, and others can't even get started due to all the regulation based on "precautionary principle". Last year it was toys, now it is cosmetics, what is next years agenda?....what foods and drinks we can consume, since they are already taxing those that are deemed unhealthy choices.
I sincerely hope you'll see the seriousness of their premise and say "ENOUGH" to their controlling our lives by signing the petition and to also contact your state representatives and say "NO to HR 5786".
Thank you for your support!
Here is a link where you can directly oppose this proposed legislation at Janice Schakowsky site, a proponent to the bill. Click Here The downside is they require a sign in procedure that is not as simple as our petition site, and may be one reason for lack of participation, but I invite you to overlook this and make our opinion known. If we sit on the sidelines thinking others will do it for us, that is how people lose!
No comments:
Post a Comment