Scrubbing Or Exfoliation Of Facial Skin: Harmful Or Helpful?!

Using Exfoliation Scrubs On Our Faces Since High School

Many of us have been convinced since our high school days when we began to suffer the angst due to the hormonal changes in our skin, that in order to keep our skin free of oil and debris and to fight acne, we must rub a dub scrub our faces until essentially raw as this was the only way to have clear skin.

In part this is true, but it is the extent of which we pursue this practice, sometimes feverishly, that is causing the ongoing problems with what might be otherwise healthy skin.  Acne is prolonged, skin is damaged, deterioration of collagen occurs causing permanent acne scarring, whereby accelerating the aging process on our faces.

So many methods have been introduced into the marketplace, it becomes a daunting task to know the wise thing to do.  Commercialization of many skincare products purport to the consumer, "use this product daily and have beautiful, lustrous skin" or "this will help clear up acne when you use our product."  

Let's begin with what we see typically:

Irritating to facial skin ~

• Terry Washcloths (harsh to delicate skin types)
• Buf Puf Facial Wedges (been around since forever, extremely harsh)
• Walnut Facial Scrubs (damaging, tears skin, sharp edges)
• Apricot Facial Scrubs (same as above for facial scrubs)
• Sea Salt Facial Scrubs (recommend for body only)
• Any Other Ground Seeds In The Formula (same principle applies)
• Alpha Hydroxy Acids (Glycolic or Salicylic Acids)
• Facial Brushes Of Any Kind (overused and can create chronic irritation)

Gentle to facial skin ~

• Oatmeal (precooked, gentle and healing, can help with dryness and has anti-itch properties)
• Rice Flour (raw version, has super fine grainy finish, extremely gentle and healing)
• Facial Mask Specific Recipes for cleansing and exfoliating
• Micro Fiber Towels (perfect for delicate skin types)
• Polymer Beads (smooth surface so no sharp edges for tearing skin)
• Jojoba Beads (same as above, yet will also moisturize, soothe and balance sebum)
• Baking Soda (basic fine grained scrubbing agent and is best used with yogurt preparations)
• Fine Textured Sugar (same as above and best used in oil or plant based treatment to prolong texture)
• Gentle AHA's comprised of natural fruit acids or lactic acid for maintaining daily natural cell turnover

What's The Harm Of It All?

Unfortunately, the many commercial preparations and mechanical methods of removing dead skin cells, or for basic cleaning of the skin are overused and are too coarse or harsh to delicate facial tissues.

For instance, your scrubbing tools are in a category of over consumption and will create problems for skin that weren't there before using one of these devices.  Although the brush can be used safely for exfoliation of the skin, in most cases the advice given with this type of facial tool is to use them everyday for the removal of makeup and daily oily grime buildup on the skin.  The advice even goes as far as to recommend twice per day usage.

Here in lies the harm: as you can see from the two lists above, one that is irritating and the other offering gentler alternatives, is if this tool is used along with the rest of these products or other micro fine scrubbing ingredients that are normally considered gentle, certain types of skin conditions can occur that could go on to require repair or treatment from your dermatologist.

To preface the list below, smoking and sun exposure along with pollutants in our atmosphere are the major causes for premature aging of our skin.  Over exfoliation contributes to this problem, but it is certainly not an overall cause for aging our skin.

Examples of harm to your facial skin tissues when over exfoliation occurs:

• Dryness and irritation due to stripping the skin by not only removing dead cells but healthy ones as well, making it more difficult to maintain moisture on the face.
• Keeps skin in a constant state of inflammation something similar to a chemical peel, causing cells to break down and making the face more vulnerable to free radical damage.
• Stripping the skin of it's lipid barrier, including destroying good facial bacteria can cause a reaction dermatitis which in and of itself has it's own set of problems and can be difficult to clear.
• Acne can actually worsen when over exfoliating the facial skin due to irritation, over stimulation of skin cells creating more sebum production and the face is no longer in correct balance for maintaining proper skin health.
• Any combination of these two lists, or just using gentle methods along with even your daily cleansing regimen can create and exacerbate many skin problems since your cleansing products will also have a certain level of ingredients that offer exfoliation benefits.

First Do No Harm To Your Lovely Face

With all of these methods and ingredients available to the consumer there are easy ways to keep your skin nice and clean and show off a lovely polished surface without looking red faced.

Remember, using a washcloth with your cleanser is already exfoliating, so to follow with a facial brush or other skin damaging scrub, your face will not be happy. 

Always treat acne and other skin conditions gently!  Rice flour or oatmeal in a facial mask followed by a bit of scrubbing action before removal, and fruit acids in cleansers, moisturizers or facial serums are wonderful for doing the job well.  With these types of raw ingredients you can use them 2-3 times per week and skincare products like our ONATI Skin Care line can be used each and everyday.

We also offer our "gentle to the skin" Micro Fiber Face Cloths.  These are excellent for delicate skin types and gentle exfoliation each and every time you cleanse your face.  Skin exfoliation is a good thing and will help keep our skin looking polished and refreshed as long as it is performed in the right doses.

So as you can see with all these everyday rituals, it is easy to be overusing exfoliation products without really realizing you are overusing exfoliation products.  Treat your face and skin gently and your skin will sustain proper balance which in turn provides overall skin health.....and that my ladies is my best advice!

Cheers!

FDA Sends More Warning Letters For Drug Claims In Skincare

FDA Is No Longer Being Complacent It Seems

FDA has sent out more warning letters to a small number of companies that specialize in skincare creams that correlate with Diabetes, since they are proclaiming a drug benefit when you use one of their topical treatments.  Although this is not a cosmetic company scenario, it still is something to underscore that FDA is keeping an eye out for those wanting to make medical claims that their skin cream will do more than just moisturize and help skin look and feel better.

Who Was Targeted This Time With An FDA Warning?

It was these medical skin care providers listed below:

• Health Care Products, Diabetes Division, concerning two of its Zostrix skin care products

• Anastasia Marie Laboratories for its Diapedic treatment

• The Magni Group for a number of medicated skin care products, to treat shingle-, diabetic- and other medical related skin care issues.

The FDA based their warning letters on the premise that some of the purported product claims offered by way of marketing and advertising, which is a violation of FTC regulations as well, also violated The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, with specific reference to drug claims that might pertain to the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease.  In these cases, it revolved around those suffering from diabetes.

Although I have covered this in the past in many of my articles I feel they are worth repeating:

FDA is clear about a disease is any condition of the body such as wrinkles due to aging, dryness, skin damage due to sun exposure, acne, psoriasis, eczema etc.  Whereas a cosmetic is defined as a product intended to be rubbed, poured, sprinkled, or sprayed on, introduced into, or otherwise applied to the human body for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance.

So most skincare creams or makeup products can clearly make us look and feel better including soothing skin and even improving its texture temporarily and / or skins appearance with cumulative effects.  However their descriptions, despite the ingredient profile of known benefits, especially when organic ingredients are used, cannot purport to be curative in any way of any disease, skin condition or otherwise.

I would love to proclaim historical and anecdotal evidence of how organic ingredients can truly react remarkably on skin, but without the actual clinical studies, no can do!  Only you can decide how your skin does or what you know has been improved after using a certain skincare product.

FDA Sent Out Warning Letters For Anti Aging Claims Last Year

Last Fall, the FDA notified some of the heavy hitters in our cosmetic and skincare industry and gave them a major smack down because they were making product claims relating to anti-aging benefits without actual FDA approved clinical trials.

Some of you may remember the companies that were targeted; Avon, L’Oreal (Lancome) and Janson Becket for example, making claims that their products can help treat or visibly repair wrinkles.  You can see the FDA list and who and what type of warning letters were issued to various cosmetic and skincare companies.

The FDA is especially keen to point out that many companies marketing anti-aging products avoid making claims that such treatments can have a physiological impact on the body or the appearance, which according to its definition of a cosmetic product, gives it a drug claim.  The term 'anti-aging' in and of itself could be determined also as a drug claim since it infers that it is reversing or preventing aging of our skin, which no product can do.  It can help skin look better and slow the process to a degree, but to prevent or reverse, this will not happen.

The FDA won't typically have a problem with a name of a product so much as a description based on its' intended use.  For instance you can call a product 'rejuvenate' or 'revitalize' as long as the name by definition doesn't broaden to a description that the skin will some how be completely transformed back to perfection before the wrinkles or damage.  However, in the other context, a product called 'acne buster' or 'acne complex' does create an inference within the name that it will do something for acne, such as cure or correct it without product description.  This would therefore fall under FDA scrutiny as a skincare product duping as a drug.

Claims that any skincare or cosmetic product will rejuvenate (restore to new), repair, or restructure the skin may also be a drug claim.  Another in particular that I have frowned on and know to be categorically false, are those that claim they can restore collagen simply by applying a collagen molecule to the skin.  Synthetic collagen is actually protein molecules, and they are too large to even penetrate skin, much less do anything to help restore our loss of natural collagen as we age.  

This also is something Lancome was claiming in their skincare products and this is tantamount to making a 'drug' claim.  So always be wary of those promising you the moon, stars and sun in a fountain of youth, physiologically speaking.  It simply cannot be done with a topical cream!

UPDATE: Green Tea Extract in Mineral Makeup: Was I Wrong?

Professionalism Is Key

Well....  it seems I have been nicely called out on the carpet again by someone claiming to be an ingredient supplier that provides Green Tea Extract to many cosmetic manufacturers, including well known mineral makeup brands.  This was discussed in my last article Mineral Makeup with Green Tea Extract, Just More Hype?

And as is fitting, I will always attempt to share both sides of the equation on an ingredient as I did with my Bismuth Oxychloride article with comments by the ingredient supplier.  I then was faced with making corrections to the Diamond Powder article with an updated Response article to address our many email exchanges we had many moons ago.  These two ingredients, I felt were not beneficial in the manner they were used through my own research.  I also had further consultations with the actual chemists that have gone through extensive R and D to create and provide many improved alternative, innovative ingredients to cosmetic manufacturers.

As luck would have it, I am no stranger to controversy since I am currently the liaison for my state in regard to ongoing cosmetic legislation and I will challenge and debunk marketing hype, along with addressing completely inaccurate pseudo science that is presented as I continue to do through my blog and over at Personal Care Truth.  I will only acquire and provide scientific facts within my research data and not support snake oil salesmanship that goes on within my own industry.  In case you missed it: Beauty Industry Professionals May Be Their Own Worst Enemy!

The supplier who contacted me in regard to my latest article on Green Tea Extract and other antioxidants was nothing short of professional and courteous, however they replied under the veil of anonymity through my blog, as was the similar case with the Bismuth Oxychloride and Diamond Powder article (using a Pseudonym).  This started a firestorm of comments on the BO article from many users of this potential skin irritant, and the Lumiere Diamond Powder caused me to prepare an updated response and correct the original article.

The supplier of this particular antioxidant conveyed to me that my description was not completely accurate.  It seems it did not correctly depict other available delivery systems which help to stabilize and prevent degradation, while preserving the phytochemical efficacy necessary that the antioxidant properties of herbal extracts, vitamins and minerals provide.  

So, I stand corrected in this regard, yet I chose to not publish their comments left anonymously since this leaves me at a disadvantage and lacks professionalism.  I decided after the comments on my Bismuth Oxychloride and Diamond Powder articles, those conveying their message under the shroud of the internet curtain will not get my full attention.  If someone wishes to engage me in a discussion and declare a statement as fact and present the science, then they should also stand behind it and the name the supplier or affiliation they represent.  However, out of respect for my customers and as a professional courtesy, I will acknowledge their comments were still worth noting and forced me to research the facts further, so let's just say for a moment, "not so fast!"

Researched and Documented

There is unequivocally no dispute as to the skin health benefits of Green Tea Extract.  It is proven to be quite effective as are vitamins A, C and E along with many other extracts.  It is the method of delivery that is called into question.

The supplier explained to me, and I am paraphrasing, through a liposome preparation, the freeze dried antioxidant can be delivered and preserved for extended periods so skin can benefit based on a liposome utilizing mild penetration enhancers.  Once it is encapsulated, sustainability and delivery of phytochemicals is improved and increased.....the length of sustainability was not determined or clarified except to be noted as many months.  Unfortunately, further research did not yield me an exact shelf life so I cannot comment further in this regard.

Now of course, I have discussed in past articles about delivery systems, including the use of penetration enhancers which have been proven beneficial based on substantiated research.

I located two PubMed articles.... the 1st PubMed  is as it relates liposome use in treatment of skin cancer, and the  2nd PubMed also reporting similar research in support of the claims this ingredient supplier made to me about antioxidant delivery and sustainability.  My long time readers know I am always about presenting true and accurate science on any ingredient, not marketing claims made by suppliers, company chemists or cosmetic formulators willing to stretch the truth so it sounds much better than it is just to sell a product.

In this case, however, I am impressed with the research and pleased to share it with you.  But as the article concurs with my past articles, these types of antioxidants are destroyed by light and oxygen, so sustainability is vital whether the ingredient is stabilized and delivered with liposomes or with the use of a preservative system and additional penetration enhancers.  Furthermore, based on scientific accuracy, these liposomes are delivered through the mean size of nano scale.  Although liposomes have been used for many years in delivery of vaccinations, medical creams and other beauty treatments, I'll limit my comments to cosmetic uses only, except for purposes of comparison.

Does This Information Negate My Last Article

Well let's see if what I presented is still accurate.  In followup, I did further research and contacted suppliers of this liposome ingredient, including acquiring a direct informational page about Liposome delivery of green tea extract.

Unfortunately, some cosmetic ingredient suppliers are not timely in their response or they ignore the email altogether.  And a phone call.... well I may be able to discuss it with them, but sometimes the hard questions about an ingredient can get muddied up or avoided if the question might challenge the "love" for their ingredient as exampled in my other two articles above.

Quite frankly, there are enough of the blind leading the blind in our industry, from product labeling to medical claims and SPF claims, or all natural cosmetic creators slamming synthetic cosmetic creators based on a belief of harm and not actual science.  And for me ethically, it is and always will be about the chemistry and the science of any ingredient I may choose or not choose to use in my cosmetics and skincare products.

One Company known as Cosmetochem International offers a technology known as Liposome Herbasec.

• This is a novel range of concentrated / standardized, liposomal-based botanical extracts in a lyophilized powder form.
• Phospholipids and lecithin are the safest, mildest, natural substances which allow the penetration of actives into deeper layers of the epidermis.
• Unsaturated phospholipids (used in Liposome Herbasec) have been shown to be excellent penetration enhancers.
• INCI Name: Maltodextrin, Plant Extract, Lecithin

Cosmetic and Toiletries also gave this company props for their innovation on providing a wonderful delivery system of antioxidants for many skincare or personal care products.

However, I was made aware that depending on the composition of the overall formula, an adverse effect can occur causing a loss of  liposome stability, making it ineffective, (example: use of emulsifiers) so cosmetic science must be sound in regard to the delivery system for best purported benefit.

Liposomes themselves are penetration enhancers, whether purchased in aqueous solution or freeze dried requiring some form of liquid be added. It is vital to be cognizant of what they are being combined with since other less desirable ingredients entering into the deeper layers of skin may cause concern and further argument from NGO's.  With them it is always about blood brain barrier interaction of what chemicals, synthetic or natural, can cause...proven or unproven...it doesn't seem to matter.  Hence why different types of penetration enhancers are used extensively in the delivery of topical drugs, such as cortisone creams and HRT for their ability to cross the blood brain barrier.

Dr. Gabriele Blume wrote an abstract and extensive article on Liposomes

So can green tea extract in mineral makeup offer similar benefits in the same fashion as it does in liquid preparations?   Scientific research and ingredient descriptions along with the recommendations of usage dictates the answer.

Back to the subject at hand....

With the links I provided above, along with my many science based articles published at PCT, and through countless discussions I have shared with cosmetic scientists whom I have a long standing relationship with, including those that are located in the EU which have been guest writers for my skin care guide as well.....the actual chemistry and science cannot be manipulated or refuted for the purposes of pseudo scientific bogus claims.

It is this same fight we currently are dealing with yet again, as in the case of the most recent draft of the Safe Cosmetics and Personal Care Products Act 2013.... onerous regulations being proposed based on non peer reviewed science, cosmetic medical claims by our industry, and the precautionary principle.

Furthermore, this is prompting some physicians to also share their views about cosmetic companies pushing the envelope on over promising and under delivering in order to sell skincare and cosmetics.  Dr. Ourian expressed in an interview we need better regulation to control these misleading claims, which falls back on my article about our beauty industry leaders being their own worst enemy.  Large to small companies do it because they can and they are only damaging the rest of us in the beauty industry that won't fabricate science.  However the larger firms like Loreal, the parent company of Lancome are beginning to get slapped for some of their anti-aging claims because they are highly visible, while smaller companies violating FDA and FTC regulations fly under the radar....

I believe it is only a matter of time before more whistle blowers, especially with new regulation, come forward to report those in violation....large or small.

Final Answers To This Debatable Question

Is Green Tea Extract wonderful as an antioxidant?.... absolutely.... as I conveyed in my last article by applying directly to the skin after brewing tea or delivered within a skincare product containing the hydrated form.  But, I also now have been further educated on how liposomes have improved on the delivery system of antioxidants based on the science of skincare and cosmetic products. 

Is it absolutely possible for freeze dried liposomes to be blended into mineral makeup.....of course....yet without compromise due to shearing.... well that is another story, but that point is moot.  Plus, based on the suppliers recommended dosing which is as high as 5%, nice efficacy can be achieved.

However, the key factor in all research articles and ingredient information as it relates to skin health benefit when used dry is irrefutable; an aqueous solution or similar is used and recommended in order for this ingredient to become viable as demonstrated. 

When used in mineral makeup, the benign liposome encapsulated Green Tea Extract will happily sit atop the skin without harm or penetration .... not a bad thing and definitely safer since no blood brain barrier confusion would occur with NGO's like the EWG or Campaign for Safe Cosemetics....well maybe.  So used in this application, science shows, that enjoying any skin health benefits is highly improbable.

Bottom line and with all due respect to the cosmetic supplier's valid point on sustainability, as science is shared with me through direct contact with actual innovators of these types of delivery systems and ingredient preparations... no matter how hard one tries to meet a marketing agenda, you can't change the science as to how and what any ingredient is capable and incapable of achieving. 

I am always grateful to those in the science community for providing pertinent information in regard to this valuable research as it pertains to improving sustainability to a beneficial antioxidant for skin health.  You may also enjoy this very informative editorial by BioEncapsulation Research Group addressing encapsulated ingredients used in personal care products today and in the future, presenting excellent innovation on bio-encapsulated research for many other consumer products we use for delivery of healthy nutrition in our foods as well.

I continue to learn something everyday.  Though it happens rarely, for those challenges that come my way from cosmetic ingredient suppliers, manufacturers and formulators, I will always meet them head on respectively where respect is given.  I am beholding to them as well since they encourage me to continue my research which keeps me on my toes, which in turn helps me to maintain the integrity I strive for in truth in marketing and labeling, and to make corrections when necessary.

Education is never-ending as Science is ever evolving!

Mineral Makeup with Green Tea Extract - Just More Hype?

The Next Generation Of Mineral Makeup Hype

As mineral makeup is getting more and more popular, it seems that many companies are doing their level best to try to take their products to the next level by touting all the fantastic benefits of additional ingredients for anti-aging.  Such as mineral makeup now with Japanese Green Tea Extract.

But what I find most disconcerting and a bit dubious, not just as a formulator but as a consumer as well, is the manner by which some also try to extrapolate purported ingested benefits of a certain ingredient, to performing the same in a mineral powder applied to the face.

With all the mineral makeup hype out there, you may not even begin to know which way to turn or where to begin.

Some newfangled additive ideas are listed here and are all freeze dried:

• Green Tea Extract (Japanese) 
• Vitamins A, C and E
• Lavender 
• Chamomile 
• Herbal Extracts 

Although this is a fantastic marketing concept or gimmick depending on your perspective, these ingredients actually do nothing for the skin when provided in a mineral cosmetic powder.  Basically this is a marketing campaign focused primarily on baby boomers.

Unless the addition of a botanical ingredient is in the mineral makeup formula to boost the skin health properties like ours, by increasing the benefits of soothing skin irritations through the use of rice powder or allantoin, or maintaining pH levels and controlling sebum production on skin such as with Jojoba Oil, all others are strictly a selling point to make a standard mineral makeup appear better than what the main inert ingredients provide to the user in the first place.  Zinc Oxide for instance, is a sun blocking agent and is well known for its' anti-inflammatory properties, and is a main component in most mineral makeup brands.

I wrote an article a couple of years ago titled Anti-Aging Ingredients In Mineral Makeup and Skincare for those that wish to learn more about the viability of such ingredients when used in mineral makeup products vs actual benefits that can occur when found in skincare regimens.

Antioxidants Benefits and Shortfalls

Benefit:

Green Tea Extract is a powerful antioxidant for fighting free radicals, it has also been tested and shown it can assist with fighting skin cancer when used in combination with other UV filters.  It does provide some anti-inflammatory properties.

Vitamin A, in the right concentration, has been found to be very effective at reducing fine lines and wrinkles, improving skin tone and exfoliating the skin.

Vitamin E and C help fight free radicals when they are found in higher concentrations, and are also used to stabilize an emulsion when utilized in combination with other preservatives. The Vitamin E portion is a nice emollient ingredient added to enrich a skincare formula.

Herbal Extracts fall under the same context as Green Tea Extract based on their various skin benefits.

Shortfall:

Antioxidants used in a powder, fail in this context.  A powder is not designed to be absorbed by the skin which is where a beneficial ingredient needs to go in order to have any purported benefit.  Mineral makeup essentially will always sit atop the skin, or at the most meld with the skins natural oil or your moisturizer, and is designed to soothe and assist with reduction of inflammation and irritation of the skins' surface.  And the last thing any mineral makeup will do is "nourish" skin.

Herbal Extracts and Green Tea in particular, in my opinion are the epitome of mineral makeup marketing hype due to the amount that can actually be incorporated into the minerals.  It is green in nature when fresh, and any supposed significant beneficial amount of this extract used for skin health, can and will alter the color of the minerals.  This is why you'll see Green Tea Extract (Japanese) at the very most, be listed as the last ingredient or after the colorants on the label placing the concentration somewhere around 1% or less of total product, at which point, if there were any actual skin benefit, would be lost at this ratio.  Concentrations mean everything when it comes to skincare enhancement and benefit, and the use of antioxidants in mineral cosmetics cannot deliver on a promise or claim.

Furthermore, what many don't know, is that antioxidants used as a stand alone additive rather than a natural constituent of another ingredient component such as Jojoba Oil, are destroyed by the air we breathe once exposed to oxygen. Without a supporting preservation system, the antioxidant loses its' potency of any benefit it may offer in short order.  Literally within a matter of a few minutes on the skin and within hours once the jar is opened.

Herbal Extracts aside, Green Tea Extract will also age quickly on the shelf in their dry form due to environmental stressors, showing signs of degradation by turning brown so any and all antioxidant benefit has oxidized, whereby aging a cosmetic and now creating a mineral makeup which has a shortened shelf life based on the skin benefit claim alone.

Another wrinkle, Vitamin A, C and E are in freeze dried form and much of their efficacy is lost in the process of the actual freeze drying.  Plus Sunlight and Oxygen are these ingredients worst enemy.  Furthermore, without a catalyst or stabilizing agent to rehydrate them, they pretty much are chemically benign, whereby negating any purported benefit for the skin.

PubMed has shown through science and research testing on Green Tea Extract, along with additional articles you can find in the right hand column, the shelf life of this ingredient of maintaining its antioxidant properties.  The overall consensus seems to give this ingredient 12 to 16 weeks of shelf life storage, not counting a quicker deterioration with everyday use.

Skin Care Can Have The Added Benefit

This is why recent studies have shown it is best to use creams or cleansers utilizing herbal extracts / antioxidants, especially  Green Tea Extract, that can be absorbed by skin through the use of penetration enhancers, be worn under your sunscreen or mineral makeup.  In fact, research provided by more PubMed Articles, has shown it is best to combine green tea with sunscreens.  It can be as easy as brewing some green tea and then putting it on your skin, and then applying your favorite sunscreen over it.  Zinc oxide for instance, is a chemically inert mineral and will not react with green tea.  (Some synthetic chemical sunscreens might have a chemical reaction, especially in sunlight as some research has shown, such as the case of Oxybenzone which is still under debate).

So mineral makeup will work best atop another skincare product that utilizes antioxidants but not when used as part of an ingredient profile in dry form.  Green Tea can have skin soothing properties to be sure, but then so does many other ingredients.  But for anti-aging claims based on the properties of the antioxidants listed above, it is definitely a huge stretch to make this claim.....let alone the fact that the term "anti-aging" is frowned upon by the FDA unless the scientific studies of the actual product it is used in, has been shown to support the anti-aging claim.  Basically reversing aging on the skin by structurally altering it permanently, which is something to date that only plastic surgery and inject-able drugs offer at the present time.

A Friendly Reminder For Skin Safety

Antioxidant usage is also why it is essential to take notice of all natural brands without a preservation system that may only be utilizing antioxidants to support a certain formulation.  This type of preservation which is geared toward spoilage and not actually killing any bacterial contamination, will degrade within a matter of days once the cap is popped.  Antioxidants can only be further stabilized with an excellent preservation system used in combination with them.

But just remember, only a youthful appearance can be assisted and maintained as long as one continues to use their skin care regimen daily, otherwise, once stopped, the skin again begins to show the years of accumulated sun damage along with our natural aging processes.  Genetics and our environment always play a key role in how our skin ages and skincare is only designed to help fight and protect the skin from further damage....but is never the complete magic bullet.

Followup Article : UPDATE: Green Tea in Mineral Makeup: Was I Wrong?

Beauty Industry Professionals May Be Their Own Worst Enemy

Making Claims To Push The Envelope

I cannot even count anymore how many upstarts have come into the beauty industry game with little to zero knowledge on what they can and cannot say in regard to marketing claims.  They are consistently pushing the envelope for trying to make claims on their cosmetics that would be tantamount to being categorized as a drug.  Basically trying to gain any edge over their competitor even if it means s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g the truth.

The war is waged it seems within our industry as those who defend synthetics battle with the organic / natural crowd until one day there will be a winner, and it may be our government with overreaching, onerous regulation founded on misnomers, beauty claims and non scientific rhetoric.  Many in the beauty industry will come out the loser and it will be in part for the types of marketing claims they are making, including negative campaigns on certain ingredients.

This area should not be black and white because you can combine science with nature to create great products using all types of ingredients to achieve excellence.  It doesn't have to be an either or scenario.  Us against them is detrimental to our industry as a whole.  We should all be on the same team and work together to continue to create safe beauty products.

Furthermore, many claims that are made by beauty insiders are way over the top or are without any sense to the claim....basically, it just isn't a logical statement.

However, this is not isolated to newbies in the market but is also being propagated by those in business for 10 years or more, or by well meaning beauty bloggers...... because they can.  Just because the FDA or FTC has not rapped on their proverbial door doesn't mean what they are doing is valid, legal or proven.

Why Beauty Insiders Can Be Their Own Worst Enemy

The multitude of claims some of my fellow beauty entrepreneurs make without scientific evidence to prove their claim, hurt us as an industry and are part of the reason we have the EWG and Campaign for Safe Cosmetics breathing down our necks.  They instill fear through ignorance, which then foments to hate, all based on theory or an ideology by their target market.

However, with that stated, the EWG and Campaign for Safe Cosmetics lose credibility when they use these claims made by the indiscriminate beauty professional to create their scare campaigns with little to zero evidence of said claim to support their assault on many different ingredients. Unfortunately, watchdog groups gather strength to try to create new legislation out of the unsubstantiated claims made by the beauty industry.  So we have no one else to blame to an extent but ourselves when things go awry.

An example: A beauty product once upon a time, made a claim as to 60% of the product is absorbed for the nourishing, age defying benefit of it's lovely ingredients.  Basically instilling the idea in the potential customer that their exceptional product will feed and replenish aged skin, restoring it to it's youthful appearance.  However, toxic chemicals that can be absorbed into our blood stream, and there is no denying they are out there, such as chemical pesticides, and can even affect our nervous system, should not extrapolate to those used in cosmetics or be lumped into the ideology, "it is a chemical, therefore we absorb it."  All chemicals are not created equal.

However, based on this simple marketing proclamation, the CFSC and EWG played on this hook and have used it throughout their literature as to supporting that 60% of all chemicals, harmful or otherwise, are absorbed through the skin into our blood stream.  This has been totally misrepresented and has been regurgitated by.... oh so many bloggers, and there is no evidence to support this other than taking a marketing claim and spinning it to the detriment of us, and the benefit of the argument goes to the opposing team, EWG and CFSC. 

This type of ideological proclamation is a primary example of what our industry has to deal with on a regular basis.  Fortunately, more and more individuals are seeing through the facade of these types of claim.

Through the use of different types of penetration enhancers we can achieve great things, not only with skincare products, but with pharmaceuticals.  So penetration enhancers aren't necessarily the enemy as EWG and CFSC would paint all of them with a broad brush.  However, factual studies have shown that various penetration enhancers will only go so deep and something designed to deliver medicine through the skin to the bloodstream will not typically be utilized in a beauty product.

Penetration Enhancers - Friend or Foe is an article I wrote providing the science in regard to how they work and the incredible, even problematical factors it requires for an ingredient to penetrate our otherwise impermeable barrier, the skin. Basically it requires a 'perfect storm' to create the advantage for which they are used.

Ten Most Common Claims Which Also Reflect Myth

1. Free From ~ This statement has become the mantra for large commercial brands with the smaller brands following suit as a way to convey that their product is somehow safer than their competitors.
   • Danger of Claim: It can reinforce the idea that if something is "free from" a certain ingredient, that the missing ingredient is somehow "dangerous."  And what was once part of the formula has since been removed when it may have never been in the product in the first place.  This is marketing to the consumer that has been led to believe natural is better and everything else will kill them. Example: Parabens, sulfates, etc. get a bad rap when there is actually scientific data that shows these are perfectly safe for personal care use in the recommended dosages within the cosmetic formula.  Or if it is a leave on or rinse off product will also determine ratios.  Any chemical in its full strength has the potential for causing harm, yet these are not offered to the end user, ever.
   
   
2. Chemical Free ~ Another claim that bears no reality in truth or common sense.  Nothing formulated can be without chemicals as all things are chemical....natural or synthetic, makes no difference, it is just the manner in which they are derived or created.  Again, shamelessly used for SCARE tactic marketing.
   
   • Danger of Claim: This connotes the idea all things chemical are hazardous to our health.....think of water, essential oils, olive oil, etc.....these appear to be benign now don't they? However, from the point of view of the overstated 60% absorption claim, these are all potential penetration enhancers.  This claim also overlooks the fact of what the product is packaged in.  There is no getting around the chemical processes that goes into creating the packaging, such as a jar or tube, technically.
   
   
3. Hypoallergenic or Noncomedogenic ~ These terms are not even recognized by the FDA and there actually isn't any proven data in clinical trials, and has yet to be tested by the US Food and Drug Administration as to the validity of such terms. 
   • Danger of Claim: Any ingredient could cause a problem for any individual and this connotes that it won't cause a problem....sorry, but trial and error only, unfortunately.  Up to 10% of the population can and will have a reaction to something the majority of the population won't have.  This includes a developed allergy after using an ingredient for years.  Our bodies are ever changing.  Those with acne may have a similar reaction. What won't cause acne on one individual may be horribly occlusive to another.
   
   
4. Dermatologist / Clinically Tested ~ This is a claim that can be made based on a single doctor trying it out on themselves or a patient.  Based on this perception it is theorized by the end user it must be a proven product. A clinical study performed by the manufacturer on a small number of people will not constitute nationally what can occur if millions use the product.
   
   • Danger of Claim: Gives the perception that it must be safe and work because a doctor or a clinical study said so, but is not necessarily the reality. Safety and efficacy data will change as high volume of users join the pool, and this is PURE marketing! 
   
   
5. Anti-aging Formula ~ This ties into penetration enhancers being utilized within a skin cream and are designed to assist beneficial ingredients in penetrating into the otherwise impermeable surface layers of the skin to restore soft, supple skin with more elasticity.
   • Danger of Claim: EWG and Campaign for Safe Cosmetics have underscored this message as a penetration enhancer being the carrier of chemicals to the blood stream.  When in reality penetration enhancers for the purpose of cosmetics are only skin deep and are not geared toward penetration through the dermis layer into the blood brain barrier as would be the desired effect with a topical drug.  Permanent change does not occur with any cosmetic and only maintains the skin as long as the product is being used.  Anything else would make it an over the counter drug under FDA Regulations.
   
   
6. Non Toxic / Harmful Chemicals ~ What does this even mean?  Who and what entity is deciding what is toxic or not?  This is yet to be determined and will continue to be debatable since EWG and CFSC think anything other than naturally derived is toxic to our bodies.  The majority of scientific research does not support the validity of this marketing claim.  Plus, too much of anything natural or synthetic can cause issues for some.
   
   • Danger of Claim: This statement plays into the fears of the consumer and reinforces the CFSC's campaign rhetoric against beauty industry leaders and their products.  Such as lead being added to lipstick which is categorically FALSE and is considered a contaminant, which is found also in drinking water and the foods we eat that are grown in the ground.
   
   
7. 100% Pure / Natural / Organic ~ This connotes that only natural chemicals are safe for the body and that synthetic chemicals are the bane of our existence and will give us cancer or worse. There is no human scientific data to support this claim.  And animal studies do not extrapolate to humans despite how hard watchdog groups try to convince us.
   
   • Danger of Claim: Beauty products labeled as natural are less tested and scrutinized than are synthetic products and pharmaceuticals. In fact, most compounds as they exist in their natural state cannot be formulated into skin care products. They first must be chemically altered before they can be incorporated into cosmetics, thereby negating the claim of being pure and natural.
   
   
8. FDA Approved ~ This marketing claim gives the unwitting consumer the idea the product is endorsed by the FDA, and the product must have been tested by the FDA to show proof of the companies claim of safety and / or efficacy. 
   • Danger of Claim: This is outright FALSE and is actually in violation of FDA regulation.  FDA does not approve any finished product for the end user in the cosmetic and beauty industry.  Only prescription and OTC drugs and medical devices are FDA approved for their intended purpose. 
   
   
9. Does Not Contain Fillers ~ This marketing claim is designed to intimate that their product is formulated with nothing but pure and essential ingredients only, and that no fillers are used to create a less than desirable product, supposedly.
   • Danger of Claim: This insinuates that somehow a filler ingredient is cheap and makes another product substandard.  Unfortunately, this bears no weight in actual truth.  Those that claim their ingredients are the ultimate and then claim fillers as bad, are also ingredients that are used as filler.  Mica for instance is not only an essential ingredient to the formulation of the majority of mineral makeup, but it is also a FILLER ingredient.  By definition a filler ingredient is used for finish of product, bulking agent, or any ingredient utilized for the desired effect for smooth application.  There is no actual separation of the two.  Water can be considered a filler ingredient since it is not typically essential but makes up the bulk of many skin care products.
   
   
10. Non Irritating ~ This gives the end user of a product the assurance that their otherwise sensitive skin will not have any problem with the product.  This expands on item 3. 
    • Danger of Claim: The problem with this claim is everyone's skin is different.  There are ingredients that have a long standing history of safety and efficacy, yet there will be the small percentile that will have irritation when using it.  Mineral makeup for instance works well for the majority of women, Bismuth Oxychloride excluded, but for a small number, no matter how much they hope, they will always have an irritant reaction and can never wear minerals no matter its' popularity.  We disclose this fact, by using only ingredients with known lower irritant risk factors, but still only the end user will determine what is right for their skin or how they'll react through testing it on themselves.  It may not be a single ingredient, but when used in combination with another or its presumed ratio is where the problem lies.  So by not purchasing something because one may see a certain ingredient of concern, they may be missing out on what otherwise could be fantastic for their skin.   Always TEST...TEST...TEST the product for absolute certainty.

The American Academy of Dermatology wrote an excellent article on Cosmeceuticals and addresses in a common sense language, how and why skincare is devised for providing actual benefit to the end user.  They further establish the premise of many claims and what is reality versus marketing puffery.

There Is No Getting Around Marketing Claims, Though Less Common

The term "cosmeceutical" is often used in cosmetic advertising and may be misleading to the consumer. In fact it connotes that it might be similar to a pharmaceutical product so they conclude that cosmeceuticals are required to undergo the same testing for efficacy and safety as required for medication or OTC drugs.  The perception by the customer is this has more intrinsic value so this is why they cost more, when in reality, may actually be less effective and/or have substandard ingredients.

However, according to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act "does not recognize any such category as "cosmeceuticals." A product can be a drug, a cosmetic, or a combination of both, but the term "cosmeceutical" has no meaning under the law.

Additionally, the FDA states that: "Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act defines drugs as those products that cure, treat, mitigate or prevent disease or that affect the structure or function of the human body. While drugs are subject to an intensive review and approval process by FDA, cosmetics are not approved by FDA prior to sale.  If a product has drug properties, it must be approved as a drug."

To avoid inquiry and punitive action by the United States Federal Trade Commission, cosmeceuticals which do not intend to be regulated as drugs by the FDA, are carefully labeled to avoid making statements which would indicate that the product has drug properties.  Any such claims made regarding the product must be substantiated by scientific evidence as being truthful.

Besides, it is to the financial gain of the manufacturer that their products are not regulated by the FDA as drugs because the FDA review process for drugs can be very costly and may not yield a legally-marketable product if the FDA denies approval.  However, to further expand on item 8, the reputation of the product may be falsely enhanced if the consumer incorrectly believes that a "cosmeceutical" is held to the same FDA standards as a drug.

"Pharmaceutical Grade" buzz words also used to describe many cosmetics, including some mineral makeup companies, is no different.  This is pure marketing hype, insinuating that the product will perform better than others on the market and the connotation is, it will do something for the skin such as heal or cure something.  Also in violation of FDA since if this claim were true, without the proper studies and / or drug monograph including all the warnings provided on the label, this product would be considered mis-branded.  Another reason to pay close attention to labels.  I also wrote an article as it relates to FDA approved Sunscreens and their respective SPF.  All equates to being an OTC drug which includes the FDA required drug monograph.

Final Word

So don't get caught up in the mumbo jumbo of marketing finesse with claims that "sound too good to be true" because they usually are.  I do feel however, that it is important to let the customer know what a product "does not contain"  such as gluten, and in this context we offer it as a quick reference to check for any allergic or sensitivity issues.  But of course always read the full ingredient list to make sure nothing else might cause problems for your skin.

And to further stipulate, when represented as a reference for making sure nothing is in the product to pose a possible problem, it will not create the same concern that "FREE FROM" can, and doesn't connote that the ingredients listed are somehow "unsafe", but rather, they are an ingredient we have chosen not to add to our products based on two parts, personal preference and consumer demand.

And if we can all get on the same page as an industry, we won't all be standing around scratching our heads in confusion and surprise, uttering the word...........................................................

What Is A Moisturizer? You May Be Surprised

Moisturizer Comprehension and Perception

It is amazing how through marketing claims, that many commercial brands of moisturizers have women convinced that they are doing something great for their skin by using their product.  The company brands their product as a moisturizer, in all their advertising they claim "you'll look years younger by using our moisturizer".  It has a thick creamy consistency, feels and looks like a moisturizer should, so it MUST be a moisturizer....right?  Not so fast!

You're In Good Company

Ingredient profiles continue to be a source of frustration for women.  They see the branding of the product as a moisturizer, they then read the incomprehensible ingredient label, throw their hands in the air, and just resign themselves to the fact, "I may not be able to read, pronounce or understand the ingredient label, but it does say it is a moisturizer." 

Just this week, I received several phone calls from women trying to understand why they struggle with ongoing dryness or other skin issues, like acne.  They have complained they can't read the ingredients of their current skincare products, much less pronounce them, and with all the fancy verbiage of a lengthy INCI name, they don't even know what type of ingredient it is or how it performs.

Is it any wonder more and more women are seeking organic or more naturally derived alternatives?  For one thing, they at least feel they are not using synthetics on their faces and that for the most part they understand what chamomile or lavender is.

A Rose By Any Other Name

A prime example about ingredients is in the use of silicone oils and silicone family.  For Example:

Dimethicone comes in many other derivative forms such as:

Amino Bispropyl Dimethicone, Aminopropyl Dimethicone, Amodimethicone, Amodimethicone Hydroxystearate, Behenoxy Dimethicone, C30-45 Alkyl Dimethicone, C24-28 Alkyl Dimethicone, Cetyl Dimethicone, Dimethoxysilyl Ethylenediaminopropyl Dimethicone, Hydroxypropyldimethicone, Stearamidopropyl Dimethicone, Stearoxy Dimethicone, Stearyl Dimethicone and Vinyl Dimethicone.

Cyclomethicone dervatives are in the form of Siloxanes, different name, but still in the silicone family: (A rose by any other name, is still a rose)

So if you see Siloxane as part of the ingredient name, this is another synthetically created silicone product and can be seen in this context: Cyclotetrasiloxane, Cyclopentasiloxane, Cyclohexasiloxane, Decamethylcyclopentasiloxane, etc. There are many more organosilicon compounds, but they are not typically used in the formulation of cosmetics or skincare.

So you can see, though their names may imply something else, they are still nothing short of a silicone oil man-made derivative.  And in most cases, these products leave the skin very soft.

But Is It Moisturizing?

The answer quite simply is "no", "nada", "negatory", etc.  Silicone oils are designed for one purpose, to seal the skin and prevent moisture loss.  They provide a velvety soft texture which eludes to the belief that it is working at making skin soft and supple...... soft yes..... supple and moisturized..... no.

Without the addition of other ingredients to provide ongoing moisturizing properties, you will have soft velvet skin, but many women have discovered, their dry skin is not alleviated in the long term.

Several high end moisturizers were presented to me by clients and once we reviewed the ingredient lists together, it was then they finally understood what they were using on their skin and why the problems were arising while using them.....new bouts of acne was one.

One such label read as follows:

Purified Water, Glycerin, Cyclotetrasiloxane, Sucrose Cocoate, Cetyl Alcohol, Stearyl Alcohol, Cyclopentasiloxane, Isododecane, Isohexadecane, Cyclohexasiloxane, Sericin, Glyceryl Stearate, PEG-100 Stearate, Sodium PCA, Microcrystalline Cellulose, Tocopheryl Acetate, Bisabolol, Glycosaminoglycans, Imidazolidinyl Urea, Cholesterol, Polysilicone-11, Millet (Panicum Millaceum) Extract, Methylparaben, Camellia Oleifera Extract, Cellulose Gum, Cetyl Hydroxyethylcellulose, Propylparaben, Tocopherol, Butylene Glycol Linoleic Acid, Linolenic Acid, Ceramide III, Allantoin Glycyrrhetinic Acid, Superoxide Dismutase, And Magnesium Ascorbyl Phosphate.

The bulk of this product is made from water, glycerin, fatty alcohol chains (emollient / surfactants double duty) and a whole lot of silicone derivatives.  Any extracts following the preservative, is strictly marketing and no benefit is forthcoming.  Glycerin and Sodium PCA are strictly humectants and should not be confused as a moisturizing constituent.  They attract moisture to the face pulled from the air, but in a dry climate, this will do little to suffice.  So the purified water is the primary hydration of this ingredient, which as we all know, water does what?.....evaporate.  So hence the need for silicone oils to slow the evaporation process by essentially sealing the skin. 

The remaining ingredients of any significance are bulking agents, emulsifiers and paraffins (by-product of Petroleum).  Again, a rose by any other name, is and will always remain a rose.  Isohexadecane and Isododecane can be used for skin conditioning to be sure, but they are a pariffin and are typically used as a surfactant, bulking agent and emulsifier.  So this luscious thick cream, is a whole lot of creamy goop..... nothing more.  Your face may feel soft and conditioned, but so is tanned leather, but I wouldn't call it moisturized leather.

Sericin for instance....did you know it is just another name for silk protein, derived from the silkworm?  So for vegans who may not have taken the time to dissect this understandably confusing ingredient label, they may be using a cream that goes against their personal beliefs.

Bottom line, there is not a single solitary moisturizing ingredient in this product except for water, and that only lasts for as long as the product can sustain the moisture loss.  Plus with so many silicone derivatives, one gal stated she now has acne, something she has not had since high school.  It may not bother sensitive skin types, but it doesn't go far enough to improve skins function either.  It more or less can be a very occlusive formula.

What Is A Moisturizing Ingredient?

• Jojoba Oil
• Grapeseed Oil
• Avocado Oil
• Olive Oil
• Coconut Oil
• Meadowfoam Oil
• Neem Oil
• Butters of Shea, Cocoa, Mango, Olive

These are sustainable, non-occlusive moisturizers, once placed on the skin.  They can remain throughout the day and when utilized with a humectant, such as glycerin, hyaluronic acid or sodium PCA, then the skin can and will sustain moisture against the surface of the face.  In fact, some of the oils listed also have some humectant properties. Silicone oil will actually prevent humectant viability.

Herbal Extracts or Distillates For Soothing, Balancing or Restoration of Skin

• Aloe Juice
• Chamomile Flower Extract
• Green Tea Extract
• Fruit Extracts (gentle AHA's)
• Comfrey Root (Allantoin)
• Marshmallow Root
• Oatstraw Extract
• Rooibos Extract
• Sandalwood Extract
• Rose Distillate
• Witch Hazel (alcohol free)
• Chamomile Distillate
• Cucumber Distillate
• Lavender Distillate

These are great for treating the skin for some of the issues women face. No gimmicks, easy to understand ingredients, not hidden behind some fancy sounding synthetically created name, that women don't get or know what it is in there for....in other words, how does it benefit her skin? 

So put on a Happy Face, because the fog has cleared and a moisturizer is finally clarified.

Final Thought

Think about it for a minute....some of us may have known those that suffer from extreme dry skin of the feet and hands to the point of cracking and bleeding.  The resolve for most has been to slather mineral oil or vaseline on the areas and then wrap them in plastic bags for relief before they go to bed at night. 

This treatment is trapping moisture in and keeping a heavy coating of an oil on the skin to allow the cracks to close and heal.  This example shows in theory, it takes moisture and a sustainable oil to remain on the skin to truly moisturize and improve skins elasticity by definition.  For those that don't like petroleum products even though they have worked miracles for those with this affliction, there are fantastic ingredients in the list above that will do an excellent job of essentially the same thing, only naturally.  

Preference is all that remains as to what you think will work best for your skin.  If you think you have been using what you thought was a moisturizer, only to learn it's not, then we do offer ONATI Skin Care as a viable alternative to actually replenishing moisture starved skin.  And the best part is, the line was solely created to be synergetic with skins natural function and our mineral makeup to give a beautiful finish to the face.

Nano Particles and Top Five List of 2011

Hi Everyone,

Just wanted to spread the word on the latest study performed by scientists in Switzerland and Australia. Many still question the safety of certain nano particles, including those that involve our sunscreen ingredients such as Titanium Dioxide and Zinc Oxide.

As some may remember, I reported on the EPA findings as they related to many versions of Titanium Dioxide and the information was quite telling, basically finding it quite safe for topical application. For those that missed these articles, they are provided in the links below:

Titanium Dioxide In Mineral Makeup, The EPA Final Report?
Does Titanium Dioxide Cause Free Radical Damage?

Well now it seems we can breathe easier when it comes to nano size Zinc Oxide as well. Even though we don't use nano particles in our mineral makeup products, the concern that so many have and those that wish to continue to spread fear about this, the science stares us squarely in the face. As I have tried to convey for several years based on past scientific studies, nano particles do not penetrate into the skin and are not absorbed by the body as many of the watchdog groups wish us to believe. This latest research only provides more concrete proof of the safety of these ingredients.

Clicking on the link below will provide the full article.

Scientists assess safety of nanoparticles in sunscreen using laser imaging

In Summary: Scientists in Switzerland and Australia have developed a way to optically test the concentration of zinc oxide at different skin depths using laser imaging in an attempt to answer safety questions over nanoparticles used in sunscreen.

Now For More Great News

Our mineral makeup foundation was listed in the Top Five list for 2011 for best foundation in Truth In Aging magazine. Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised and honored by their recognition of our minerals. Furthermore, the samples of our products were not provided "Gratis", but were purchased by one of the authors unbeknownst to us, which of course makes the review all the more fantastic, clearly showing no bias toward our products, and that I LOVE!

The excerpt reads: Sterling Minerals Rose Petal Foundation ($25 from Sterling Minerals). Beloved by Julie Kay, Sterlings loose mineral foundation promises to never streak, fade, slide or maximize your wrinkles. Although I'm not a big fan of mineral powders, I tried this out and found that it does live up to its promises. Light deflecting boron nitride and rice starch trick the eye, while the ingredients are friendly to sensitive skins.

For the complete article you can view it at Five Best Foundations, plus clicking on links will take you to past articles written about our products and to tell you little bit about the author and tester extraordinaire.

Thanks Ladies and to Truth In Aging for still loving Sterling Minerals products, even two years later.

Minor correction on ingredients that they listed for accuracy and to clarify we have 3 formulas:

Dewy Rose Petal™ – Ingredients: Titanium Dioxide, Zinc Oxide, Oryza Sativa (Rice) Starch, Boron Nitride, Methicone, Mica, Kaolin Clay, Simmondsia Chinensis (Jojoba) Seed Oil, Allantoin, Iron Oxides [CI 77491, CI 77492, CI 77499], Ultramarines [CI 77007].

Delicate Rose Petal™ – Ingredients: Zinc Oxide, Titanium Dioxide, Oryza Sativa (Rice) Starch, Boron Nitride, Methicone, Mica, Simmondsia Chinensis (Jojoba) Seed Oil, Allantoin, Iron Oxides[CI 77491, CI 77492, CI 77499], Ultramarines[CI 77007].

Velvet Rose Petal™ – Ingredients: Titanium Dioxide, Zinc Oxide, Oryza Sativa (Rice) Starch, Boron Nitride, Kaolin Clay, Methicone, Mica, Simmondsia Chinensis (Jojoba) Seed Oil, Allantoin, Iron Oxides [CI 77491, CI 77492, CI 77499] , Ultramarines [CI 77007].

Well that's it for our science update and exciting business news. Hope everyone is enjoying the Holiday Season.

Cheers!

The Bath Salt Scare!

Clearing Confusion

Over the past year there was a big ruckus on the use of bath salts, and splashed across every news channel in America, how they will be banned from the shelves in order to prevent them from being used in an illicit manner, and to provide safety to the public. When I heard this on my national news and after my initial panic of disbelief, I cringed thinking, this will only now fuel the fire of all those that are working so tirelessly to claim that bath and beauty products are killing us. The fervor went on for several months following the initial announcement and I watched closely to see how this would play out.

Of course, with patience and further research as the information unfolded, it was clear to see this was not the same thing as the bath salts you buy for personal care. Yet some of the packaging appeared to be that of a bath salt, lending only to further confusion. I also allowed some time to pass, and recently I looked to see how the EWG and Campaign for Safe Cosmetics had dealt with this latest scare. I googled this report with the connection to these two entities and not to my surprise;

Crickets.....nada.....zilch. Where were they in all of the hyper hysteria?

They continually jump on the bandwagon to promulgate about cancer causing agents, which instills fear, supposedly found in bath products, but when something so dire comes about that really draws concern and confusion into a "bath salt", they are content to leave it so. What a perfect opportunity for these entities to come forward to alleviate any fears or concerns that this particular "pseudonym" of bath salt was not the same as ones' beauty product. Trust me, this was not our "Calgon, Take Me Away" from our troubles, bath salt. Failure to clarify, simply shows apathy of displaying true concern to the public, especially at this crucial moment.

It is better it seems, to keep the public confused and scared since this solicits funding for their campaign to continue to spread unnecessary fear, so it is left to the rest of us who dare to get at the truth of the matter, in order to spread accurate information to consumers. It is sad when too much faith is placed in EWG and Campaign for Safe Cosmetics as being the truth tellers of our industry, yet on this critical issue they totally dropped the ball and squandered the opportunity to be in the forefront of really separating truth from fallacy. Especially when dealing with our youth!

Personal Care Products Council didn't hesitate and released their statement to inform the public of the lack of accuracy being spread throughout the media. Yet they are accused constantly by the EWG and Campaign for Safe Cosmetics as those with vested interest and they don't really care about the public concern.....looks like care and concern for the public to me.

PCT (Personal Care Truth) also created a statement for clarification. Lisa M Rodgers, co founder of PCT, was quick to get the word out on their website so that consumers who may be truly nervous about this, would have a source to learn the facts about "Bath Salts." So in order to educate and to let everyone know, including those with teens in the home, this article below will explain exactly the difference, yet also to be wary of what it is, in order to protect your teens from experimenting with this dangerous drug.

The Bath Salt Scare

Are people really snorting bath salts?

I know, it sounds crazy, right?

While I was making my rounds in the world of Facebook, I came across a status update that included a link to an article that said, "Several states may ban bath salts that contain the chemicals mephedrone and methylenedioxypyrovalerone because people are now snorting, injecting, and smoking them to get high". What? Ban bath salts? I had to read it twice to make sure it wasn't a joke.

So, in my quest for additional information, I found that the two chemicals mentioned are not approved for use in the United States and is not found in your typical bath salt. From the U.S. Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration website, they report the following:

4-Methylmethcathinone (mephedrone) is a designer drug of the phenethylamine class and shares substantial structural similarities with methcathinone (Schedule I). Evidence of mephedrone use and associated toxicity has been increasing, in 2009 and 2010, particularly in the United Kingdom and other European countries. To date, one confirmed and several suspected deaths related to mephedrone have been reported by Europol-EMCDDA Joint report on mephedrone 2010. In recent years, law enforcement agencies have documented seizures (Oregon, Illinois and Alabama) associated with mephedrone in the United States.

Mephedrone is not approved for medical use in the United States. Mephedrone is sold over the internet and is promoted as a “research chemical”, “bath salts” or “plant food.”

Via the Europol-EMCDDA Joint Report,:

More local names for mephedrone marketed products are: ‘Rush’ (Belgium); ‘Miaou Miaou’ (France); ‘MMC Hammer’ and ‘Magic’ (Germany); ‘kapszula’, ‘kata’, ‘kati’, ‘mefi’, ‘mefó’, ‘mephisto’, ‘moonshine’, ‘piercing’, ‘zsuzsi’ (Hungary); ‘ronzio’ (Italy); ‘aka’(Malta); ‘Mef’, ‘Mefko’ (Slovenia); and ‘Mef’, ‘Meffe’, ‘Räka’, ‘Krabba’, ‘Kräfta’, ‘Fisk’, ‘Torsk’, ‘Lax’ and ‘Fiskrens’ (Sweden).

Irish head shop products sold as ‘legal highs’ that appear to contain mephedrone are ‘Blow’, ‘Snow blow xxx’; ‘bath salts’, ‘Hurricane Charlie’, ‘White Gold’, ‘White Aroma Crystals’, ‘Recharge’, ‘Volt’, ‘Star Dust’, ‘Flake’, ‘Wild Cat Oceanic Charge +’, etc; and ‘Ketones’, ‘Am Hi Co Doves’, ‘Doves’, ‘Rocket fuel’, ‘Xtacy’, ‘Speed Freak’, ‘Dynamite’and ‘Diablos XXX’.

In Romania, samples containing powder and crystals were identified in products sold as ‘bath salts’ under different names: ‘Flower Magic Powder’, ‘Flower Magic Powder+’, ‘Charge+’ (27), ‘Flower Power’, ‘Crush’, ‘Cristal bath’, ‘Dark+’, ‘Special Diamond’, ‘Special Gold’, and ‘Special Original’.

There are no indications that mephedrone may be used for other purposes. Furthermore, there is no evidence of mephedrone use as ‘plant growth regulator’, ‘plant feeder’, ‘herbal bath salt’ or ‘hoover freshener’, as widely advertised on the Internet.

So, as you can see from the above, 'bath salts or herbal bath salt' is a name given to this product and is in no way associated with bath salts that are marketed by personal care product manufacturers. K2 or "fake pot" is another form of this illegal substance that is marketed as "herbal incense" or "potpourri". Again, it is no way associated with incense or potpourri you typically use in your home.

The reason I wrote this post is because I've already come across a search result that asked the question, "How do I know if my bath salt contains mephedrone?" The cosmetic industry has enough fear mongering and misinformation to deal with without adding a "bath salt" scare to the mix. The products marketed under the above names weigh 3 grams and can be found in convenience stores, head shops or party shops and are NOT like the typical bath salt that is poured into your tub.

Lisa M. Rodgers, is co-founder of Personal Care Truth and the creator of Cactus & Ivy. Lisa has strong convictions, isn't afraid to defend them and has zero tolerance for an individual or corporate bullies. Lisa's parents raised her that you're only as good as your word, to stand up for what you believe and life is black and white, never gray.