Comments on: Clean Beauty Is Wrong and Won’t Give Us Safer Products https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/ The science of beauty, explained simply Thu, 08 Jun 2023 16:52:27 +0000 hourly 1 By: Dwain https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/#comment-272153 Thu, 08 Jun 2023 16:52:27 +0000 https://labmuffin.com/?p=11075#comment-272153 Great write-up, Michelle! I share your concern about the lack of proper waste management regulations and the abundance of non-recyclable plastic packaging. It’s disheartening, even as a minimalist skincare enthusiast, to witness the daily waste we contribute to. Let’s hope for more accountability and sustainable options from these brands in the future.

]]>
By: Brianna https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/#comment-140408 Thu, 26 Aug 2021 23:41:27 +0000 https://labmuffin.com/?p=11075#comment-140408 In reply to Michelle.

thank you so much!

]]>
By: Michelle https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/#comment-138844 Wed, 18 Aug 2021 05:39:45 +0000 https://labmuffin.com/?p=11075#comment-138844 In reply to peter.

Have you looked at the EU banned list? A ton of them are ingredients that would never be used in cosmetics, including things like plutonium and a bunch of different types of petroleum. It’s a different process of regulating.

Yes science isn’t static, but the best practice is to make decisions based on the current evidence and not make regrettable replacements. It’s not established that the vast majority of these replacements are actually “safer”.

]]>
By: Michelle https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/#comment-138830 Wed, 18 Aug 2021 05:17:43 +0000 https://labmuffin.com/?p=11075#comment-138830 In reply to Brianna.

The cocktail effect is potentially a concern, but the science is in its infancy on that, and no major impacts have been found so far (which is a good sign). There’s also the unknown effects of the ingredients you end up switching to – more potentially hazardous chemicals are usually better researched and regulated. On the whole, in the absence of concrete evidence, my personal opinion is that personal care products are a far more minor contributor to health effects compared to chemicals in food, water, indoor dust, air pollution etc.

It’s actually quite funny that ThinkDirty use MSG as their example – scientists know that there’s tons of natural MSG (which is indistinguishable from “artificial” MSG) in tomatoes and parmesan cheese! So it’s clear they don’t really apply a scientific approach…

]]>
By: Brianna https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/#comment-134983 Sat, 07 Aug 2021 21:38:06 +0000 https://labmuffin.com/?p=11075#comment-134983 Michelle, I’m so glad I found your videos and blogs! I have a question about how to apply this to my buying decisions. I’ve been told to go to websites like safecosmetics.org, ewg.org/skindeep, and thinkdirtyapp.com to “clean out” my bathroom and makeup bag. But when I looked into how these websites came up with their recommendations, they all considered hazard but never exposure.

ThinkDirty went so far as to say: “We rate BHA / BHT, PEGs, petrochemicals, parabens, phthalates, formaldehyde releasing agents, siloxanes, sulfates, fragrance/parfum and non-biodegradable ingredients 10-7. Because we believe those chemicals don’t belong in products we use daily, no matter how much or how little. Some may argue low percentage is harmless. Then the debate will move from whether it’s safe or dangerous to how high or low percentage is dangerous. Also for those we argue low dosage is ok, they simply forget the numbers of products we use, and also didn’t take into account of how each of the low dosage of controversial chemicals might react with each others. The health impact of being exposed to the chemical cocktail effect is unknown. The debate on how much toxic chemicals should be in your products is similar to arguing how much MSG should be in your food. In both cases, we believe there shouldn’t be any.”

Is this chemical cocktail a real concern? And is there an easier and more accurate way to determine what kinds of products I should and shouldn’t be using?

Thanks!

]]>
By: betsy ross https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/#comment-130265 Sat, 24 Jul 2021 19:42:03 +0000 https://labmuffin.com/?p=11075#comment-130265 clean beauty is ineffectual especially for the mature women. I don’t like being forced to use it as all the brands are just doing it to keep up with the others. Give us back the products that actually did what they claimed to do.

]]>
By: peter https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/#comment-129948 Fri, 23 Jul 2021 14:18:42 +0000 https://labmuffin.com/?p=11075#comment-129948 In reply to Michelle.

Yes. However, you don’t name any of these replacements nor speak to any studies performed on them. My understanding is that there are very good replacements available.

It’s also odd that parabens are singled out – as if that’s the only questionable ingredient. The EU lists over a 1,000 banned ingredients (that science say were safe before Dec 2002, but in January 2003 were deemed unsafe). US has less than a dozen. So which is it? Are you suggesting that EU scientists have different data? Or are they interpreted differently, perhaps just as consumer might interpret parabens or phenoxyethanol as something to avoid.

My point being that science is not static – what may deemed safe today, may be deemed unsafe tomorrow. And if ‘safer’ alternatives can be used, then isn’t that a good thing? Isn’t that science helping us progress? But replacements almost always cost more – and this is one of the main reason there’s puch back from the conglomerates

]]>
By: Michelle https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/#comment-117199 Fri, 11 Jun 2021 01:10:21 +0000 https://labmuffin.com/?p=11075#comment-117199 In reply to Taina.

I’m not sure I agree – there are lots of active ingredients that do work. I think some older cosmetic chemists don’t really believe they do anything, but in a lot of cases the evidence is there (and it’s sometimes peer-reviewed too). Clean beauty does actually mean that more effective ingredients like preservatives, petrolatum, mineral oil are getting phased out of products based on consumer demand – products are becoming less safe and dermatologists are seeing more allergies, so there are real world impacts as well.

]]>
By: Taina https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/#comment-116108 Mon, 07 Jun 2021 09:52:07 +0000 https://labmuffin.com/?p=11075#comment-116108 I partly agree, but don’t quite understand why ”clean beauty” claims are so terribly wrong in your opinion. It seems to me that cosmetic industry in general largely employs exaggerations and lies in pursuit to sell more. Many conventional brands market their products as having new miraculous ingredients, while in fact those ingredients don’t do much and are there only for marketing claims, and the product functionality relies on petrolatum, mineral oil, glycerin etc.

]]>
By: sushma bramhacharya https://labmuffin.com/clean-beauty-is-wrong-and-wont-give-us-safer-products/#comment-106056 Mon, 05 Apr 2021 10:02:45 +0000 https://labmuffin.com/?p=11075#comment-106056 It means we all are applying dirt on all over our body. People who consider themselves beautiful after applying beauty products are actually applying dirt! No matter how hard the beauty product try to explain that their product are chemical free or dirt free we cannot neglect the bitter facts that all products can some how effect our health and environment.
I wonder why people do not want to treasure their natural beauty and use natural ingredients for skin care.

]]>