Inside Prevention

Hey Guy, Toxic Shampoo Is Bad for You Too! (Huffington Post, 5/21/2013)

It's not just the ladies who are exposed to chemicals that reduce fertility or may cause cancer. There are plenty of toxic chemicals in men's products as well, especially those marketed to teenage boys, according to a Huffington Post piece by Breast Cancer Fund Director of Program and Policy Janet Nudelman.

A recent analysis by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics indicates that many men's personal care products contain a range of unsafe chemicals of concern linked to cancer and reproductive and developmental harm, including lead acetate, triclosan and coal tar among others.

Read more in the Huffington Post.

J&J removes some chemicals from its baby shampoo, other products (5/6/13)

Breast Cancer Fund Director of Program and Policy Janet Nudelman was quoted in an Environmental Health News article about Johnson & Johnson's landmark decision to remove many harmful chemicals from its personal care products:

"The small companies demonstrate to the big cosmetic giants that making safe products is not only possible, but it's also profitable. It's what consumers want."

She points out that disclosure requirements can serve as de facto bans on toxic chemicals:

"Companies would rather quietly reformulate their products than have consumers know there are carcinogens or reproductive toxins in the product."

 Read the full article here.

Beauty tips for the FDA (The Investigative Fund, 5/6/13)

After John Wasik's wife, Kathleen, was diagnosed with breast cancer, the couple started to ask "why"? She didn't have the BRCA breast cancer gene, and her surgeon suggested that environmental factors might be responsible. Eventually, Kathleen discovered the Breast Cancer Fund, and the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics. She proceeded to throw away her cosmetics—and Wasik started a journey exploring the vital question that we at the Breast Cancer Fund have been asking for the past ten years:

"How is it, I wanted to know, that the FDA, which was created by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938, leaves the regulation of cosmetics largely up to the cosmetics industry?"

He explains how the Cosmetic Ingredient Review, the entity that is supposed to be responsible for ensuring the safety of cosmetic products, is not subject to Freedom of Information Act requests and would not disclose its budget.  As Wasik points out: “the CIR has no power over the industry that finances it.”

Wasik also explores pinkwashing and cosmetic company lobbying: two powerful explanations for our lax regulatory environment. The piece ends on a guardedly hopeful note with the introduction of the Safe Cosmetics Act. 

Wasik reported this piece for the Investigative Fund, which is part of The Nation Institute. He has been working as a financial reporter for the past 25 years, and this article is a must read.

To learn more about the cosmetic links to breast cancer: http://bit.ly/12Wa8YM

To take action on the Safe Cosmetics Act: http://bit.ly/2013SafeCosmeticsAct

Media Roundup: Metals linked to breast cancer found in lipsticks (5/2/13-5/6/13)

A UC-Berkeley study finds that many common lipsticks contain heavy metals like cadmium and chromium, which are both linked to breast cancer. Our Campaign for Safe Cosmetics broke the story about lead in lipstick 6 years ago, but this latest research also tested for concentrations of additional metals.

Breast Cancer Fund Director of Science Sharima Rasanayagam was quoted in The Huffington Post:

"It's definitely a preliminary study and something that needs more research, but we're concerned about there being potentially toxic chemicals in lipstick and consumers not knowing about it."

Rasanayagam was also featured in The San Jose Mercury News and Mother Jones, which directs readers to our State of the Evidence on Cadmium and Other Metals web page:

"Cadmium, for example, is a carcinogen that has been found in breast cancer biopsies and shown to cause cancer cells to multiply in lab experiments. Metals are often used in mineral dyes, which give lipstick its pigment, and are also often found in soil and groundwater. 'Cadmium is a very common contaminant in soil,' says Sharima Rasanayagam, a scientist at the Breast Cancer Fund. 'What's concerning is that consumers don't know they're in the lipstick.'"

Since cosmetics companies and the FDA have failed to take steps to protect consumers from toxic metals found in lipsticks, consumers must educate themselves about how to make safe choices. Lipstick lovers may want to start cutting back on the product, saving it for special occasions, or to choose safer options. Parents should prohibit children from wearing lipstick because toxic metals found in these products are too dangerous for developing minds and bodies.

Check out our Storify, which is tracking the buzz.

Congress re-introduces safe cosmetics legislation in attempt to update 1938 law

Today, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., and Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., introduced the Safe Cosmetics and Personal Care Products Act of 2013, which would give the Food and Drug Administration authority to regulate the products we use for grooming, primping and beautifying.

Loopholes in current federal law have left the U.S. cosmetics industry basically unregulated. That means that companies can put ingredients linked to breast cancer (or any other other disease), including phthalates, 1,4-dioxane, parabens and ethylene oxide in everything from shampoo to hand soap to lipstick.

Instead of meeting public demand for truly healthier products, the cosmetics industry would prefer to maintain the status quo. In fact, the industry has spent more than $3.5 million lobbying against similar legislation, according to ABC News.

The 1938 law that currently regulates cosmetics companies has created a free-for-all—one in which consumers are the big losers. Companies essentially can put whatever they want in their products and they don’t even have to tell the public about the ingredients they use. To top it off, they can slap an organic, natural or unscented label on a product, with no oversight. As a result, the majority of chemicals in cosmetics have not been assessed for safety, and more than 500 products sold to U.S. consumers contain ingredients banned in cosmetics in Japan, Canada or the European Union, according to the Environmental Working Group.

At the Breast Cancer Fund we believe preventing exposure to environmental risk factors, including exposures to harmful chemicals in personal care products, will enable us to protect women from being diagnosed with breast cancer in the first place.

Tell your member of Congress that it’s time to fix this broken regulatory system. Take action today.

GMA tests lipsticks, glosses for lead (Good Morning America, 12/3/2012)

Good Morning America tested 22 lipsticks and lip glosses from drug stores and department stores for lead, and ran a story on the results—and what they mean—this morning.

Of the 22 samples, 12 (55 percent) contained lead. As the Breast Cancer Fund's Director of Program and Policy, Janet Nudelman, points out in the segment, the results show that it's possible to make lipstick without lead.

GMA's sampling follows testing initiated by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics in 2007 (the Breast Cancer Fund is a founding member of the Campaign), and the FDA in 2009 and 2011. Lead is a neurotoxin that is especially harmful to fetuses, babies and children. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention state that "no safe blood lead level has been identified."

Watch More News Videos at ABC | 2012 Presidential Election | Entertainment & Celebrity News

Related articles

Does Lipstick Contain Lead? 'GMA' Tests Lipsticks and Lip Glosses

Prevention Is Power: Why it matters so much

As we wind down our October Prevention Is Power campaign, we're reminded of how important our work to prevent breast cancer is for our community, their loved ones and our collective future. Thank you, Liz, for sharing your powerful story. This blog post was also featured on Care2.com.

By Liz Jones, Guest Blogger

When something big and unexpected happens to you, when you get your socks knocked off and aren’t sure you’ll be able to find them any time soon, when you find yourself overwhelmed in a way you’ve never experienced before, what do you do? Sit still or pace around in circles? Get very quiet or talk to everyone? Pull the covers over your head or develop a game plan? Decide you have enough information or research, research, research?  In 1993 when I was diagnosed with breast cancer at age 48, I did all of the above.
 
Ten years later, after making many changes in my life and saying “yes” to several paths I would never have entertained during my prior-to-breast-cancer life, I was diagnosed with a second primary breast cancer. It was 2003 and I was 58. I was aware I was at risk for developing metastatic breast cancer, but it never entered my mind that my body might develop two unrelated breast cancer tumors. The nerve of it! I mean, after all!

This time around I made decisions more quickly and surely, and I became more convinced than ever that the causes of my two breast cancer tumors were related to my past. I now know I had been inadvertently exposed to carcinogens as a child. I grew up in the 1940s and 1950s in Niagara Falls, New York, home to inexpensive hydroelectric power and many chemical manufacturing plants. It was a time when the effects of chemical pollutants on our bodies were not well understood. I remember taking in the chemical smells and looking at the gray clouds of pollutants hanging over the city and telling myself they were my “bread and butter.” Hard to fathom now, but I actually viewed the pollutants positively. Well, now is very different from then, when I had completely bought into the popular marketing line, “Better living through chemistry.” The only downside I remember is our frequently wiping the accumulated layers of soot from our lawn furniture every summer.

The statistics tell us that 1 woman in 8 will develop breast cancer in her lifetime. Last month I was in Niagara Falls attending my 50th high school reunion. One evening as I sat around a table with six of my female classmates, the subject turned to breast cancer. We discovered that four of us have had breast cancer. I know this sample is small, but I believe our tally at the table that evening might well be telling us something.

In the fall of 1997 the Breast Cancer Fund entered my life. I began to learn about the effect of under-studied and unregulated chemicals on our bodies and our lives. Now I know that endocrine-disrupting chemicals and formaldehyde-releasing preservatives lurk in the products we use every day. I know that even very low doses of bisphenol A (BPA), found in the lining of food cans, can cause harm to babies and young children. I know that the beauty industry, whose products we slather all over our skin, manufactures products containing substances toxic to humans. I know that biomonitoring (measuring the levels of chemical pollutants in people’s bodies) and health-tracking programs (examining regional disease rates) are critical to larger efforts to reduce chemical exposures linked to disease.

And so I became a fundraiser and strong voice for the Breast Cancer Fund. To spread the word, I ask my community, year after year, to contribute to my hiking effort in the Breast Cancer Fund’s Peak Hike for Prevention. My loyal following of 50 appreciates both learning from me and making a financial contribution to this important work.

I also choose my personal care and household cleaning products carefully, bypassing the advertising and going straight to an examination of their contents. I buy locally grown, pesticide-free produce as much as possible, minimize my use of canned foods, choose wild fish over farmed, and free range chickens over those confined to crowded quarters in too-small cages. I try to “live lightly” on this earth, respecting its land, water, air and living things. And I model my behaviors and choices for my children and grandchildren – my most precious legacy. I see myself as one of the many human faces of people living with the effects of diseases linked to chemical exposure. Do you see yourself this way too?

Two-time breast cancer survivor Liz Jones is a mother of two and grandmother of six who lives in San Jose, California.

Prevention Is Power: Moving beyond breast cancer awareness (blog roundup, 10/2012)

Prevention Is Power! This October blogs have been buzzing about preventing breast cancer, not just putting a pink ribbon on it. Spread the word about our Prevention Is Power campaign, and check out what others are saying:

Glamour, 4 Easy Ways You Can Reduce Your Breast Cancer Risk in Your 20s and 30s

Mommy Greenest, Fight Breast Cancer, Carcinogen-Free. Also reposted at EcoStiletto, Cancer Kick and Yoga Blog. Plus, check out the accompanying video!

AlterNet, Corporations Cashing in Big Time on Breast Cancer -- 5 Shocking Hypocrisies

Living Green Magazine, Prevention is Power: A Better Goal for Breast Cancer

Everything's Abuzz, Breast Cancer Prevention Is Power

MommaWords, Why I’m detoxifying our life

Mommybites, Breast Cancer Awareness: Power in Prevention

Non-Toxic Kids, Protect Women, Prevent Breast Cancer

Celebrate Green, Let’s put focus on ​preventing cancer

Motherhood Moment, Healthy Habits: Prevention is Power

The Life Atlas, Prevention Is Power

Retro Housewife Goes Green, Toxic Chemicals and Pink Ribbons

The Survive and Thrive Boomer Guide, Breast Cancer Fund offers tips for cancer prevention

Johnson & Johnson to remove formaldehyde from products (New York Times, 8/16/2012)

Our announcement yesterday that Johnson & Johnson has committed to removing chemicals of concern, including formaldehyde, 1,4-dioxane, triclosan and certain phthalates and parabens, was reported by the New York Times today.

The Breast Cancer Fund's Lisa Archer, who leads the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, told the Times that we will continue to push global giants in the cosmetics industry to make safer products:

Johnson & Johnson, which makes a range of personal care products like baby shampoo, acne cream and antiwrinkle lotion, announced plans Wednesday to remove a host of potentially harmful chemicals, like formaldehyde, from its line of consumer products by the end of 2015, becoming the first major consumer products company to make such a widespread commitment....

“There’s a very lively public discussion going on about the safety of ingredients in personal care products,” said Susan Nettesheim, vice president for product stewardship and toxicology for the company’s consumer health brands....

Lisa Archer, director of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, said her group would continue to press other cosmetics and consumer-goods companies to follow Johnson & Johnson, including the Estée Lauder Companies, Procter & Gamble, Avon and L’Oreal. (Read complete article.)

J&J removing harsh chemicals from products by 2015 (Associated Press, 8/15/2012)

In a monumental victory for the Breast Cancer Fund and our partners in the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, today Johnson & Johnson announced that it will remove toxic chemicals linked to cancer and other health problems from its cosmetics for kids and adults, across all J&J-owned brands, worldwide.

The company plans to reformulate its baby products by 2013 and its adult products by 2015. Previously J&J had committed to making baby products safer, but not adult products.

Breast Cancer Fund staff member Lisa Archer, who leads the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, spoke with the Associated Press about the victory:

The health care giant late last year pledged to remove "chemicals of concern" from its baby products sold around the world. That change came after a large coalition of health and environmental groups began pressing J&J more than three years ago to make its personal care products safer.

"This is a good step in the right direction," said Lisa Archer, the campaign's national director. "In terms of the cosmetic giants, Johnson & Johnson is going the furthest of any of them in removing chemicals of concern."

By 2015 Johnson & Johnson will phase out [probable human carcinogens 1,4 dioxane and formaldehyde] and others of concern, including triclosan, phthalates and parabens, as well as fragrance ingredients, which aren't disclosed on product labels. However, it will allow chemicals that release formaldehyde when no safe alternative will work and is reducing levels of 1,4 dioxane to below 10 parts per million. (Read complete article.)

We're thrilled with this victory and all that it means for the health of children, women and men worldwide. For more about J&J's specific commitments and the history of our work to convince the company to reformulate, visit safecosmetics.org.