A new bill could make it harder for makeup companies to cover up contaminated children’s cosmetics.
Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) on Tuesday introduced a bill that would require warning labels on makeup marketed to children that could contain asbestos. The proposed legislation comes after the Food and Drug Administration reported finding the carcinogen in makeup sold by national cosmetics and accessories retailers Claire’s APO, +2.71% and Justice earlier this month.
The FDA found asbestos in three types of cosmetic products sold at Claire’s and one product sold at Justice, which had already been recalled in 2017; other Justice products that were suspected of containing asbestos were also removed from shelves. (Claire’s has disputed the FDA findings; Justice did not reply to request for comment.)
The FDA found asbestos in three types of cosmetic products sold at Claire’s and one product sold at Justice, which had already been recalled in 2017.
“They would have to demonstrate to the FDA that they used a very refined method to test for the presence of asbestos,” Scott Faber, senior vice president of government affairs at the nonprofit watchdog Environmental Working Group told MarketWatch. He said companies would also have to show that their cosmetics were free of the toxin under the bill.
If a company couldn’t prove that kids’ makeup is asbestos-free, it would have to issue a warning to consumers of potential contamination. The bill would also require companies that market makeup for customers under the age of 18 to label products with the following statement: “Warning: Talc in this product has not been evaluated for asbestos contamination. Asbestos may be present.”
Faber says asbestos can be found in talc, a clay mineral used in powder form for facial powders, eyeshadow and baby powder. Talc and asbestos can be formed from the same rock, and as a result, the powder can become contaminated with asbestos fibers. The EWG tested 2,000 different cosmetics products that were on sale in the last three years and found that more than 1,000 were made with talc. “Even the best detection methods can’t guarantee a product is free of asbestos,” Faber urged.
Earlier this week, J&J was ordered to pay $29 million to an Oakland woman who claimed its baby powder gave her terminal cancer.
Johnson & Johnson JNJ, +0.59% has faced at least 13,000 lawsuits around the country claiming its Johnson’s Baby Powder and other talc products caused ovarian cancer and mesothelioma. Last month, the company received subpoenas from the U.S. Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission seeking documents related to the safety concerns of its baby powder and other items containing talc.
J&J did not respond to request for comment, but said decades of testing has shown its baby powder is safe and free of asbestos and asserted it does not cause cancer. Earlier this week, J&J was ordered to pay $29 million to an Oakland, Calif. woman who claimed its baby powder gave her terminal cancer.
Consumer watchdogs have argued that much more stringent regulation of the personal care products industry is sorely needed. “Asbestos in kid’s cosmetics is just the tip of the iceberg,” said Janet Nudelman, director of policy for the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.
Lawmakers seem to have taken notice. On Tuesday, a separate bill from California State Assembly members Al Muratsuchi (D.-Torrance) and Buffy Wicks (D.-Oakland), proposed to ban the use of 20 highly toxic chemicals such as mercury, lead and formaldehyde among others known to cause cancer or reproductive harm in makeup sold in California.
The FDA currently doesn’t have the authority to recall cosmetics products
The asbestos found in makeup products sold by Claire’s and Justice highlighted the relatively weak regulations in the U.S. around personal care products including cosmetics, soaps and shampoos, consumer safety advocates say.
“Under the current law, companies don’t have to prove that their ingredients or products are safe before they go on store shelves,” said Nneka Leiba, director of healthy living science at the Environmental Working Group. “The FDA has no authority to issue recalls or to force companies to issue recalls.”
‘You pretty much have to have a Ph.D. in chemistry to read a lot of these labels and know what it means for your health.’ ––Nneka Leiba, director of healthy living science at the Environmental Working Group
When the FDA found asbestos in three products sold by Claire’s, the retailer initially refused to comply with the agency’s request for a recall, an FDA spokeswoman told MarketWatch. Consequently, the FDA’s only option was to issue a “Safety Alert” warning the public not to use the products that the agency’s testing showed had asbestos.
Claire’s ultimately chose to issue a recall after the FDA’s announcement, though the company maintains that it found no evidence of asbestos in the products through independent testing it performed. “Despite our efforts to discuss these issues with the FDA, they insisted on moving forward with their release,” a spokeswoman said in an email. “We are disappointed that the FDA has taken this step, and we will continue to work with them to demonstrate the safety of our products.”
In other instances, companies have opted to disregard the FDA’s requests entirely. The FDA issued a “safety alert” in 2011 that Brazilian Blowout, a hair-smoothing treatment, contained formaldehyde despite labels that claimed the opposite was true. An investigation conducted by ABC News months later found that salons were still using the product, and some hair stylists were not even aware that the product contained formaldehyde, a known carcinogen. (Brazilian Blowout did not respond to a request for comment.)
“There is a history of this approach not working for the FDA when it comes to protecting consumer health,” Nudelman said. “They need to have regulatory mandate to issue recalls in the same way as they can do so with food or pharmaceuticals.”
Asbestos can contaminate cosmetics like facial powders and eye shadows
An estimated 15,000 Americans die each year from asbestos-triggered diseases, according to an analysis of federal mortality data by The Environmental Working Group Action Fund. There is no safe level of asbestos exposure, according to the federal government. Even exposure to the smallest amounts for as little as few days can cause mesothelioma, an incurable cancer, and other hazardous diseases.
Nudelman described cosmetics safety as “the Wild West.” The legislation that currently governs regulation of cosmetics and other personal care products dates back to 1938.
There is no safe level of asbestos exposure, according to the federal government.
Currently, no beauty products except for color additives require FDA approval before being sold. Altogether, the U.S. only bans 12 chemicals or other harmful substances from being used in personal care products –– asbestos and formaldehyde are not on that list. Comparatively, Europe bans thousands of substances.
In 2017, The Personal Care Products Safety Act was proposed by U.S. senators Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) and Susan Collins (R. Maine), to give the FDA the power to regulate the safety in cosmetics products. The Personal Care Products Safety Act would require companies to publish a complete list of ingredients online and print one on product labels. The bill would also empower the FDA to order recalls of questionable products.
The bill received support from a beauty giants like Estée Lauder EL, +1.32% L’Oreal LRLCY, +0.48% and Johnson & Johnson JNJ, +0.59%
Some proponents of cosmetics safety argue that this legislation does not go far enough. “It does a number of things well,” Nudelman said. “But it’s a bill that industry can stomach and doesn’t go far enough to actually change the status quo.”
Nudelman said the involvement of manufacturers is one reason why the bill hasn’t yet become law.
How consumers can protect themselves
As things stand now, it can be very difficult for a consumer to know what ingredients were used in their makeup and other personal care products and whether it could be contaminated with harmful substances. “You pretty much have to have a Ph.D. in chemistry to read a lot of these labels and know what it means for your health,” Leiba said.
The Environmental Working Group maintains the Skin Deep Cosmetics Database, which includes information on the ingredients and manufacturing processes for thousands of personal-care products. EWG’s staff scientists compare the ingredients on the labels with information regarding the toxicity of the substances and then creates a safety rating for each product.
Outside of conferring with this database, consumers are basically on their own when it comes to assessing whether a product is safe or not. Concerned shoppers can consult with a doctor to get advice as to whether a product will be harmful to their health.
As for children’s cosmetics, Nudelman advised parents not buy products that contain talc whatsoever unless they call and confirm with the company that it has strong processes in place to prevent asbestos contamination. “This is a pretty big ask of consumers,” she said.
Are you a young family thinking about budgeting, investing, saving for retirement or buying a home? We’d be eager to talk to you as part of a personal finance project we’re working on. Email raakhee.mirchandani@dowjones.com to learn more.
Get a daily roundup of the top reads in personal finance delivered to your inbox. Subscribe to MarketWatch's free Personal Finance Daily newsletter. Sign up here.
