Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
Just to inject the most tiny bit of common sense into this thread....
Would everyone please read the original post again.
Note how the article contains many many scary words but neglects to ever mention the amount of chemical being talked about in the product? This is a
common trick in "anti-" to scare the public into supporting bans. There are "anti" groups who have vowed to destroy the cosmetics industry for
whatever reason.
This is how the campaign goes...
1 Identify any substances, no matter how minute the quantity which may be associated with toxic products. Ie Propylene Glycol ...its anti-freeze and
its toxic. Anti-freeze is about 30 to 50 % Propylene Glycol. Of couse it is toxic but how much Propylene Glycol is in make-up. There is a safe
level of exposure to everything. There is a very old maxim...the dose makes poison.
2. Demand labelling to "warn" the public.
3. Explain that the product has no redeeming benefit.
4. Hold the industry up for blackmail. Sue them in court. Demand laws that ensure your "grass roots" campaign has secure funding for the "public
good"
Invest heavily in competing products that you can endorse.
5. Lobby your local politician - get bans in place so that everyone has no choice but to follow your dictates on what products to use.
6. Destroy the entire industry - sit back and count the money. Ignore the ranks of the previously employed.
7. Find another industry and start again.
Now the question is ...the "grass roots" anti has a vested interest in making you afraid. Your fear is worth money! But what is your interest in
the matter? If you are truly concerned, I encourage you to do your own research.
People - at least demand to know what concentration of these "dangerous chemicals" are being talked about and then compare that concentration with
established by science.
Remember - carcinogens are ubiquitous to the environment. Go to the most pristine place in the world and I guantee, you will find carcinogens. Even
pine trees emit turpines and forest fires generate dioxins and furans.
Tired of control Freaks.
Strarred you as you put a case forward, but do you work for the cosmetic industry?
Perhaps I have fallen for the fearmongering as you say, but I dont think so, since moving from SLS I have no more skin irritation, no more hives,
perhaps a co oincidence....
The main point of the post is to ask for regulation of this industry especially in the US where 89% of chemicals are unknown.
It is a self regulated insustry, which quite frankly is a load of rubbish, a law passed in the 1930's should certainly be repealed, especially when
it deals with the use of dangerous chemicals in human consumption (or absorbtion if we going to get picky).
Besides the chemicals, I highlighted and you didnt address the incredble not needed animal cruelty, testing done on non compatible species, the use of
illegal child labour, and the trafficiking of human fats and organs....perhaps we are just being over the top as you suggest?
The point is summary of the OP, read it again.....
"I suggest we insist on regulating this industry, cosmetic products deserve special attention from the regulators due to their scientific complexity
or higher potential risk for the consumers' health, you have 89% unknown substances in there.
Next time you shop, check out if you are putting anti freeze in your system because its cheaper to use, avoid using companies that test on animals,
look for "sparkles" cause you've had a kid slaving in the sun for hours to bring them to you, and simply pray your not getting human fat and
rubbing it into your system."
"
Im not saying do away with the industry< im asking it becomes regulated, and people know the human and animal expence of their products.
Sound like your saying your competitor industry ..ie organic is to blame for all lies? and that no regulation should be in place? No animal cruelty or
human illegal labour and trade takes place?
Wow I would never invest my reputation so much in a business I work for.
[edit on 20-11-2009 by zazzafrazz]
