[ad_1]
According to a new study by researchers in the United States, Canada and Switzerland, people who wear cosmetics such as lipstick or mascara may absorb or lick potentially harmful ingredients that have been in the environment for decades.
According to the study, these ingredients called polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are rarely disclosed on the label, so it is difficult to avoid Published on Tuesday in the “Environmental Science and Technology Letters” magazine.
What are PFAS and where are they found?
PFAS is a group of more than 4,700 man-made chemicals that contain fluorine combined with carbon. This strong chemical bond makes them difficult to decompose.
“What is really worrying about them is that they are very persistent,” said Miriam Diamond, a professor at the University of Toronto and co-author of the study. “Actually, it will exist for many years… decades.”
This is why they are often called “eternal chemicals” by scientists. This is how they accumulate to high levels in the body or the environment over time.
PFAS has been used in lubricants, antifouling agents, waterproofing, non-stick coatings, and fire fighting foams, and can be found in products ranging from carpets to cosmetics to food packaging.
How harmful is PFAS?
Few PFAS have been studied in detail, but those related to various health effects of humans and animals, Increasing the risk of cancer, reducing the immune response and fertility, with Metabolic changes and increased risk of obesity.
Canada prohibits the use of the three well-researched PFAS (PFOS, PFOA and LC-PFCA) Because they are risky to the environmentBut Health Canada stated that there is evidence that other PFASs that are replacing these are also related to environmental or human health effects.This is why the government is Consider regulating all PFAS as a whole.
Diamond pointed out that it is well known that PFAS “exists in all of us” because these substances are detected in blood samples, but scientists do not know exactly how people are exposed to them.
Why do researchers look for PFAS in cosmetics?
Studies in Europe and Asia have found that dozens of products list PFAS in their ingredients; they are touted to make products such as foundations, mascaras, and liquid lipsticks more waterproof, durable, and spreadable. Increased absorption of the product by the skin is listed as another benefit.
But it is not clear whether these are also in cosmetics sold in North America.
Diamond said the Canadian Ministry of Environment and Climate Change provided funding to study this issue to help understand how PFAS enters the environment. Other funding comes from the Great Lakes Conservation Initiative, the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and the National Science Foundation.
How do researchers look for PFAS in cosmetics?
In this new study, Heather Whitehead, a chemistry graduate student at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana, and her collaborators studied 231 cosmetics purchased in Canada and the United States, including 17 Canadian products, most of which did not list PFAS on the label.
The researchers first tested fluorine, a key element in PFAS. Then, they conducted a more detailed analysis of 29 products with high fluorine content. In particular, they found detectable levels of at least four PFAS, some of which would be broken down into smaller but highly toxic and environmentally harmful PFAS.
What kind of cosmetics does PFAS exist in?
Overall, 52% of the tested products contained substances that researchers considered “high” fluorine. But it is most likely to appear in products that advertise “wear-resistant” or “long-lasting”. High fluorine test products include:
- 82% waterproof mascara.
- 58% of other eye products such as eye shadow, eyeliner and eye cream.
- 63% of foundations.
- 62% liquid lipstick.
Of the 17 Canadian products tested, only one had PFAS on the ingredient label.
Many are designed to be used close to the mouth or eyes, and the researchers say this can increase exposure through licking, skin absorption, or absorption through the tear duct.
However, people may be exposed to PFAS from various sources and do not know the level of harmful substances in products such as cosmetics.Health Canada stated that most PFAS have limited scientific information, although there is Guidelines for maximum levels of PFOA and PFOS In drinking water.
If PFAS are not on the list of cosmetic ingredients, where do they come from?
Researchers believe that they have discovered this by carefully reading the ingredient list. Some ingredients used to increase product volume, such as mica and talc, can be treated with PFAS called PAP to improve durability. Other ingredients, such as methyl silicone oil, acrylate and silicone polymer, are available in PFAS-containing versions.
The researchers said: “We speculate that the detected perfluorinated and polyfluoroalkyl substances come from these ingredients described only by their generic names on the label, for example, methyl silicone oil, acrylate.”
They added that the reported concentrations of these components are consistent with the highest fluorine concentration measured in the analysis.
Diamond said that when some researchers contacted companies that produce cosmetics, many people did not realize that their products contained PFAS because their supply chain was very complicated.
Should people avoid using cosmetics containing PFAS? How can they?
Diamond said that she believes that consumers should avoid products containing PFAS, because the possibility of exposure to PFAS in cosmetics is very high, and these chemicals can have a negative impact on health.
She added that the impact is not limited to users, because the product will eventually enter the air or water. “Therefore, when I use this product, I will not only pollute myself, but also my entire community.”
Fortunately, studies have found that some cosmetics contain little or no fluorine. Unfortunately, because PFAS is not listed in the ingredients, it is difficult to identify.
Diamond recommends avoiding the use of products sold as waterproof, long-lasting or durable, which are most likely to contain PFAS.
In the end, she thought they should be banned, “because they are unnecessary.”
At the same time, she hopes that this research will prompt cosmetic manufacturers to remove PFAS from their products, allowing retailers to consider these ingredients when selling their products.
Haneen Al-soheli is a bridal makeup artist and social media influencer in Ottawa. She said that when clients have long-term activities, she sometimes chooses durable and waterproof products for them.
She said that she carefully checked the ingredients to make sure they did not cause allergies or sensitivities, but she did not know that some products might contain PFAS.
“I was actually surprised,” she said. “This is the first time I have heard of it.”
Al-soheli said that she believes that the results of the survey may increase distrust of cosmetics and agrees with the idea of ??banning PFAS in cosmetics.
“If it can be avoided, 100%, I think these ingredients, these harmful ingredients, should be avoided.”
Fe de Leon, a researcher and legal assistant at the Canadian Environmental Law Association, has conducted research on PFAS to address the government’s recommendations for such chemicals, saying the results of the research are “very important and shocking” because They pointed out that there are gaps in the government’s requirements for PFAS. Product labeling and testing.
“I think this research will not only trigger some dialogue between our groups and NGOs, but it will certainly trigger a dialogue with the government to do more,” she said.
[ad_2]
Source link