You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Organic Soapbox’ category.
The Smurf Juice Syndrome
One day, I was visiting a new spa in the Phoenix area with another soaping friend of mine, and as we awaited our bill, we perused some of the beauty product offerings in the spa’s retail boutique. My friend picked up a small bottle filled with a conspicuously blue yet “natural” facial serum and suddenly exclaimed (not just a little loudly in the whispery quiet of the spa environment) with incredulity, “where’s the blue?!” She, a fellow formulator and artisan of her own line of handmade, natural bath and body products, was of course scrutinizing the ingredients label on the product box, because that is what we do. It is a compulsion and we can’t help ourselves, really. As far as I know, there is no 12-step program for this label-reading affliction because it doesn’t really constitute a diminishment of one’s quality of life; it’s just really annoying for anyone trying to get me to walk through any retail beauty aisle at anything resembling a brisk pace. I just can’t do it. I *have* to stop and read the ingredients.
Anyway, the problem with the ingredients listing on this particular product, however, was that it was incomplete. And anyone who formulates beauty or body care products for a living can tell this, simply by looking at it. There were actually more than a few little label lies happening in this case, but the most glaringly obvious omission was the fact that the stuff in the bottle was seriously, oceanically, azure blue. However, there was absolutely NO listing for a colorant anywhere in the ingredients. To nearly anyone else, this might simply not even matter. I mean, why NOT blue? It’s a “blueberry” serum, right? So it must be blueberries that make the serum Smurf blue, right? Even though it’s not even the color of blueberries? So what if it’s the color of Smurf juice? So what if they forgot to include blue on the label?
As creators and formulators of our own skincare and bodycare products, the ubiquitous and blatant mislabeling of products in our industry is well known to us. Yet when I tell friends, family and customers about this rampant labeling abuse, they are often shocked. Like most people (and like me, before I began making my own organic body care products over 16 years ago), they assume that there are laws and regulations and governing agencies (such as the FDA) which oversee these things to protect consumers. Right? Well, mostly. There are laws. There are rules. But you may be a bit surprised to learn there is very little, if any, actual policing or enforcement of those laws.
As indie beauty care artisans, we tend to take a great deal of care in choosing quality ingredients, painstakingly sourcing and blending and mixing and tweaking and testing (usually on friends and family) before finally releasing our creations into the world. And most of us follow the labeling laws. Many of us do so proudly, because we know how great our ingredients are and we want you to know, too. We pour our hearts and souls into our products, because we want to put something really good out into the world.
The problem with the smurf juice syndrome is that we indie brands are trying to compete on an unlevel playing field. The company that makes the smurf juice serum happens to take out two-page spreads in every spa, salon and beauty trade publication currently in circulation every month, and they claim to be offering “handmade”products using “organic” ingredients. Yet, as a literal handmaker of bodycare products using certified organic ingredients, I can assure you that this company is not. But how is the public to know the difference? How are we, as consumers, going to make informed choices if there is no transparency and truth in labeling? When the average consumer (who is not a formulator) picks up a bottle of something called “Rose Hip Toner” and the entire sum of the ingredients reads: “Rose Hip Juice” despite the fact that the product is red—very red. And despite the fact that this “rose hip juice” smells heavily of roses. And nevermind that, if I were to go out to my wild rose bushes this autumn and squeeze the juice from the ripe rose hips and put that juice in a jar and leave it on a shelf for, say, anywhere from one to two weeks at room temperature, the result would be at least fuzzy, probably covered in mold and certainly. Not. Red. And it would definitely not smell like roses. How are you, the consumer, to know that this product has to contain more than what its ingredients label suggests? I know, as a formulator, that there would have to be some type of preservative, whether natural or chemical-based, for any kind of liquid “juice” to not decompose in a bottle, unrefrigerated, unless that juice is sold in powder form. I know, too, that it is exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to achieve or retain a natural red color in wet products. If you were to mash strawberries into a jar and leave them there, they would most certainly turn brown (and then into compost). And I can tell you that there is a fragrance in that bottle, because “rose hip juice” doesn’t smell like roses. In fact, I am not sure that there is even such a thing as “rose hip juice”. But this company, with its big advertising budget and its clever packaging will sell you its “handmade, organic rose hip juice” toner for the bargain price of $48.
There is currently new legislation being proposed to improve FDA laws for food as well as cosmetic products. And, as much as I am not looking forward to the prospect of having to pay more licensing, certifying or business fees, I think it’s long overdue. The European Union took the lead way back in 1976 with their European Cosmetics Directive, which has been improved and updated several times since, banning harmful ingredients such as known carcinogens and irritants and greatly restricting labeling nomenclature (http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/cosmetics/html/consolidated_dir.htm). Here in the States, we’re way behind. Aside from the lack of enforcement in labeling laws, there are many substances in commercial cosmetics and beauty products today which are quite frankly, toxic. They’re toxic to humans and they’re toxic to the planet. Although the proposed FDA requirements will hopefully bring some much needed attention to the way that cosmetics are made, packaged and sold in the United States, there isn’t likely to be a substantial restriction of known harmful ingredients. There are, however, a couple of independent sites trying to bring more transparency to the formulation of beauty and skincare products, most notably the “Skin Deep” site by the Environmental Working Group, which keeps a free database of cosmetic and beauty products and their ingredients, breaking them down by safety in a rating system. Although their system is admittedly flawed and imperfect, it certainly is a step in the right direction.
But regulation and databases can’t replace good common sense. You, the consumer, already have the senses to discern labeling omissions. Next time you pick up a beauty product the color of smurf juice, even though the “FD&C Blue No. 5” isn’t listed in the ingredients, you know it’s in there.
In the meantime, I am going to endeavor to utilize this blog space to educate, inform and hopefully entertain those who would be so kind or curious as to read it. It occurred to me that there are hundreds of blogs out there from organic product reviews to nothing short of a shill for organic product sellers, but scant few from the perspective of the actual indie formulator. I make absolutely no pretenses as to my point of view: I am heck bent on purity, and so about purity I will write. I may also occasionally shill for my own products, too, but I promise to keep it to a minimum. Until next time, please remember not to believe everything you read, especially if it’s an ingredient label for a “natural” or “organic” product that is bright blue, yet doesn’t list a colorant, or preservative, among its ingredients.
Founder & President, WoodSprite Organic Body
Recently I’ve received a few questions from worried customers about our use of palm oil in our organic soaps. Upon the heels of the good news this week that Procter & Gamble have bowed to global pressure and have vowed to begin using traceably sustainable palm and palm kernel oils in their products, I thought this was a timely opportunity to educate and address those very valid concerns.
I share that concern; it is my passion for a sustainable and socially responsible Earth that drove me to start WoodSprite nearly 15 years ago, and it is that same passion that dictates our choices and practices as a company every single day, from every one of the ingredients we choose, to the recycled papers and materials we use in our daily business and product packaging, to our energy and water conservation, to our practices of composting and recycling.
Organic Palm Oil is highly valued in soapmaking because it replaces animal lard in the formula, lending hardness and stability to our all-vegetable soaps, allowing them to last longer. We feel very strongly that using vegetable or mineral ingredients is a far more sustainable and morally responsible choice over using animal ingredients, but we are also looking for those sources to be grown in accordance with our purpose and environmental values. While there certainly is a problem with devastating habitat loss and unfair trade/labor practices with the growing global demand for palm fruit oil, not all palm oil is grown or harvested equally. At WoodSprite, we use and have always used, certified organic palm oil that is grown sustainably and responsibly with third party verification. If you’d like to learn more, you can visit this site by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil: http://www.betterpalmoil.org/about or read this article about EcoSocial’s certification programs: http://newhope360.com/supply-news-amp-analysis/ciranda-launches-first-ecosocial-certified-sustainable-palm-products
To learn more about WoodSprite’s daily environmental policies and practices, please visit this link on our website: http://www.woodspriteorganicbody.com/Being-Green_ep_38-1.html or here: http://www.woodspriteorganicbody.com/why-organic-woodsprite-organic-body
I love these questions from customers and appreciate the opportunity to share knowledge. It is education and information that allow us all to make conscientious, informed decisions that better our lives and our planet. So, if you have a question, please feel free to stop by our website and reach out.
I’ve received this question on occasion, and often enough that I thought I’d share my answer here in the hope that it may lead to a better understanding of the ingredients we use in our organic skincare products.
It seems that there has been a fair amount of unnecessary concern generated when folks see certain ingredients–in this most recent instance, Borax (or Sodium Borate)–listed as a “moderate concern” on the well intentioned, yet a bit flawed, Environmental Working Group’s Skin Deep Database. I love the Database for its efforts to bring the power of knowledge to the average consumer, especially to help open people’s eyes to the truly harmful ingredients commonly found in our everyday lives, but an effort so large and encompassing cannot always appropriately weigh every little factor in the overall equation, and sometimes, ingredients are judged in very broad and generalized terms. At any rate, the Database seems to have generated this question more than a few times and I thought it may be helpful to include my full reply for your consideration. The following is a direct copy and paste of an email I sent in response to a question about why we use Borax in some of our organic skin and body care emulsions (lotions):
Hello, and thank you for your question about our use of Borax.
I can certainly understand your concerns about the use of Borax (or sodium borate) in some of our body care products, especially with the wealth of conflicting and confusing information on the internet and specifically, on the Skin Deep Database. While I do link to the database from our own website because I think it’s a wonderful resource for consumers, it is still a flawed, incomplete and imperfect system. And the EWG has even admitted as much. They have made some excellent improvements on the database recently, but as in any case of good research, one should still weigh the information against other reference sources as well.
For instance, we also use a dietary-grade (for ingestion) Vitamin E in many of our products. Our Vitamin E is sourced from natural non-GMO vegetable oil (very often sunflower or wheat germ oil) and is full-spectrum, meaning that it contains all the components of Vitamin E in its complete and natural form, rather than a synthetically produced or heavily processed derivative. Vitamin E is a wonderful antioxidant and, of course, is well known for its ability to heal the skin. However, the Skin Deep Database used to list Vitamin E as a skin irritant, potential carcinogen and had a moderate hazard level of 4. Since the changes that they have been implementing, they have now made a differentiation between naturally-sourced Vitamin E and its synthetic cousins. Even with that differentiation, Vitamin E is still listed as a “low” hazard, but with a score of 2. And it still makes a very small reference to a 25 year old cancer study. If one were to take only a cursory glance at the Skin Deep Database without taking its data gaps and references with a grain of salt, they might just see the word “potential cancer” and become needlessly alarmed.
Regarding Borax, I have absolutely no concerns about its use in my skin care products, and I use it regularly as part of my non-toxic cleansing regimen both at home and in our workshop because of its many wonderful properties. A natural and unique mineral found in dried up lakebeds with large deposits found in the US Southwest, sodium borate serves many purposes and industries. In cleaning, Borax mixed with water creates a minor reaction and releases very small amounts of hydrogen peroxide, which makes it a mild antiseptic and helps to inhibit microbial growth. This is also a reason it is desirable in natural cosmetics. In our products, borax softens the water phase of an emulsion (lotion or creme) which assists in binding the disparate aspects of oil and water together, without the need for chemical emulsifying waxes (which are often referred to on cosmetic products as “vegetable emulsifying wax” but are actually an isolated fatty acid fused to a detergent or surfactant which are typically petroleum derived or completely synthetic). In other words, the Borax helps to reduce the surface tension of the water-based portion of our formulas, and enables the water to stay mixed together with the beeswax and oils, and contributes to the inherent natural preservation of the formula without the need for chemical based preservatives, many of which have been linked to cancer and which have been proven to reside in the lymph and fatty tissues of the human body.
Our use of Borax in our products represents 0.00297% of the formula. Certainly, there are potential health risks involved in using nearly any ingredient, natural or not. The way in which an ingredient is used, and the purpose it serves in a formula are factors that are not considered in the Skin Deep Database score, which they do attempt to specify next to the score. For instance, most of the research that I have found regarding the human toxicity of Borax applies to ingesting large amounts of the powder, and the exact amount is only estimated, not known.
Furthermore, the bulk of the research is based on animal testing, with cruel trials stretching out over time in highly unlikely dosages and types of exposure (in addition, the studies included use of boric acid ,which is not the same thing as sodium borate, but is derived from it). The low risk rating on Lavender Essential Oil does not include similar references in the Database, though I’m quite certain that if one were to drink a couple glasses of it, or inject the essential oil subcutaneously, they would indeed be feeling rather poorly. But these are exactly the sorts of data gaps which the Skin Deep Database allows for, though I personally think they still need to do a little more to make that more clear.
One thing I would like to stress is that I am probably the biggest stickler out there when it comes to purity in products, especially my own. I started making my own skin care formulas in my apartment kitchen nearly 20 years ago because I could not find the level of purity I was looking for in the marketplace. I have always been very chemical sensitive, especially to synthetic fragrances, and I had to start educating myself on food and cosmetic ingredients so that I could avoid the common offenders. The more I learned about the chemicals routinely used in our everyday food and body care products, the more I observed a direct link between the health of our planet and the health of humans. Especially concerning to me is that there seems to have been an increased incidence of cancer in all its forms in proportionate correlation to the use of chemicals in everything from agricultural crops to the water flowing from our faucets to the heavily processed “food” products on grocery shelves and the body care products we use daily on our skin. 14 years ago, I started selling the products I was making for myself quite by accident, and we’ve been growing ever since. I’ve turned away opportunities due to requests from large hotel chains who wanted me to change my formulas (ie: use chemical ingredients) so that I could produce in larger quantities or compete on a more economical scale, but I would not veer from my natural path. I believe that dedication to making products using only natural and organic ingredients, in as complete a form as possible, is the answer to a healthier planet, and to that of her inhabitants. I am very passionate about this, and every product I have formulated has been with that core value in mind.
At any rate, I’ve compiled a little information about Borax, or Sodium Borate, for your consideration (below). It is only with information that we can make informed purchasing choices, and that is ultimately something that each of us must decide for ourselves.
If I can answer any other questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me. And thank you again for your interest in WoodSprite Organic Body products.
WoodSprite Organic Body
From Mountain Rose Herbs (mountainroseherbs.com):
Borax Powder Profile
Appearance- White crystalline granules
Shelf life- 2-3 years
Notes- Stores well under any condition but extreme moisture is best
avoided. Avoid contact with the eyes and mouth, and do not expose
directly to the skin. Can be used directly for cleaning purposes, and is
suitable for both cosmetic and cleaning purposes. Manufactured according
to USP standards.
Anhydrous Borax- 70.1%
Boric Acid – 48.5%
Sodium Oxide – 20.8%
Water of Crystallization – 46.2%
Size- US #30 Mesh
Borax (Sodium borate) is a natural mineral which is widely used in the
cosmetic industry. Since it is also utilized as a detergent, many people
are shocked to learn that it is also a main ingredient in their favorite
brand of bath salt! Borax naturally occurs from the repeated evaporation
of seasonal lakes. The largest deposits of this mineral may be found in
California, the American southwest, Chile, and Tibet. Borax is a very
popular ingredient, simply because of its many varied applications, and
its ease of use.
Borax is found in creams, lotions, shampoos, gels, bath salts, and bath
bombs. It is an emulsifier, preservative, cleansing agent, and a
buffering agent. Commonly used in bath salts, borax has the ability to
soften the water, and suspend soap particles in the bathwater. The
result is soft, clean, and healthy skin, which is not clogged by the
residue of soap particles. When used in collaboration with citric acid
in bath bomb or bath salt recipes, the product will produce a fizzing
action. It also forms bath or body gel, when mixed with water and guar
gum. In summary, Borax has the following uses for body care products:
* Water softener
* Particle suspension
* Buffering agent
* Fizzing action (when used with citric acid)
To use: Simply mix borax into the water portion of your recipe, and heat
to a temperature of above 75 °C. Stir until fully dissolved, and then
incorporate into your recipe.
Not to be ingested, large doses may be fatal. May cause irritation if
exposed to the skin, eyes, or if inhaled. Handle with caution, and keep
away from children and pets.
Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Sodium Borate and Boric Acid
(BORIC ACID IS NOT THE SAME THING AS SODIUM BORATE)
Journal of the American College of Toxicology Vol: 2 Year: 1983
Sodium borate and boric acid are used in cosmetics as preservatives,
antiseptics, water softeners, pH adjusters, emulsifiers,
neutralizers, stabilizers, buffers, or viscosifiers. Investigators have
reported that sodium borate and boric acid are poorly absorbed through
intact skin; however, both compounds are absorbed through abraded,
denuded, or burned skin. In a 90-day dermal toxicity study, boric acid
(25-200 mg/kg/day) was nonirritating and nontoxic when applied to the
intact skin of rabbits. Sodium borate and boric acid were relatively
nontoxic when tested orally in animals. A 5% sodium borate in water
solution was mildly or moderately irritating to the skin of rabbits and
guinea pigs, and practically nonirritating when instilled in rabbit’s
eyes. Acute studies indicated that, at 10% in water, boric acid was
mildly or moderately irritating to the skin of rabbits and guinea pigs.
Sodium borate or boric acid in the diet of rabbits and rats caused
growth retardation. Doses of up to 1.06 g/kg/day sodium borate in the
diet of male rats exerted toxic effects on the gonads as well as
infertility. Boric acid was nonmutagenic in the Ames test. Boric Acid
induced reduced eye phenocopies and lumpy chromosomal inclusions in
drosophila melanogaster. Limited carcinogenic and teratogenic studies
did not indicate a statistically significant effect. In clinical
studies, cosmetic formulations containing up to 3.2% sodium borate were
nonirritating to moderately irritating and nonsensitizing when applied
to human skin. Formulations containing up to 2.4% boric acid were
moderately irritating and practically nonirritating. Photopatch testing
of formulations containing 1.1% or 1.7% sodium borate were negative.
Based on the increased absorption of boric acid by damaged skin as
compared to intact skin, as well as the testicular atrophy observed in
experimental animals, the panel concluded that sodium borate and boric
acid, in concentrations < 5% are safe as cosmetic ingredients when used
as currently recommended; however, cosmetic formulations containing free
sodium borate or boric acid at this concentration should not be used on
infant or injured skin.
What Is Borax? from
Borax (also known as sodium borate decahydrate; sodium pyroborate;
birax; sodium tetraborate decahydrate; sodium biborate) is a natural
mineral compound (Na_2 B_4 O_7 • 10H_2 O). It was discovered over 4000
years ago. Borax is usually found deep within the ground, although it
has been mined near the surface in Death Valley, California since the
1800s. Although it has numerous industrial uses, in the home borax is
used as a natural laundry booster, multipurpose cleaner, fungicide,
preservative, insecticide, herbicide, disinfectant, dessicant, and
ingredient in making ‘slime’. Borax crystals are odorless, whitish (can
have various color impurities), and alkaline. Borax is not flammable and
is not reactive. It can be mixed with most other cleaning agents,
including chlorine bleach.
*How Does Borax Clean?*
Borax has many chemical properties that contribute to its cleaning
power. Borax and other borates clean and bleach by converting some water
molecules to hydrogen peroxide (H_2 O_2 ). This reaction is more
favorable in hotter water. The pH of borax is about 9.5, so it produces
a basic solution in water, thereby increasing the effectiveness of
bleach and other cleaners. In other chemical reactions, borax acts as a
buffer, maintaining a stable pH needed to maintain cleansing chemical
reactions. The boron, salt, and/or oxygen of boron inhibit the metabolic
processes of many organisms. This characteristic allows borax to
disinfect and kill unwanted pests. Borates bond with other particles to
keep ingredients dispersed evenly in a mixture, which maximizes the
surface area of active particles to enhance cleaning power.
*Risks Associated with Borax*
Borax is natural, but that does not mean it is automatically safer for
you or for ‘the environment’ than man-made chemicals. Although plants
need boron, too much of it will kill them, so borax can be used as an
herbicide. Borax may also be used to kill roaches, ants, and fleas. In
fact, it is also toxic to people. Signs of chronic toxic exposure
include red and peeling skin, seizures, and kidney failure. The
estimated lethal dose (ingested) for adults is 15-20 grams; less than 5
grams can kill a child or pet. For this reason, borax should not be used
around food. More commonly, borax is associated with skin, eye, or
respiratory irritation. It is also important to point out that exposure
to borax may impair fertility or cause damage to an unborn child.
Now, none of these risks mean that you shouldn’t use borax. If you do a bit
of research, you will find risks associated with all cleaning
products, natural or man-made. However, you do need to be aware of
product risks so that you can use those products properly. Don’t use
borax around food, keep it out of reach of children and pets, and make
sure you rinse borax out of clothes and off of surfaces before use.
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA), along with certified organic personal care brands Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, Intelligent Nutrients, and Organic Essence, today filed a complaint with the USDA National Organic Program (NOP), requesting an investigation into the widespread and blatantly deceptive labeling practices of leading “Organic” personal care brands, in violation of USDA NOP regulations. The complaint, filed collectively on behalf of 50 million consumers of organic products, argues that products such as liquid soaps, body washes, facial cleansers, shampoos, conditioners, moisturizing lotions, lip balms, make-up and other cosmetic products produced by twelve different corporations have been advertised, labeled and marketed as “Organic” or “Organics” when, in fact, the products are not “Organic” as understood by reasonable consumers.
“Unfortunately, the hands-off regulatory approach by the USDA’s National Organic Program during the Bush years failed to protect consumers from deceptive labeling in the personal care marketplace,” said Ronnie Cummins, Executive Director of the Organic Consumers Association. While the USDA enforces strict standards for the labeling of organic food, the NOP has not enforced the organic regulations in regards to personal care. “Given the increased resources and staffing at the National Organic Program under Obama, we’re optimistic that the situation will be rectified before too much more damage is done,” added Cummins.
“Consumers who pay a premium for high-end organic products expect the main cleansing and moisturizing ingredients of a product labeled ‘Organic’ to be made from certified organic agricultural material produced on organic farms, and not from petrochemicals or pesticide and herbicide-intensive conventional farming,” explains Horst Rechelbacher, founder of Intelligent Nutrients (and founder and previous owner of Aveda Corp).
The corporations named in the complaint are The Hain Celestial Group, Inc.; Kiss My Face Corporation; YSL Beaute, Inc. (”YSL”); Giovanni Cosmetics, Inc. (”Giovanni”); Cosway Company, Inc. (”Cosway”); Country Life, LLC (”Country Life”); Szep Elet LLC (makers of Ilike Organic Skin Care); Eminence Organic Skin Care, Inc.; Physicians’ Formula Holdings, Inc. (makers of Organic Wear); Surya Nature, Inc.; Organic Bath Company, Freeman Beauty Division of pH Beauty Labs, Inc. (makers of Freeman Goodstuff Organics).
David Bronner, President of Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, stated, “Yesterday we re-filed our lawsuit in federal court against culprit companies under the Lanham Act for false advertising. One way or another, the era of ripping off organic consumers in personal care will soon come to an end.”
Ellery West, founder and owner of Organic Essence adds, “The predatory marketing practices of companies that take advantage of consumer trust in the organic label are cheating not only organic consumers but also small certified companies like ourselves.”
On November 5, 2009, the USDA National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) formally recommended that the National Organic Program regulate personal care to ensure that any use of the word “organic” on a personal care product is backed up by third-party certification to USDA organic standards. Immediately following the recommendation, the OCA launched a consumer boycott of the major “Organic” cheater brands, and has produced a list of USDA certified organic brands that are true to their claims and are safe for organic consumers.