Cosmetic Safety

Like the food in your fridge, the makeup in your bathroom goes bad after a while. Even though a swipe of day-old lipstick doesn't warrant a trip to the hospital like food poisoning, expired makeup can wreak havoc in its own nasty ways. The FDA doesn't require makeup companies to print expiration dates on their containers, so how do you make sure your makeup bag has a clean bill of health? Keep this chart on hand, and count from the day you break the seal on the product:

Still not completely sure? Read on for more tips.

Ever stop to think about what's in your lipstick as you swipe it on in the morning? Good Morning America wanted to find out if lipsticks across the board were pulling a clean bill of health, and the results were . . . unexpected. After testing 22 lipsticks, ranging from drugstore buys to luxury glosses, with Underwriters Laboratories, they found that 12 of the products contained trace amounts of lead.

Slightly freaked out? Unfortunately, it's not a new issue, and it's not illegal. In essence, there is no lead limit for cosmetics in the US.

The tests showed levels that ranged from no detectable levels to 3.22 parts per million. To put it in perspective, California has a state-mandated limit for lipstick of five parts per million, so it's below even that. And overall, it's progress from 2010, when the FDA tested lipsticks and found the highest levels of lead at seven parts per million. However, watchdog groups like the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics emphasize that it is possible to manufacture lipstick sans lead, as many other brands have proved.

Good Morning America couldn't find any pattern in the types of lipsticks and lip glosses that contained lead, so the bottom line is that you should be aware, especially if you're pregnant. But many scientists claim that trace amounts of lead in lipstick is not as much of a concern. To find out what's in your makeup, check out the EWG's Skin Deep Cosmetic Database. Your lips will thank you.

We're happy to present this article from our friends at Allure:

California health officials are going undercover to find the distributors of smuggled Mexican skin creams containing dangerous levels of mercury. The creams are mainly skin lighteners, since mercury removes pigment. The tainted cosmetics are brought into in the country illegally and sold surreptitiously at pharmacies, shops, and swap meets. To find out more about the dangers of these surreptitiously tainted creams, just keep reading.

Major beauty drama is going down in Michigan: an indie cosmetics brand Glittersniffer is being accused of using unsafe ingredients in its eye makeup. Glittersniffer proprietor Lela Warren, who does not have formal training in cosmetics formulation, is under fire for using non-FDA approved soap dyes — which can lead to irritation and even blindness — in the brand's vividly hued eye shadows.

After customers complained of irritation and ensuing visits to the hospital, some launched a collective blog. In December 2010, Warren recalled some products, acknowledging that she had previously used noncosmetic grade ingredients in her formulations to get brighter colors. "We decided to do an 'official' recall of our products because we felt Glittersniffer was becoming a more serious company," Warren explained to BellaSugar in an email. "We wanted to make sure all non eye-approved products were no longer in use."

Is the story over? No way. The drama continues. Find out what's up after the jump.

Over the last few years, there's been a lot of back and forth about parabens, especially their possible effects as reproductive hormone disruptors. Now, the EU's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety has released an opinion suggesting that, according to the available data, "systemic exposure from typical cosmetic use scenarios will be negligible."

The committee found that, at least with respect to the current model, only about one percent of butyl- and propyl-parabens put on skin actually gets into your system without breaking down. However, they also requested that a skin metabolism study be conducted, since none of the current data is totally conclusive. Basically, they're taking a tentative step toward saying that parabens are safe, which would be nice since they're in so many products. But is "we think it's probably OK" enough of an assurance for consumers?

If you're getting Botox or Dysport in your forehead, you could also be losing muscle in your arms or legs, leading to sag not unlike these adorable Shar Peis. Doctors have long been aware that one of botulinum toxin's side effects is muscle wasting; after all, when you paralyze a muscle to keep it from wrinkling, it begins to weaken and atrophy very quickly.

Apparently new, however, are findings indicating that those effects aren't just limited to the injection site. It's not really shocking that this is the case; it seems hard to believe that a neurotoxin that spreads easily throughout muscles would stay put in one tiny section of your body, anyway. It's also not clear just how much of this wastage occurs in humans — the experiment in question was conducted on a small number of rabbits who received multiple injections over six months. Still, not exactly comforting news for injectables fans. Does this story put you off the 'tox, or would you still feel safe using it?

Source: Flickr User Emdot

For years, some people have been grumbling about the heavy clouds of fragrance that Abercrombie & Fitch pumps through its stores, but this October, activist group Teens Going Green actually decided to protest. The group objected to A&F's in-store use of their Fierce fragrance on the grounds that "Abercrombie & Fitch customers are unknowingly being exposed to harmful chemicals by simply walking into the stores." The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics joined the fray, too, suggesting that Fierce contained "secret chemicals" and possible hormone disruptors. Abercrombie fired back with a long rebuttal on Facebook, but both sides are still deadlocked, and A&F has been adamant about keeping their scent-blasting machines running. Most of you say that you don't like stores that use scent machines, but it doesn't look like A&F's fierce smell will be dissipating anytime soon.

Trouble for a popular hair straightening treatment, the Brazilian Blowout, started brewing back in September when Oregon's OSHA released alarming results of its study. While Brazilian Blowout products are advertised as formaldehyde-free, OSHA found higher-than-allowable percentages of the toxin in all samples tested. A similar study by the Canadian government also concluded the solution had "unacceptable levels of formaldehyde."

Everyone from the state of California to Cosmetologists Chicago has chimed in since then. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review is holding a panel to discuss the issue in the next few weeks. The makers of Brazilian Blowout, however, claim the testing methods were flawed. We're guessing this issue won't be straightened out before 2011.

On Wednesday, the state of California filed a complaint against GIB LLC, the maker of Brazilian Blowout, saying that the company failed to warn both stylists and customers that the product contained formaldehyde. The state's asking that Brazilian Blowout remove anything on the brand's advertising, packaging, and website declaring that the products are "formaldehyde-free" and "safe."

This comes after a recent study by Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OR-OSHA) found that the formaldehyde levels in the product averaged at 8.68 percent. OSHA standards dictate that solutions with a formaldehyde content of greater than 0.1 percent must be listed as an ingredient. Brazilian Blowout, however, proudly declares that its product "contains no formaldehyde." To see more about the controversy, just keep reading.