Ever wonder what’s in your nail polish? The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) recently released a study that found some nail polish manufacturers have been mislabeling their products as being free of certain toxic chemicals including dibutyl phthalate, toluene and formaldehyde, the chemicals know as the “toxic trio.”
These chemicals are associated with cancer, birth defects, asthma and other health conditions according to the DTSC. They can also cause short-term effects such as dizziness.
While it is unclear whether the levels of these chemicals are high enough to cause damage, public health officials are still concerned said Michael DiBartolomeis, the head of the California Safe Cosmetics Program.
“In public health we try to prevent things from happening in the first place,” said DiBartolomeis, referring to the potential of birth defects for salon workers who are exposed to these chemicals every day.
Researchers tested 25 nail products for two out of the three “toxic trio” chemicals. Formaldehyde was not tested for. Overall, products labeled as free of these chemicals had higher concentrations of them, according to the study.
“We were surprised as a whole, and in general, just as a regular consumer, you would hope that if you bought a product that was labeled in a certain fashion, that indeed those products would have or have not the ingredients,” said Valetti Lang, branch manager for the Pollution Prevention branch of the California DTSC.
[pagebreak]
Lang said her department plans to communicate with manufacturers to get information on the “level of confidence they have in labeling their ingredients as they sell them to consumers.”
Lindsay Charles, a freshman communication studies major, said she isn’t worried about the chemicals in nail polish.
“I’m only exposed to the chemicals they use for fifteen minutes a week,” said Charles, who goes to a nail salon in Evanston. Out of all the ways to get cancer “nail polish doesn’t really concern me.”
Mislabeling is possible because the beauty industry is not well regulated said Karl Palmer, chief of the Toxic and Products Branch in the DTSC.
“One of the things that people should know is as consumers, that there isn’t a one stop shop for making sure that one of those things are true, that they’re accurate, that they’re safe. It’s not that well regulated.”
Palmer said his branch plans to try and get more transparency in the beauty industry and more information provided to nail salon workers and consumers.
Leeann Brown, a spokesperson for the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a nonprofit that focuses on advocacy for health and the environment, said her organization is “really glad” the study was conducted.
“Consumers should be able to trust salon labels, their product labels, and be able to trust the product and know that it’s safe. Their study found out that that just is not the case,” she said.
The EWG plans to work for legislation at the federal level that prevents companies from making false marketing claims and from having these chemicals in their nail polishes.
“Cosmetics aren’t very strongly regulated, so companies can put nearly any ingredient they want in their cosmetic product,” said Brown.
Lisa Archer is the director of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics at the Breast Cancer Fund, a nonprofit coalition that lobbies for removal of harmful chemicals from personal care products. She also hopes to see change at the federal level.
“Consumers have had it with the current system that tolerates cosmetics companies outright lying to consumers, putting dangerous chemicals in our products, and getting away with it. It’s clearer than ever that we need to overhaul our country’s outdated and broken cosmetics laws to protect workers and all of us.”
Archer said a big problem is that the FDA is responsible for ensuring that cosmetics are safe for consumers, but doesn’t have any legal enforcement power.
While the study does show that there is a problem with mislabeling, the problem may not be that extensive said DiBartolomeis.
“It looks like it’s one main manufacturer, one kind of product line. Which is bad, but it’s more kind of honed in on a single manufacturer versus a problem across the board.”
He said it’s also important to keep in mind that the study was small and only looked at a few products.
“We could end up finding more, and certainly having one is bad enough, but I kind of tempered my concern a little bit in thinking that well at least it’s not as widespread as I originally thought it was going to be,” said DiBartolomeis.