« Notes and News | Main | Cropwatch at the SCS Symposium, Grantham UK, 2009 »
April 03, 2009
Cosmetics Database reliability questioned
1000fragrances expresses some concerns about the reliability of the Skin Deep cosmetics Database. This reiterates some concerns I had when I was looking at the database a few months ago. For those of you unfamiliar with the database, it allows companies to enter their product ingredients and then evaluates the safety of the product, assigning a hazard score of 0-10. Consumers concerned about the safety of products can look them up and obtain an assessment of their relative safety. It sounds like a good idea, but it appears to have a faulty evaluation mechanism. Unless the user is careful in evaluating the data, and understands the limitations of the evaluation, it may be useless. They do state what they call a “data gap” that assesses what data is unknown. In the case cited by 1000fragrances the data gap for the “good” product is 81%, which suggests to me that they are admitting they don’t really know whether it is safe or not. The “bad” product has a data gap of 64%.
The difference seems to be that the ingredients in the “good” product are listed as essential oils, while the ingredients in the “bad” product are listed by their constituent chemical names. And the “bad” product contains a number of ingredients that are indeed synthetic or hazardous in some way, in addition to the essential oil constituent chemicals that are listed. So indeed the “bad” product may be bad. 1000fragrances makes the point that the “good” product is also potentially hazardous, even though it gets a “good” score.
One reason the “bad” product scores badly is because one of the ingredients is “fragrance”, which is allowable as an ingredient by the FDA, but is considered as “bad” by the Environmental Working Group because it could contain anything.
Given that the Compact for Safe Cosmetics and EWG seem to be prepared to jettison the small businesses who have been the innovators in the Safe Cosmetics industry by blindly supporting the regulation of the industry through the FDA Globalization Act of 2008/9, perhaps it is time to reconsider whether participation in the Cosmetics Database is a good idea. It certainly products some strange results.
Posted by Rob on April 3, 2009 in Regulatory Issues, Safety/Toxicity | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451d6f369e201156ed325e5970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Cosmetics Database reliability questioned:
Comments
I agree - the results for good and bad ratings just don't make sense. Often the data they are using to claim something is bad is from tests run on rats ingesting large quantities of a topical ingredients. We removed our name from the data base, but our mission remains to the same - to produce safe cosmetics!
Posted by: Kayla Fioravanti @EssentialU | Apr 5, 2009 8:09:04 PM
I don’t think that cosmetic database can give you the correct idea about the quality of the product. However it may help you in getting some idea.
Posted by: Organic Cosmetics | Apr 11, 2009 2:36:49 PM
Well this is really true...we aught to know what exactly we are using...and the database may help us know what are the ingrediants to the product.
Posted by: Organic Make Up | Aug 11, 2009 12:03:00 AM
I agree, calculation done by the database can adversely affect the rating outcome...depending on the CFSC agenda.
I just got around to reading my current copy of CPC Packaging where they are also questioning the ability for Walmart to be unbiased in their announcement of the ambitious goal of a world wide sustainability index, :)
It all boils down to the saying about using calculators: Garbage in = garbage out. If we can not trust the veracity of the output, than it is garbage.
Posted by: Kelly Bloom | Sep 12, 2009 9:31:11 PM
There are too many companies out there claiming to be organic when if fact they are not. It is deceiving and it lets you know that the companies are not concerned about their customers, only their customer's credit card numbers. It is shameful.
Posted by: organic cosmetics | Oct 19, 2009 9:52:16 AM
