Before modern liquid shampoo became widespread, hair care routines didn’t involve so much plastic waste. Now, we are conditioned (!) to believe we need liquid shampoo in plastic bottles that usually get disposed of rather than refilled, and solid soap is considered a niche. However, thanks to environmental awareness about plastic waste and renewed attention on some of the harmful effects of toxic synthetic ingredients in many liquid soap brands, shampoo bars are making a comeback. But where did the humble shampoo bar come from? And how did it fall out of use? Below we nerd out on the history of the cult zero waste beauty product, explore the role of British cruelty-free beauty pioneer LUSH in “reinventing” shampoo bar in the past two decades, and how we might be looking at bottle-free becoming mainstream again soon. 

Where Did Shampoo Come From?

​The word “shampoo” entered the English language around three centuries ago, and it originates from India in the colonial era. It is derived from the Hindi word champo and the Sanskrit root chapati (yes like the popular Indian flatbread), which is to press or knead. The practice of “shampooing” therefore meant to massage the scalp with fragrant oils, rather than hair washing as the word is understood today. The hair treatment was introduced to European societies when colonial traders returned with the local Indian custom of cleansing the hair and body with massage and oils.

Shampooing – cleansing the excess oil and dirt from our hair – was also done using other natural methods, such as using vegetable starch and wood ash to absorb excess oil and wash hair. In the 19th century, people also started to use soap bars containing palm fruit oil and coconut oil to wash their body and hair. So the concept of using a packaging-free solid bars to clean our hair isn’t exactly “new” – it has been around for centuries, long before “zero-waste” even became a term.

With the dawn of liquid surfactants that scientists created to efficiently remove dirt, a few opportunistic cosmetics companies jumped on the idea of developing products that marked the start of what would become a billion-dollar industry. We started seeing different types of commercial soap displayed on retail shelves in the 1930s and 40s: liquid shampoo, body wash and gels, liquid conditioners – all of which by necessity had to be packaged in containers. At around the same time, plastic as a material became favoured as a replacement for less convenient and more expensive forms of packaging such as paper and glass. The single-use/disposable personal care industry was thus born.

The Rise Of Modern Bottled Liquid Shampoo
​
Slowly, these liquid shampoos in plastic containers and bottles became widespread in almost every family bathroom. Though unarguably convenient to use, these products generate massive amounts of waste and neither consumers nor businesses considered the effect off their choices when it came to the lifespan of the container bottles.

It is estimated that over a lifetime, the average person goes through 800 plastic shampoo bottles – the majority of which ends up in landfills or in our oceans, which are then further broken down into microplastics, choking marine life and contaminating our own water and food. Needless to say, recycling has never been and continues not to be the answer, with waste regulations and recycling infrastructure mostly unavailable in large swaths of the globe.

As reports of the scale of our plastic pollution began to surface and headlines about the massive Pacific trash vortex became more widespread, environmentalists and concerned consumers became concerned about everyday consumption habits and the throwaway culture that was becoming pervasive. This heightened eco awareness saw the advent of the now worldwide “zero-waste” lifestyle, which initially began as niche grassroots concern that later morphed into today’s global movement.

How LUSH’s Co-Founder Upended An Industry

Over in the United Kingdom, a couple of alternative upstarts were looking to disrupt the personal care industry. In the 1980s, Mo Constantine, co-founder of cult beauty brand LUSH (known as Constantine & Weir, and later Cosmetics-To-Go at the time before they rebranded to LUSH in 1995) was struck by inspiration thanks to an unlikely source: Alka-Seltzer. The fizzing tablets led her to create the brand’s ubiquitous bath bombs, which were also the first product they sold ‘naked,’ aka without packaging.

Shortly thereafter, Constantine and Stan Kryszta, the brand’s cosmetic chemist, sought to reinvent the traditional soap bar specifically for hair. Unlike other soap bars on the market at the time, which were based on oils and fats (the traditional recipe for soap), Mo and Stan came up with an innovative formula for a solid version of liquid shampoo. When they first launched their shampoo bar product in 1988 under the Constantine & Weir name, it became so popular that they successfully applied for and won a composition patent for their groundbreaking recipe.
​
Years after the now famous shampoo bar was born in the kitchens that later became LUSH, the brand remains the keepsake of the invention, even though the original patent expired in 2011.

Thanks to LUSH, eco-friendly beauty products have been on consumers’ radars like never before, as the brand has captured a (mostly) young and eco-conscious generation with their low waste range and naked store concept, with the brand reportedly saving around 30 million plastic bottles from landfills over the past year alone. Amid a recent public outcry on plastic waste, the company has even launched a carbon positive cork container for the shampoo bars, manufactured using regeneratively grown cork (which absorbs carbon from our atmosphere) and transported via sailboats. 

The Shampoo Bar Goes Mass

LUSH shampoo bars are infused with blends of natural ingredients with cleansing yet soothing properties, such as cinnamon leaf oil, contain no preservatives, and most importantly, do not require any packaging or container. Compared to the average bottle of liquid shampoo, solid shampoo bars last around three times as long and only need be stored on a dish.

In recent years, a plastic-free and zero-waste beauty movement has taken hold and become more mainstream. As well as LUSH‘s pioneering range, other independent beauty brands with a sustainability focus have also developed their shampoo bars, many of them featuring natural, plant-based and organic ingredients- brands like Lamazuna (France), Meow Meow Tweet (US) and Ethique (New Zealand) filled Insta feeds the world over with their low-waste, plastic-free modern bars to suit every eco warrior hair type.

Even mainstream cosmetics corporations have caught onto the trend and launched eco-friendly and plastic-free beauty products, hoping to catch a share of this budding market. The shampoo bar crazy has also spawned a whole range of plastic-free bars from face moisturisers to pet soaps to hair conditioner, all formulated for various care concerns and all made available sans packaging.
​
In the midst of the many environmental issues the planet is facing, from global warming to biodiversity loss, plastic pollution is one that we can easily tackle individually by making easy switches in our everyday habits. So go on, ditch the bottle and choose the (shampoo) bar- it’s an easy choice you can feel seriously good about. 

A recent headline featured in The Daily Mail proves once again how impactful fearmongering is on unknowing consumers. "How your shampoo bottle could be making you FAT: Scientists discover 11 chemicals in common plastics that contribute to weigh gain," it reads. Throw another pick on the junk science pile; or at least, it's portrayal.

According to the story, scientists examined 34 different plastic products and identified 11 chemicals commonly present that can affect human metabolism and contribute to weight gain. The products included beverage bottles, kitchen sponges, yogurt containers and hair conditioners. Martin Wagner, a co-author and associate professor at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, said their experiments show that "ordinary plastic products contain a mix of substances that can be a relevant and underestimated factor behind [being] overweight, and obesity."

The study itself, published in Environmental Science & Technology, describes how the authors characterized the chemicals and analyzed their joint adipogenic activities. Among some 629 unique compounds, 11 known metabolism-disrupting compounds (MDCs) were identified; including four phthalates and six organophosphates. Importantly, according the the article abstract, the chemicals extracted from one-third of the products caused murine 3T3-L1 preadipocytes to proliferate and differentiate into adipocytes, which were larger and contained more triglycerides than those treated with a reference compound, rosiglitazone.

The Daily Mail reported that while some plastic products contained known metabolism-disrupting substances, or obesogens, others did not but still induced the development of fat cells. "It's very likely that it is not the usual suspects, such as bisphenol A, causing these metabolic disturbances," said Johannes Völker, one of the study's authors. "This means that other plastic chemicals than the ones we already know could be contributing to overweight and obesity."

Caroline Rainsford, head of scientific services at the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Perfumery Association (CTPA), quickly jumped on this study and misleading headline. In a blog post, she wrote "It’s certainly true that the study’s authors looked at packaging samples and found some of these samples contained chemicals they suspect to have metabolism-disrupting effects....just not the shampoo bottles! In contrast to what the striking headline suggests." 

In her blog, she worked her way through the paper, critiquing the study design and describing, for consumers, how to "interrogate" media articles such as these to come to their own conclusions. For example, she questioned how relevant it is to real life exposure to extract chemicals from plastics, concentrate them in a solvent and test them on fat cells grown in a lab.

"The results from the study certainly give us a fascinating insight into the behavior of fat cells in the presence of certain chemicals," she wrote. "Although we do have to consider what might happen outside of a lab... Are we exposed to the same amount of chemicals from plastic packaging when using everyday products? How will the chemicals get into our bodies?"

Rainsford further explained how solvents are used to extract chemicals to get enough of a material to perform the tests but the reality is, products such as shampoos and beverages are much less effective at dissolving those chemicals; not to mention the fact that laws covering cosmetics, foods and other products already take into account the potential migration of chemicals from packaging into products.

Furthermore, by adding these chemicals directly to fat cells, the researchers have taken a "short cut" to how they would be processed through the body. And, personal care products in particular are applied to skin or hair, which makes it more difficult for chemicals to enter the body.

Notably, in the paper's conclusion, the authors also highlighted, "Given that we aimed at investigating whether MDCs are present in plastic products, we used methanol to extract the samples. This simulates a worst-case scenario. Thus, even though we demonstrated that potent (mixtures of) MDCs are present in consumer products, it remains to be investigated whether these will migrate under more realistic conditions into air, water, or food, or can be taken up dermally." 
​
"It’s always exciting to see new scientific research, especially that which relates to the cosmetics and personal care industry—which has science at its foundation," Rainsford wrote. "... But this headline-grabbing story is a reminder that in every case, it is helpful to approach new science with a critical eye, an open mind… and to draw your own conclusions."

from Cosmetic and Toiletries

Did you know that your shampoo can contain ingredients harmful to both you and the environment? Chief among them: Sulfates. But what exactly are sulfates, and what other problematic shampoo ingredients should you avoid? 

Instead of harmful shampoo brands to avoid, we’ve made a list of 15 common and not-so-nice shampoo ingredients to watch out for — and why. What are the main ingredients of shampoo to skip?

Read on to find out.

 1. Ammonium Lauryl Sulfate or Sodium Laureth Sulfate (SLES) 
What are sulfates? Sulfates are very strong detergents that work through a chemical reaction, in which they bind with the sebum on our scalp and with water. When you rinse out the shampoo, sulfates take all the oils and residue with them. But while cleansing, they can also damage the hair, make it brittle, and increase frizz.

2. Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS) 
This sulfate creates a lathering foam some people love, but it can compromise follicles when left on the scalp and it has other toxic effects on the human body. Yikes! Anyone with color-treated hair or dry hair should definitely avoid SLS, as it can fade your color and strip your strands of natural oils.

3. Parabens
Parabens are also known to be harmful. They are used as a preservative to prevent bacteria from growing in cosmetics and shampoos. Parabens can mimic the hormone estrogen and have been linked to increased growth of breast cancer cells.

4. Sodium Chloride
Sodium chloride is another name for salt. Sodium chloride in shampoo and conditioner is mainly there to make the consistency thicker. Salt can make an already-sensitive scalp dry and itchy, which can eventually cause hair loss.

5. Polyethylene Glycols (PEG)
PEG is a thickening agent derived from petroleum that is often contaminated with byproducts. There has not been sufficient research done to conclude that PEGs themselves are as toxic as shampoo ingredients, but common byproducts in PEGs can be harmful.

6+7. Diethanolamine (DEA) and Triethanolamine (TEA)
DEA and TEA are also emulsifiers and foam agents that reduce surface tension so water-soluble and oil-soluble ingredients can blend together. In 1998, researchers found a link between the topical application of DEA and cancer in animals, but the effects on humans are unclear. The European Commission has banned DEA in cosmetics.

8. Formaldehyde
Formaldehyde is a known human carcinogen and has been proven to be absorbed through the skin in animal testing. Manufacturers often add it to products directly as a preservative, but it can also be released over time through a chemical process from other types of preservatives. If you’re wondering what to look for, a common one in shampoos is quaternium-15. They can also be found in chemicals used for Brazilian blowouts at hair salons.

9. Alcohol
Most alcohols have a drying effect, and the higher up in the ingredients list they appear, the more alcohols the product contains. Some alcohols that are not as bad for dry hair begin with a “C” or an “S,” like Cetearyl alcohol and Stearyl alcohol. They can actually help your hair retain moisture. The ones that are bad if you already have dry hair usually have a “prop” in their name, like Isopropyl alcohol or propanol.

10. Synthetic Fragrances
Products that have “fragrance” on their label can contain thousands of hidden chemicals. Some ingredients in fragranced cosmetic products can disrupt the reproductive system and cause cancer or asthma. They can also irritate the skin and scalp, which can lead to hair loss.

11. Synthetic Colors
Most shampoos and conditioners are dyed with a synthetic color to make them look nice. These colors come from petroleum or coal-tar sources, all of which come with harmful health effects. Synthetic colors will normally go by FD&C or D&C combined with a number.

12. Dimethicone
Dimethicone is a type of silicone that is used in a ton of hair products and contributes to product buildup that makes your hair feel greasy. Since it acts as a protecting cover on the surface of the hair, it stops moisture and nutrients from coming in and instead collects dirt and residue. It can clog the pores on the scalp and cause skin irritation.

13. Cocamidopropyl Betaine
Cocamidopropyl betaine is another foam booster. Although it’s derived from coconut oil, it can have negative effects. This surfactant is used in hair products along  with dimethylaminopropylamine, which can cause skin irritation, allergies, rosacea, and eczema.

14. Triclosan
Triclosan was banned from being used in antibacterial soaps in 2016 but is still allowed in toothpaste, shampoos, and deodorants. It’s a chemical antibacterial agent known to cause hormone disruptions, which can lead to cancer and affect fetal development, among other things.

15. Retinyl Palmitate
Retinyl palmitate is the ester of retinol combined with palmitic acid. It’s a known skin irritant that can cause peeling, scaling, redness, and itching. Side effects of retinyl palmitate may include cancer, reproductive problems, and organ toxicity.

Harmless Shampoo Ingredients
​While there are many bad ingredients in shampoos and harmful shampoo brands, plenty of shampoos use only natural, non-toxic, and organic ingredients, and you can even make your own homemade hair treatments using ingredients from your kitchen. If you are suffering from hair loss or unhealthy hair growth and think chemicals such as the ones mentioned above may be to blame, try switching to a natural alternative. You can also try taking natural supplements that contain plant-derived ingredients that work synergistically to help your natural hair growth.

Your make up routine may be so dangerous that it leads to cancer, migraines, skin irritation, and reproductive health issues.

According to the Food and Drug Administration, the “FDA's legal authority over cosmetics is different from our authority over other products.” As such, cosmetic products and ingredients do not need FDA premarket approval with the exception of color additives.

To date, the FDA will only intervene as a result of consumer complaints. Therefore, cosmetic companies have extensive latitude in choosing ingredients.

“More than 500 cosmetic products sold in the U.S. contain ingredients that are banned in Japan, Canada, or Europe,” reports New Max.

Interestingly, some cosmetic companies have banned certain harmful ingredients from their products in Europe but still use them in the United States and other countries. For example, L'Oreal has discontinued phthalates (see "Complete Guide to the Most Harmful Chemicals to Avoid" below) in Europe, but continues to sell products that contain them in the U.S.

An analysis of product ingredients by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) reveals that “more than one in five of all products contain chemicals linked to cancer, 80% contain ingredients that commonly contain hazardous impurities, and 56% contain penetration enhancers that help deliver ingredients deeper into the skin.”

Some of these chemicals or petrochemicals are deemed to be safe in small doses. However, there are two key factors that complicate the safety of these chemical ingredients in personal care products.

First of all, these ingredients appear in a wide range of products throughout the household. Since many of the ingredients are accumulative in the body, exposure to ingredients in multiple products can exceed the safe levels.

Secondly, adverse impact of these ingredients is exacerbated when the body is exposed to multiple types of chemicals resulting in a compounding effect on the body. Therefore, avoiding all synthetics in personal care products is the only safe option.

Absorption of harmful substances through skin is far more dangerous than through oral intake. Harmful substances taken orally go through the digestive system where enzymes in the saliva, stomach, and liver break them down and purge them from the body before they enter the bloodstream.

However, when these chemical substances are absorbed through the skin, there is no protection mechanism to prevent them from entering the blood stream. As is commonly known, snake venom absorption through the skin is lethal, whereas ingesting it will result in illness, but not death.
​
Given the potential for devastating adverse impact of chemicals on the body, it is important to distinguish true natural products from others that are branded as natural but contain harmful chemicals.

Selecting natural personal care products.

Caution needs to be taken when selecting among the wide range of products labeled and marketed as natural. By branding themselves as “Natural,” “Organic,” “Herbal,” or “Botanical,” many products with complex molecules and petrochemical substances aim to deceive unsuspecting consumers.

Commonly referred to as “greenwashed,” these products have misleading buzzwords in their name, brand name, or taglines on their packaging.

Fortunately, growing consumer skepticism has led to more stringent scrutiny by resellers. In addition, the power of social media is exposing this unscrupulous behavior of many brands. For example, in early 2016, Honest Company Inc. and Hain Celestial Group Inc. announced widespread re-evaluation of their claims of “no harsh chemicals” such as Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS), after a Wall Street Journal report went viral.

When purchasing personal care products, it is highly advisable to perform a thorough evaluation of the brands and their ingredients to ensure that they are not greenwashed products.
​
Moreover, retailers can garner the trust of consumers interested in genuinely natural products by instituting, enforcing, and publicizing a rigorous evaluation process for selecting natural products. Embarking on such an evaluation initiative need not be a daunting undertaking, however.
​

Definitions and Guidelines.

Definitions. At the center of the evaluation system is the definition of “natural.” The absence of a universal definition has led many organizations to create one to meet their specific needs.

Perhaps, the most comprehensive definition is by Ecocert. According to the international certification organization, natural ingredients can be from four sources (plant, mineral, marine, or animal) with allowance for specific transformations, either physical or chemical.

In contrast, “Synthetic ingredients are considered to be any ingredient, fully or partially stemming from a petrochemical origin.” Adopting the Ecocert definition not only establishes a solid foundation, but also simplifies the evaluation of products and their ingredients.

Guidelines. A structured, but simple, approach is essential in ensuring a resilient system for evaluating products that claim to be natural. Follow these five easy steps to institute and enforce a process that will not only result in genuinely natural products on your shelves, but also allow you to capitalize on the market segment that is keenly interested in authentic natural products.

1. Study pre-existing sources (listed in the following section) for evaluating “natural-ness” of ingredients in cosmetic products.
2. Create your own “natural-ness” evaluation standards. You may choose to adopt any one of the sources in its entirety or create a hybrid based on your company’s specific customer market.
3. Ask your suppliers to provide the entire ingredients list for each product with all unlisted or unclear chemical substances that are usually hidden within some ingredients such as: proteins, extracts, stem cells, fragrance/perfume, natural fragrance/perfume and preservatives.
4. If you're a seller, evaluate your current and future product offering based on your standards.
5. Publish and educate your sales staff and consumers on the merits of your standards.

Sources for creating “Natural-ness” Standards for Evaluation.

There are a variety of sources to use as the basis for creating your own standards. The most dependable ones are listed below:

• USDA Organic Integrity Database. This is a one-stop shop for validating claims by manufacturers regarding organic certification of their products. If a brand and their products are listed here, then it has passed the strictest standards and no further evaluation of ingredients is necessary.
• Natural Products Association (NPA). Founded in 1936, NPA is the largest nonprofit US organization dedicated to the natural products industry (foods, dietary supplements, and health/beauty aids). NPA is recognized for its strong lobbying presence in Washington, D.C. and acts as a watchdog on regulatory and legislative issues. They have a very useful list of prohibited and temporary allowed personal care ingredients.
• Whole Foods Market Premium Body Care Standards. Developed by Whole Foods market to evaluate natural products sold in their stores. They have Basic standards and Premium standards. You may choose to adopt either the Basic or the Premier standard, or some combination thereof.
• EU Approved List of Preservatives. In 2009, the European Parliament and The Council of European Union developed a database of allowed preservatives in cosmetic products.
• Ecocert. Founded in France in 1991, it began as a partnership between European nations, but has gradually expanded to many other nations around the world.  It is the largest organic certification organization in the world. Ecocert primarily certifies food and food products, but also certifies cosmetics, detergents, perfumes, and textiles.
• COSMOS (COSMetic Organic Standard). In 2010, the five main European organizations involved in organic and natural cosmetics standards came together to create a single, harmonized international standard.

​The group (BDIH in Germany, Cosmebio and Ecocert in France, ICEA in Italy, and Soil Association in the UK) created the COSMOS-standard AISBL (an international non-profit association registered in Belgium) in order to define common requirements and definitions for organic and/or natural cosmetics.

Your Complete Guide to the Most Harmful Chemicals to Avoid.

Whether consumer or seller, look out for these key toxins:

• Aluminum. Found in food and cosmetics, mainly antiperspirants, lipsticks, lip-gloss, and toothpaste. Although it occurs naturally, it is linked to Alzheimer’s, other neuro-degenerative diseases, lung cancer, and skin irritation.
• Talcum Powder. It is a mineral, produced by the mining of talc rocks. It is used in baby, foot, and first aid powders; and in cosmetics used as filler and for absorbing moisture or oil. Impure talc can contain asbestos that it is known to cause cancer. However, talc, itself, is also linked to respiratory system and ovarian cancer.

Recently Johnson & Johnson was forced to pay $72M to the family of a woman who sued the company for her ovarian cancer. The jury found that for decades, the company used talc in its Baby Powder and its Shower-to-Shower products knowing that it has a potential to cause ovarian cancer.

• Formaldehyde and Formaldehyde Releasing Ingredients. It is a natural trace compound and a synthetic preservative found in cosmetics. They usually appear as DMDM hydantoin, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, methenamine, and quarternium-15.

These ingredients slowly release small amounts of formaldehyde, known to cause cancer; allergic reactions; eyes, nose, and throat irritation; interference with skin’s natural oil production; dermatitis; and reproductive system disparity (decreased fertility, increased the risk of miscarriage, and damaged sperm).

It is banned in Sweden and Japan. It is a restricted ingredient in Canada (usage is restricted to less than 0.2%) for skin care products. European countries mandate that if formaldehyde-releasing preservatives in cosmetic products exceed 0.05%, the product must be labeled with the warning, “Contains Formaldehyde.”
​

• Petrochemicals. Petrochemicals are chemical ingredients that are derived from petroleum, and an astonishing number of so-called natural products in health and beauty stores contain these.

Detecting petrochemical ingredients in personal care products can be difficult as they are usually listed under different names (e.g., Behentrimonium Chloride, Cetrimonium Chloride) or hidden in other ingredients such as perfumes, fragrances, glycols, and many more.

Petroleum and petrochemicals are known to cause a range of serious health problems, such as cancer and endocrine disruption (hormones interference), clogged skin pores and interference with natural sebum production resulting in skin imbalances, and other medical disorders (e.g., Attention Deficit Disorder).

Moreover, petrochemicals are a leading cause of groundwater contamination. Finally, petroleum products generate 1,4-dioxane that is known for its health disruption effects (e.g., vertigo, drowsiness, headache, anorexia and irritation of the eyes, nose, throat, and lungs). The EWG has found that an alarming 22% of all products contain unsafe levels of 1,4-dioxane.

Avoiding all products that contain petroleum-based ingredients is highly recommended.

• Phenoxyethanol. It is a synthetic ether alcohol and a petrochemical preservative. It can cause contact dermatitis, and damage reproductive, immune, and nervous systems. It has been banned for use in certified organic skin care products by COSMOS, Ecocert, and the new EU organic certification standard.

Yet, many greenwashed companies in the U.S. continue to use it as a Paraben alternative as it's is on the temporary allowed NPA standard list. It is a common preservative in many natural extracts and proteins (wheat, rice, quinoa, etc.) used by cosmetic companies in their products.

Since cosmetic companies are not required to disclose preservatives and solvents that are used by their vendors to make their extracts and proteins, a more extensive due diligence step of asking cosmetic manufactures for the Composition Analysis of these types of ingredients is necessary.

• Mineral Oils. Also listed as Paraffin and Petrolatum is this petroleum derivative ingredient found in drugs, cosmetics, household cleaning products, and baby oils (sometimes at 100%). They are linked to immune and respiratory toxicant or allergen, clogging the skin’s pores, promoting acne and other skin disorders, and premature aging.
• Siloxane/Silicones. Polymers of Silicone found in cosmetics as texturizers. They are used for delivering a superficial silky sensation to the skin. Most silicones are derived from petroleum. In cosmetic ingredient lists, they can appear as Dimethicone, Cyclopentasiloxane, Cyclohexasiloxane, and Phenyl Trimethicone.

Silicones stay at the top layer of the skin. Therefore, they clog the skin’s pores and cause acne. Some research findings indicate that Siloxane/Silicones can disrupt the endocrine (hormone functions) system and cause harm to the reproductive, immune, and nervous systems.

• EDTA. Made from coal tar and include Disodium EDTA and Tetrasodium EDTA, they are used for a variety of reasons such as removing impurities from raw materials, as a preservative, chelator, stabilizer, and foam enhancer. Tetrasodium EDTA is made from formaldehyde (see above) and sodium cyanide is made from the toxic gas hydrogen cyanide.

EDTAs serve as penetration enhancers, which means that they can intensify harmful effects of other ingredients in the formula by promoting deeper penetration into the skin’s tissue and, consequently, the bloodstream. Additionally, EDTAs are not easily biodegradable and a poor choice for environmental health. Be mindful of this ingredient as it is used in some greenwashed products.

• Glycols. They appear in cosmetic ingredient lists as Polyethylene Glycols (PEGS), Polypropylene Glycols (PPGS), Propylene, Butylene, Pentylene, Hexylene, and Caprylyl. Found in food, drugs, and cosmetics, they are petroleum-based compounds that serve as texturizer, thickeners, solvents, and moisture-carriers in cosmetics.

The majority of "natural" products contain this highly toxic ingredient. Propylene Glycols have been linked to skin irritation. PEGS can be contaminated with ethylene oxide known as a human carcinogen. Ethylene Oxide can cause cancer and if used on broken skin can cause irritation.

• Benzyl Alcohol. This is a petrochemical preservative and is known to cause severe skin, eye, and respiratory irritation. Be aware that some natural brands use Benzyl Alcohol in combination with other preservatives as an alternative to Parabens. In the U.S., this ingredient is on the temporary allowed NPA standard list.
• Alcohol Denat. It is a denatured ethyl alcohol and a petrochemical product that usually contains Benzyl Alcohol to make it undrinkable. It can cause skin irritation, eczema, trigger rosacea flare-ups, and prevent the absorption of Vitam

• Isopropyl Alcohol (Rubbing Alcohol). Also known as Isopropanol, found in perfumes, cosmetics, and household cleansers. It is derived from petroleum. Highly toxic and linked to medical complications and allergic reactions of skin, eyes, mucous membranes, and upper respiratory tract.

It is used to dissolve other substances in cosmetics, personal care, and fragrances/perfumes products. It is also used to decrease the thickness of liquids and prevent foam.

• Ethanolamines. They appear in cosmetic ingredient list as Diethanolamines (DEAs), MEAs (Monoethanolamine), and Triethanolamine (TEAs). They are petroleum-derived ingredients that are found in cosmetic cleansers, shampoos, soaps, and bubble baths. They are linked to cancer, organ system toxicity, and allergic reactions.
• Parabens. They appear in cosmetic ingredient list as Methylparaben, Propylparaben, Ethylparaben, Isobutylparaben, Butylparaben, Benzylparaben. Mainly derived from petroleum, they are potent broad-spectrum preservatives and are cheap and easy to use.

Parabens are linked to breast cancer, hormone disruption, reproductive system disorder, DNA damage, and skin irritation. The use of five Parabens (Isopropylparaben, Isobutylparaben, Phenylparaben, Benzylparaben, and Pentylparaben) in cosmetic products was prohibited in European Union in 2014. Parabens have been used by many cosmetic brands since the 1950s.

They are also hidden preservatives in many botanical extracts and proteins used heavily in all types of personal care products. Many companies who claim to be Paraben-free have done so by replacing it with other petrochemical preservatives such as Phenoxyethanol or Benzyl Alcohol.

• All Sulfates. Sulfates are basically detergents that are used in household cleansers, and personal care products such as shampoos, soaps, toothpaste, and masks. They are partially made from petrolatum or petroleum jelly. Sulfates are linked to skin, scalp, and eye irritation.

Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS) and Sodium Laureth Sulfate (SLES) are known to cause hormone imbalance, toxicity formation in internal organs (liver, brain, and heart), and potentially cancer. The source of health issues caused by SLS and SLES is in their manufacturing process (ethoxylation) that results in contamination with 1,4 dioxane, a carcinogenic by-product.

According to Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 1,4 dioxane is described as "probably carcinogenic to humans," toxic to the brain and central nervous system, kidneys, and liver. Moreover, it is also a leading groundwater contaminant.

• Quats. They are chemical and petrochemical ingredients that contain a quaternary ammonium compound (QAC). Some examples of quats include Benzalkonium Chloride, Cetalkonium Chloride, Steardimonium Chloride, Cetrimonium Bromide, and Cetrimonium Chloride, Behentrimonium Chloride, and polyquaternium(s), Lauryl Dimonium Hydrolysed Collagen, Diethyl Ester Dimethyl Ammonium Chloride, Dialkyl Dimethl Ammonium Methyl Sulfate, and Hydroxethyl Methyl Ammonium Methyl Sulfate.

There are also milder versions of them that are used both as a conditioner and thickener. These include Guar Hydroxypropyltrimonium Chloride, Hydroxypropyltrimonium Oligosaccharide, and Sugar Quats.

Quats are used as a hair conditioner, hair styling gel, moisturizers, body wash, etc. Quats hold all the petrochemicals adverse events discussed above. Furthermore, in the U.S., the Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics (AOEC), classified Quats as “asthmagens,” meaning they can trigger asthma attacks and initiate asthma in those who are asthma-free. Quaternium-15 releases formaldehyde that is a serious health-damaging ingredient as described earlier.

Among quats, Benzalkonium Chloride has been known to have the most impact on natural hormone function disruption and causing reproductive toxicity. In Europe, the Scientific Committee on Consumer safety, based on skin reactions and toxicity, has restricted the use of Behentrimonium Chloride (below 3% in a rinse-off products and below 0.5% in leave-on products). In the U.S., they are heavily used by both conventional and greenwashed brands as a hair conditioner.

• Phthalates. Commonly used as softening agents to enhance absorption of skin care ingredients and to create fragrances, they can be found in color cosmetics, lotions, body washes, hair care products, and nail polish. The most common Phthalates used in cosmetics are Diethyl Phthalate (DEO) and Dibutyl Phthalate.

The latter is used mainly in nail products as a solvent for dyes. Phthalates are also used as a fixative in fragrance ingredients in many other cosmetics. They have been classified as a potential carcinogen ingredient by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Health and Human Services.

There are serious concerns regarding their impact on the reproductive system. Phthalates are often hidden from the ingredient lists as many companies use “fragrance” or "parfum" rather than listing them separately.

• Artificial Colors. Found in food, drugs, and cosmetics, artificial colors contain heavy metal salts and are linked to cancer, hyperactivity, anxiety, migraines and allergic reactions. They are even used heavily by cosmetic companies in many so-called “natural” products. Most are derived from petroleum and/or coal tar. They are normally listed as FD&C or D&C, followed by a color and a number.
• Fragrances/Perfumes. Found in cosmetics (including so-called natural products) and household products. They are linked to headache, dizziness, allergic reactions, hormone disruptions, and hyperpigmentation.

Additionally, They are the most frequent cause of allergic reactions in cosmetics. Most are derived from petroleum. Since companies consider their fragrance formulations as trade secrets and listing the chemicals, such as solvents or preservatives, is not mandated by FDA, they are able to hide toxic synthetic substances such as chemical preservatives, petroleum, Dibutyl phthalate (DBP), etc.

This widespread practice extends to natural brands that choose to list “natural fragrance” on their label instead of disclosing the actual substances in their formulations. These "natural" fragrances very likely consist of petrochemicals (e.g., Phthalates) or other harmful ingredients that are used as solvents or preservatives.
If manufacturers are not willing to provide the breakdown of their natural ingredients, it is best to avoid their products altogether.

• Triclosan. It is mainly used in antiperspirants, deodorants, hand sanitizers, facial tissues, and toothpastes as an antibacterial agent and a preservative. It passes through skin and it is linked to endocrine (hormone function) disruption and irritating to the skin and eyes.

Prevalent in so many products, Triclosan was detected in 75% of urine samples (2,517 people ages six years and older) in a study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Triclosan has been banned in Europe since 2010 but is still used in the U.S. Its use in Canada is restricted (0.03% in mouthwash and 0.3% in cosmetics) and flagged for further assessment by the Canadian Chemicals Management Plan.
​

• Butylated Hydroxyanisole (BHA) and Butylated Hydroxytoluene (BHT). Used as preservatives, BHA and BHT can be found in moisturizers, lipsticks, hair products, makeup, sunscreen, antiperspirant/deodorant, fragrance, other cosmetics, and some food products (e.g., cereals, gum, fast food, snacks).

They are known to cause skin allergic reactions, endocrine disruption (hormonal), developmental and reproductive toxicity, and as potential human carcinogen. Some studies also indicate that they may cause organ-system toxicity and impact liver, thyroid and lung health.

Conclusion.

As is evident, there are many chemical ingredients that can cause serious harm to the health of consumers. For this reason, there is a growing demand for products that are truly free of such harsh ingredients. Retailers can take steps to serve their customers’ demands and capitalize on this growing trend for truly natural products.

The first step to addressing this market opportunity is to implement a process to evaluate products that are marketed as natural. Equally as important is to communicate the specifics of the program for evaluating products to the sales staff and consumers.

By informing the salespeople and consumers, this program will not only result in safer products on the shelves but also generate incremental sales by having instilled a sense of confidence in consumers – a true win-win for all.

Fortunately, the work to create and implement this program should not be viewed as an insurmountable endeavor as there are plenty of pre-existing resources from reliable entities to jumpstart the evaluation process.

Some, such as the USDA Integrity Database, serve as an instant validation (or not) of claims made by manufacturers, while other sources require some adaptation to meet your business needs.
​
Given the industry trend, it is certain that any effort expended in separating true natural products from imposters will pay dividends for quite some time.

Skincare specialists The Derm Review analyzed the 100 best-selling natural skincare products to establish how many of these contain synthetic ingredients. The study determined:

• Only 42% of “natural skincare products” are truly natural
• Majority (58%) of skincare products marketed as “natural”’ contain synthetic ingredients 
• Skincare products marketed “natural” are 24% more expensive than “regular” skincare products
• All of the “natural” serums in the study contained at least one synthetic ingredient
• Nearly eight in ten (78%) “natural” face masks contains synthetic ingredients
• “Natural” facial toners cost on average 479% more than “regular” toners.
• “Natural” skincare products contain on average 2.4 synthetic ingredients 

See the full findings from the research here: https://thedermreview.com/natural-skincare-study/ 

Skincare biochemists from The Derm Review analyzed the ingredient lists of the 100 best-selling skincare products containing the word “natural”. The study found that out of the 100 best-selling natural products, only 42 were truly natural. The majority (58%) of products included at least one synthetic ingredient. 

​The average number of different synthetic ingredients used in “natural” skincare products was found to be 2.4.

The Cost of Natural Skincare Products

The study found that the price of skincare products marketed as “natural” were on average 24% more expensive than skincare products that didn’t contain the word. 

​The most expensive “natural” skincare products were facial toners. They were found to cost 479% more than “regular” toners.

Top synthetic ingredients found in natural skincare products

Ethylhexylglycerin is the most commonly used synthetic ingredient and was found in 24% of all the “natural” products. It is deemed safe and is generally used in low concentrations in skincare products however, it can cause minor irritation to the skin and eyes if high concentrations are used.

The second most commonly found synthetic ingredient was Phenoxyethanol which was found in 22% of the products. Like Ethylhexylglycerin, it is considered safe but can cause irritation when high concentrations are used. It is used mainly as a preservative and antimicrobial agent used to help your products last longer and prolong their safety and efficacy. 

Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate comes up as the third most widely used synthetic agent and was found in 13% of the “natural” products. While being a synthetic agent, it is generally safe for all skin types, and is a type of vitamin C.

Products containing synthetic ingredients
​
Out of the product types The Derm Review looked out, all of the serums contained at least one synthetic ingredient. Out of the “natural” face masks on the list, 78% contained synthetic ingredients, while 58% of moisturizers and 55% of cleaners contained synthetic agents.

Are all synthetic skincare ingredients bad?

No, and not all natural products are good. 

Some chemical ingredients have been scientifically developed to be more gentle on our skin and more cost-effective to formulate. Other synthetic ingredients are processed to mimic bioavailable products that may be rare or threatened in the wild, and are aiming to prevent damage to biodiversity and environmental destruction.

For consumers, it can be difficult to tell the difference between the “good” and “bad” when reading a skincare label. Some long chemical-sounding words can sound “scary”, and many consumers may feel that the product feels safer if they see ingredients they recognise on the list.

When it comes to the synthetic versus natural skincare debate, it is not black and white. However, synthetic products are often demonized, and as a result, consumers seek out to find natural alternatives. Indeed, a 2018 survey showed that the vast majority of people (90%) believe that natural or naturally-derived beauty ingredients are better for them. 

It is important to remember though, that just because something is natural doesn’t mean it’s safe. Some natural ingredients, such as essential oils, could be poisonous if used incorrectly, and many natural ingredients can cause more irritation to the skin than synthetic alternatives. 

Elle MacLeman, Skincare Biochemist at The Derm Review says:

“As we’ve established, natural is not always better, but despite that, consumers have the right to know whether the products they buy are indeed natural or not.”

“Sadly many brands overuse the word “natural” in their marketing in order to sell more products, and that feels misleading and deceptive. Especially as our research found that these products tend to be priced higher while not necessarily being better, safer or more environmentally friendly.”

“I think one of the problems is that the industry is pretty much unregulated when it comes to making claims. For instance, it’s common to see ‘chemical-free’ products on the shelves, but that doesn’t make any sense as even water is a chemical.”

Methodology
​
The Derm Review searched Amazon.com during July 2021 for phrases such as ‘natural skin care’, ‘natural moisturizer’ and looked at the top 100 best-selling products that came up within the search results. For pricing, we compared the $ per Fl Oz on products marketed as “natural” with the same type of skincare products that didn’t contain the word natural.