[Fun With Press Releases] Capitol Hill Cosmetics Party Was a Hoot.

Fun with Press Releases: Because sometimes the beauty industry just goes there.

So last Wednesday, the Society for Women’s Health Research hosted a Capitol Hill briefing called “The Make Up of Your Make Up” (see what they did there?) to discuss, “the science of cosmetics and its impact on women’s health.” They sent me a press release right after, so I could know what a great time they all had.

And my first response was: Color me excited! A great women’s health nonprofit getting Congress to pay attention to all the women’s health issues going on in the world of beauty? This is big stuff.

Linda Katz, MD, MPH, Director of the Office of Cosmetics and Colors at the Food & Drug Administration kicked things off with an overview of the FDA’s responsibilities. Which I’m sure was good times. And then they got to the rest of their speakers:

With FDA oversight defined, John E. Bailey, PhD, Chief Scientist and Executive Vice President for Science of the Personal Care Products Council, shared more information on the cosmetic regulatory system including hazard vs. risk and how products are developed. Bailey said the steps for product development are, “to decide on type of product, who is intended to use it, what do you want the product to do, what regulatory body does it fall under (over-the-counter drugs or cosmetics), and finally, selection of ingredients by formulator.”

Halyna Breslawec, PhD, Deputy Director of the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR), explained the approval process for cosmetics and how ingredients are deemed safe. The mission of CIR is to “thoroughly review and access the safety of ingredients used in cosmetics in an open, unbiased, and expert manner, and publish the results in open, peer-reviewed literature.” The most frequently used ingredients and ingredients of concern are given high priority from CIR for review. They found 1124 ingredients to be safe, 875 safe with qualifications, 9 unsafe and 51 with insufficient data. In total, 2109 ingredients have been reviewed by CIR to date.

Rounding out the panel, Tina Alster MD, Director of the Washington Institute of Dermatologic Laser Surgery and Clinical Professor of Dermatology at Georgetown University Medical Center, offered insight into the top dermatological concerns with cosmetics. Even though cosmetics are deemed safe, some women face adverse reactions, including irritant, allergic, photoallergic and other reactions. Dermatitis from topical prescriptions is common so women should be diligent in observing how their skin reacts to different products. Alster’s main take-home messages for consumers are “sun protection is crucial, know your ABCDE’s (have any and all suspicious lesions checked by a dermatologist), and topicals have great therapeutic efficacy but also potential for side effects.”

Following the presentations, guests were treated to a reception to learn more about cosmetics from various companies and to ask further questions of the panel.

Ground Control to Major Tom! Because, yeah, there’s something wrong. Apparently SWHR decided to discuss the impact of cosmetics on women’s health with… the scientists that the beauty industry pays to tell everyone that cosmetics are good for women’s health. Let’s review:

1. John Bailey is the “chief scientist” of the industry’s main trade association.

2. Halyna Breslawec works for the CIR, which is the industry-funded panel that reviews cosmetic safety (and shares office space with the main trade association).

3. Tina Alster sounds all impartial in the write-up above — Georgetown, ooh fancy! — but is also “the consulting dermatologist to Lancôme” according to her official bio over here. I’m guessing she doesn’t do that pro bono.

Now, I don’t mind giving the industry a place at the table when we’re talking about what’s going on with their products. They make ‘em, they get to talk about ‘em. And they’re super convinced that their safety review process is awesome. (Even though they’ve only reviewed about 20 percent of the over 10,000 chemicals used in cosmetics today. What? They’re being thorough, don’t rush them.)

Fair enough.

But where were the impartial scientists and doctors, you know, the ones who don’t get paid to say beauty products are safe? Where were the activists like the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics who have spent years researching why they might not all be so safe? Where were the salon workers, who are experiencing health issues from breathing this stuff in all the time? And where were the consumers who’d like get some actual straight answers for a change?

And most of all: Why is a reputable women’s health nonprofit throwing a singles mixer for a $330 billion industry* that seems to need no help finding its way into the government’s snuggly warm embrace?

“The safety of cosmetics is an important issue for women’s health,” said Phyllis Greenberger, MSW, President and CEO of SWHR. Oh… nope, still confused.

*Estimate of industry value per Harvard business historian Geoffrey Jones.

Filed under Fun with Press Releases, Government Watch, Happenings, Ingredients

Tagged as , , , , ,

6 Comments

3 Comments

  1. Cora
    Posted February 14, 2011 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

    Well, if you look at SWHR’s corporation-heavy Board of Directors and “Corporate Partners” I think you get the picture…

  2. Posted February 14, 2011 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    Take a look at the list of corporate funders for the Society for Women’s Health Research. Also check out the articles about how this group defended the safety of Hormone Replacement Therapy even after the huge WHI study showed that HRT has more health risks than benefits. At the time, the Society for Women’s Health Research was getting something like $1 million a year from Wyeth, the drug company that makes HRT. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Astroturf_Marketing

    Here’s a list of “Corporate Advisory Council Members” from the Society for Women’s Health Research website:
    Abbott Laboratories
    Amgen Inc.
    Allergan, Inc.
    AstraZeneca
    Bayer AG
    Boehringer Ingelheim
    Boston Scientific Corporation
    Cook Group Incorporated
    Eli Lilly and Company
    Endo Pharmaceuticals
    GE HealthCare
    GlaxoSmithKline plc
    Hologic, Inc.
    Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc.
    Medco Health Solutions, Inc.
    Medtronic, Inc.
    Merck & Co., Inc.
    Novartis
    Pfizer Inc.
    Purdue Pharma L.P.
    Roche
    sanofi-aventis U.S. LLC
    Stryker Orthopaedics
    Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited

    It’s not so surprising that the Society for Women’s Health Research would host a Congressional briefing about a women’s health topic they haven’t researched, featuring industry scientists, without even consulting the women’s health groups that have been working on this issue for a decade — but it is still very disappointing.

    Stacy Malkan
    Campaign for Safe Cosmetics

3 Trackbacks

  1. [...] Other Beauty Schooled Around the Interweb adventures include Monday’s post scoring a Jezebel repub and lots of business by me over on MyDaily. [...]

  2. [...] See the rest here: [Fun With Press Releases] Capitol Hill Cosmetics Party Was a Hoot … [...]

  3. By Pretty Price Check (07.22.11) | Beauty Schooled on July 25, 2011 at 11:47 am

    [...] the eco-health risk of beauty products is an issue still close to my hear. Because the industry is not always so straight-up with us about what’s really going on. And that means we just don’t know enough about [...]

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

  • COMING SOON

    The Eating Insinct: Food Culture, Body Image, and Guilt in America by Virginia Sole Smith

    Pre-order now!