Skip to main content

A Pandora’s Box of things I can never unknow


The real difficulty with learning about the amount of waste Americans generate is the flood of other information that comes with that research. According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), women are exposed to 168 chemicals in the cosmetics they use while men are exposed to roughly half, 85.
            I come from an area of the country where people are adamantly against big government and even more against governmental regulations. On the other hand, they will tell you how great it is to live in a country where the food and water are so safe and clean. Never once will they put two and two together realizing that regulatory agencies ensure their food is safe to eat. Why am I telling you this? Because I am a fan of regulating food and other products to protect us from companies trying to make a buck.
            I should not have to learn chemistry to shop for soap. However, in the US it is nearly to that point. The FDA bans only 11 chemicals from cosmetics (Cosmetics is a broad category ranging from make up to tooth paste) while the EU has banned or severely limited the use of more than a thousand and Canada bans hundreds of the same chemicals the FDA considers safe. In the US the government takes the view that something is safe until determined dangerous while in Europe and Canada chemicals must be proven safe before allowed on the market.
            Below are just a few of the reasons I would argue for greater regulation of food and cosmetics in the US:
1.     There is little to no regulation for chemical mixtures labeled as “fragrance” in the US. The FDA allows companies to claim “fragrance” blends as proprietary information. This allows companies to keep those chemical mixtures off ingredients labels.
2.     Ripe oranges are not actually orange. The FDA allows companies to spray or inject the orange skins with dye to make them more appealing to the consumer. The FDA reasons that this is acceptable because no one consumes the rind of an orange.
3.     Talcum-based body powders that were marketed for use on infants and female genitalia have been shown to meet market regulation while containing asbestos fibers.
4.     Microplastics have been found in water bottles in startling numbers. More recently microplastics have been found in the air we breathe. There is no information at this point what the health impacts of consuming small plastic particles on a regular basis will do to humans.
5.     Natural flavoring simply means that the flavor originated from a natural organism. The end product can have dozens of added ingredients to aid in maintaining or enhancing the flavor.
The lack of regulation in cosmetics and food makes it seem like this is one giant science experiment and we are test subjects. Groups like EWG work to determine the long term health effects of the chemicals we encounter every day. My hope is that some day the government will catch up to groups like this and take a hard look at what they are allowing companies to sell us all in the name of capitalism. 


Popular posts from this blog

Four years in and still figuring things out

Initially I was drawn into this world of sustainable living based on posts I had seen on social media. These ranged from very simple changes to reduce plastic consumption all the way to people that did not use toilet paper because it was too wasteful. ( Americans use more toilet paper than anywhere else on earth. )  This wide spectrum was incredibly daunting at first. How far was far enough? On the other hand, at what point would I become a social outcast for the ideas people were suggesting?             Then the real questions started popping up in my head. Were these people on social media even remotely correct in the assertions they were making? I did not have the foggiest clue. This is the point where I started to do actual research. I realized fact checking was going to be incredibly important in accepting this lifestyle change and convincing others that it is a worthwhile cause.   ...

There are two sides to every story

As I mentioned in my earlier posts, there are plenty of people that will push back against my choices. One such push back came in a GEG class quite unexpectedly. It was simply an off handed comment by my professor. I do not believe he intended as a slight against me in any way, but it really made me think about how people view my choices in protecting the environment.             I believe were talking about the impacts of disposable diapers and my professor said, “just wait until you have kids, things will change.” It really struck me in that moment that people see environmentalism as a trend. Something to be put on hold or given up when life gets in the way. To be clear, I was in no way offended by his comment, quite the opposite in fact. I took his comment to mean that I have work to do. Maybe I should give more credit to advocating for changes in the law. That would provide more legitimacy to the changes I ...

Not for the love of animals, but for sustainability

I do not necessarily subscribe to a specific diet. I do not claim to be vegetarian or vegan even if most of my meals meet those requirements. I guess you could call my diet plastic free. It sounds strange but that is the goal when I go shopping for food.             I was really inspired after reading The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan. His book really focused on being in touch with the food we consume. So much of what we eat today is highly processed with added sugars, emulsifiers and stabilizers. Our great-grandparents probably would not recognize most of what America is eating today as food. Pollan’s advice for a healthy diet is, “eat food, not too much, mostly plants.” Image source.              It is well understood that the meat industry in the US is a major environmental problem.   Beef production requires a significant amount of na...