President’s Cancer Panel report highlights threat from hormone-disrupting chemicals – many found in new fragrance study

San Francisco – A new analysis reveals that top-selling fragrance products – from Britney Spears Curious and Hannah Montana Secret Celebrity to Calvin Klein Eternity and Abercrombie & Fitch Fierce – contain a dozen or more secret chemicals not listed on labels, multiple chemicals that can trigger allergic reactions or disrupt hormones, and many substances that have not been assessed for safety by the cosmetics industry’s self-policing review panels.

The study of hidden toxic chemicals in perfumes comes on the heels of last week’s report by the President’s Cancer Panel, which sounded the alarm over the understudied and largely unregulated toxic chemicals used by millions of Americans in their daily lives. The President’s Cancer Panel report recommends that pregnant women and couples planning to become pregnant avoid exposure to hormone-disrupting chemicals due to cancer concerns. Several fragrances analyzed for this study contained multiple chemicals with the potential to disrupt hormones.

“This monumental study reveals the hidden hazards of fragrances,” said Anne C. Steinemann, Ph.D., Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Professor of Public Affairs, University of Washington. “Secondhand scents are also a big concern. One person using a fragranced product can cause health problems for many others.”

For this study, the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, a national coalition of health and environmental groups, commissioned tests of 17 fragranced products at an independent laboratory. Campaign partner Environmental Working Group assessed data from the tests and the product labels. The analysis reveals that the 17 products contained, on average:

Fourteen secret chemicals not listed on labels due to a loophole in federal law that allows companies to claim fragrances as trade secrets. American Eagle Seventy Seven contained 24 hidden chemicals, the highest number of any product in the study.

Ten sensitizing chemicals associated with allergic reactions such as asthma, wheezing, headaches and contact dermatitis. Giorgio Armani Acqua Di Gio contained 19 different sensitizing chemicals, more than any other product in the study.

Four hormone-disrupting chemicals linked to a range of health effects including sperm damage, thyroid disruption and cancer. Halle by Halle Berry, Quicksilver and Glow by JLO each contained seven different chemicals with the potential to disrupt the hormone system.

The majority of chemicals found in the testing have never been assessed for safety by any publically accountable agency, or by the cosmetics industry’s self-policing review panels. Of the 91 ingredients identified in this study, only 19 have been reviewed by the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR), and 27 have been assessed by the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) and the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM), which develop voluntary standards for chemicals used in fragrance.

“Something doesn’t smell right—clearly the system is broken,” said Lisa Archer, national coordinator of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics at the Breast Cancer Fund. “We urgently need updated laws that require full disclosure of cosmetics ingredients so consumers can make informed choices about what they are being exposed to.”

“Fragrance chemicals are inhaled or absorbed through the skin, and many of them end up inside people’s bodies, including pregnant women and newborn babies,” said Jane Houlihan, senior vice president for research at Environmental Working Group.

A recent EWG study found synthetic musk chemicals Galaxolide and Tonalide in the umbilical cord blood of newborn infants. The musk chemicals were found in nearly every fragrance analyzed for this study. Twelve of the 17 products also contained diethyl phthalate (DEP), a chemical linked to sperm damage and behavioral problems that has been found in the bodies of nearly all Americans tested.

Members of Congress who are working to develop safe cosmetics legislation reacted to the report:

Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill.: “There’s no reason that people should be exposed to potentially harmful chemicals because they use perfume, cologne or body spray. But this report suggests that is exactly what’s happening. The chemicals detected in popular fragrances, which are often endorsed by celebrities, could have a range of adverse health effects and Americans are being exposed unknowingly. I think this is a clear sign of how woefully out of date our cosmetics laws are and how urgently the cosmetics safety legislation we’re developing is needed. The ingredients used in these products need to be tested for safety and the FDA must be empowered to fully protect the health of Americans by blocking chemicals deemed unsafe. Americans need to know that the fragrance products they buy don’t contain chemicals that could harm them.”

Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass.: “A rose by any other name may smell as sweet, but in some cases sweet smelling fragrances may in fact be dangerous. I am happy to be joining with my colleagues to soon introduce legislation that will make disclosure of ingredients used in cosmetics and fragrances mandatory and ensure that toxic chemicals are kept out of colognes and perfumes. Consumers have a right to know just what is in the products they spray and rub on their body every day.”

Rep. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis.: “It’s alarming that cosmetics products we use every day contain hidden toxic chemicals. That’s why I’m working with colleagues in Congress on legislation that will overhaul our outdated cosmetics oversight and regulation. We all deserve to know our products are as safe as possible.”

# # #

Download the report: www.safecosmetics.org/notsosexy

Autor: Campain for Safe Cosmetics, Release: May 12th, 2010.

On February 4th 2010 at 12:00h has been held the meeting with Ministry of Health to state the situation of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity sufferers in Spain.

Mr José Martínez Olmos, Secretary General of the Ministry of Health, Mr Alberto Infante Campos, General Director of Professional Planning, Cohesion of SNS and High Inspection and Mr Francisco Valero Bonilla have attended to the meeting representing the Ministry of Health. One person by almost each MCS association has attended to the meeting and also Jaume Cortés, lawyer of Colectivo Ronda, and Dr. Pablo Arnold, immunologist specialized in MCS.

• ACAF: Cristina Montané
• AFCISQUIM: María Roldán
• Alas de Mariposa- SQM: Tránsito Rodríguez
• ALTEA – SQM: Cristobalina Bejarano
• APQUIRA: Mª Carmen Gómez de Bonilla
• AQUA: Mario Arias
• ASQUIFYDE: Francisca Gutiérrez
• AVASFASEM-AVASQ: Francisca García
• ENA: Laura Domínguez
• MERCURIADOS: Mª Carmen Miravete
• Plataforma Estatal Contra la Contaminación Ambiental: Minerva Palomar
• PLATAFORMA PARA LA FM ,SFC, SQM, reivindicación de derechos, Asociación Nacional: Elena Navarro

A petitions document done by MCS associations under David Palma coordination has been submitted. This document has been signed by:

• ABAF: Margarita Pascual
• ACAF: Maite Ribera
• AFCISQUIM: María Roldán
• Alas de Mariposa- SQM: Irene Escudero
• ALTEA – SQM: Cristobalina Bejarano
• APQUIRA: Mª Carmen Gómez de Bonilla
• AQUA: Mario Arias
• ASQUIFYDE: Francisca Gutiérrez
• AVASFASEM-AVASQ: Francisca García
• ENA: Rosa de Gabriel
• MERCURIADOS: Servando Pérez
• Plataforma Estatal Contra la Contaminación Ambiental: Minerva Palomar
• PLATAFORMA PARA LA FM ,SFC, SQM, reivindicación de derechos, Asociación Nacional: Elena Navarro
• Eva Caballé

Also a copy of Desaparecida: Una vida rota por la Sensibilidad Química Múltiple (Missing: A life broken by Multiple Chemical Sensitivities) has been hand delivered on behalf of Eva Caballé, who couldn’t attend to the meeting, as an example of what MCS sufferers have to go through in Spain.

The meeting with Ministry of Health has meant an agreement on minimum standards by the Ministry, but a big hope for all MCS sufferers.

Representatives of Ministry of Health have committed to contact MCS associations within 2 weeks to jointly agree on experts to form a Scientific Committee to create a document of consensus on the MCS. They have stated that this is the first step to make possible the inclusion of the MCS in ICD-10, i.e. its official recognition as disease in Spain. They have demonstrated that later there would be necessary to start creating the guidelines.

All people who have been part of this process are thrilled by the result of the meeting, because doors have opened us to obtain the recognition of the Multiple Chemical Sensibility in Spain and to achieve that MCS sufferers have the same rights as the other chronically ill people.

Authors: Eva Caballé, David Palma, NoFun, February 4, 2010

Yesterday (Feb 2, 2010), in an independent student newspaper from the University of New Hampshire, a professor of chemical engineering appealed to the community to take “Canaries” into account regarding the use of chemicals and especially scents. He spoke of those persons who suffer from Chemical Sensitivity and who have to be seen – like those former canaries in mines – as indicators for toxic chemicals.

Some American and Canadian Universities have a “Scent Free Policy” which means that the use of perfumes and products containing scents is prohibited within these Universities. All visitors have to meet this policy. It allows students with allergy and chemical sensitivity to work and study.

Professor Ihab Farag, Chemical Engineering Department:

Many of us are familiar with canaries, the beautiful, colorful birds that tend to sing most of the time. Canaries also saved many human lives in coalmines. This is because canaries are much more sensitive to toxic gases than humans. Miners would take canaries with them in the coalmine. If the canary stopped singing and fell (or died), the miners knew to leave the coal mine quickly to safety.

There are individuals who have developed a very strong sensitivity to many common chemicals. These people can be very negatively affected and irritated by fumes, chemical cleaners, disinfectants, cigarette/cigar smoke, engine exhaust, solvents, etc. These people are often called “Human Canaries” of the modern world, because of the chemical sensitivity similarity to that of Canaries. Human Canaries of the 21st century tend to be very strongly irritated by everyday chemicals like perfumes, hair products, shampoos, shower gels, after shave lotions, antiperspirants, deodorants, hand sanitizers, chap sticks, finger nail polish, etc. Human canaries look the same as other people, and when you see one you probably will not recognize he or she is a human canary until an offensive toxic chemical triggers his or her sensitivity.

Please be considerate to human canaries and help them to enjoy life to the fullest. One way you can help the human canary and at the same time lower your exposure to undesirable chemicals, is to go fragrance-free: avoiding perfumes, and fragranced personal care products.

Author: Silvia K. Müller, CSN – Chemical Sensitivity Network, February 2, 2009

Reference:

Chemical consideration to the Human Canaries, Ihab Farag, Professor, Chemical Engineering Department, Letter to the editor 02-02-10, The New Hampshire, Independent Student Newspaper at the University of New Hampshire since 1911, Februar 2, 2010

A new study by researchers at UCLA and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston suggests that improvements in air quality over the past decade have resulted in fewer cases of ear infections in children.

Ear infections are one of the most common illnesses among children, with annual direct and indirect costs of $3 billion to $5 billion in the United States.

“We believe these findings, which demonstrate a direct correlation between air quality and ear infections, have both medical and political significance,” said study co-author Dr. Nina Shapiro, director of pediatric otolaryngology at Mattel Children’s Hospital UCLA and an associate professor of surgery at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. “The results validate the benefits of the revised Clean Air Act of 1990, which gave the Environmental Protection Agency more authority to implement and enforce regulations reducing air-pollutant emissions. It also shows that the improvements may have direct benefit on health-quality measures.”

The research appears in the February issue of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, the official peer-reviewed publication of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation.

The researchers reviewed National Health Interview Survey data for 120,060 children between the years of 1997 and 2006 and measured the number of instances of three disease conditions for each year — frequent ear infections (three or more within a year), respiratory allergy and seizure activity, which is not influenced by air quality but was included as a control condition.

These numbers were then cross-referenced with the EPA’s air-quality data on pollutants, including carbon monoxide, nitrous dioxide, sulfur dioxide and particulate matter, for the same time period. The study authors discovered that as air quality steadily improved, the number of cases of frequent ear infections significantly decreased.

The results also showed that there was not an association between improved air quality and improved rates of pediatric respiratory allergy, possibly due to the fact that allergens are not pollutants.

Reference: UCLA, Amy Albin,  Improved air quality linked to fewer pediatric ear infections, January 27, 2010

Postage stamps with aroma could affect the health of sensitive people

On January 7th, German Minister of Finance, Dr.Schaeuble, presented the new charity postage stamps to Federal President Horst Koehler and Ms. Donata Freifrau Schenck zu Schweinsberg, President of the Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft der Freien Wohlfahrtspflege (a federal association of welfare organizations). The unique feature of these stamps for this year is: They are fruit scented – blueberry, strawberry, lemon and apple. The scenting agents are micro-encapsulated and are not supposed to be released until they are rubbed.

The perfumed stamps release a scent even without being rubbed

CSN wanted to know whether the stamps really do not smell until being rubbed and arranged to get samples of the scented stamps. As we asked to buy the new charity stamps, the lady behind the post office counter pulled out an extra folder and remarked almost devoutly, “Oh yes, this are the new perfumy stamps.” She took out a sheet of stamps which showed blueberries and delightedly announced: “Wow, these really can be smelled without rubbing!”

Two welfare stamps were purchased by CSN and examined carefully. Both stamps give off a smell without being rubbed with the finger. Strictly speaking, the strawberry-stamp emits the smell of a cheap toothpaste with strawberry flavor, and the odor of the lemon stamps are a reminder of a toilet cleaner with an artificial lemon aroma. It smells nothing like a natural fruit aroma. The lemon scent grew stronger after the stamp was left at room temperature for a short while. CSN refused to activate the odor by rubbing. It can be assumed that the smell of the stamps will grow by the inevitable friction of the letters during transport and by running them through the sorting system at the postal hubs. Therefore it is quite possible that the perfumed stamps will contaminate other mail.

CSN would like to know if the applied scents were tested for their health compatibility, and which safety criteria and methods they used for the tests. Was their safety criteria the tolerable toxic load for an average healthy adult or was it the tolerable toxic load for the weakest, i.e. for an embryo? Did they test the plain aroma agents or the printing ink equipped with the aroma? Has the material of the stamp an effect on the compatibility? The information of the Bundesdruckerei (German federal printing press) suggests that first amounts of the scents were emitted before even the printing process was completed.

People with asthma, allergy to scents, sensitivities to chemicals, and persons who respond severely to scents could be affected by this advertising stunt.

As an answer, at January 11, CSN wrote the following open letter:

Perfumed Postage Stamps Constrain People with Disabilities

Dear Mr. Federal President Dr. Horst Koehler,

Dear Ms. Frau Donata Freifrau Schenck zu Schweinsberg,

Dear Dr. Wolfgang Schaeuble,

On January 7th, you shared the presentation of the new charity stamps issued by the Ministry of Finance, which emit scents of apple, strawberry, blueberry and lemon when rubbed. We want you to think about that at first glance simpatico idea, and we politely request you Dr. Schaeuble, to withdraw these postage stamps from circulation as Minister of Finance, because there are groups of people with certain disabilities and health disorders, who would be at risk if exposed to these scents.

Wouldn’t it be ironic, if some of those people who should benefit from these charity stamps will be harmed, by putting them in circulation? Do you realize the critical position of the German Federal Environmental Agency (UBA/Umweltbundesamt) regarding scents? The UBA points out that scented products should be avoided in public areas. The German coalition for allergies and asthma the DAAB (Deutscher Allergie- und Asthmabund e.V.) assumes about 11 percent of general population, that was actually a good nine million cases, affected by olfactory hypersensitivity for scents (according to Meggs et al. 1996). They postulate warning signs for scented rooms.

Is it appropriate to characterize those as people with disabilities who respond to scents with health troubles?

According to the ‘Americans with Disabilities Act’ (ADA), an individual with a disability is defined as a person who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a person who has a history or record of such an impairment, or a person who is perceived by others as having such an impairment.

The ‘Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities’ (UN-convention) which was signed by the German government on March 30, 2007, defines persons with disabilities as those, who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.

Perfumed postage stamps limit the lifestyle of allergic, asthmatic, chemically diseased and other sensitive persons in an unreasonable way. This violates the UN-convention and does not meet the protection criteria set out for people with disabilities as outlined by the ADA. Severe sensitive cases and those who suffer from contact allergies caused by scents don’t even need to smell traces of those contaminants. Unsuspecting they will contaminate their living space which often is prepared safe from toxins under difficult financial conditions.

Thus far, people with health impairments from scents were able to at least receive and open their mail without help from others. This autonomy and normality of life is taken away from them. If someone encounters physical reactions by being exposed to scents, he/she will become unable to receive mail any longer and has to depend on other people to sort this type of ‘mail bomb’ out. Possibly a whole delivery is lost because one single letter with a perfumed postage stamp has contaminated all other mail.

During the Christmas season of 2004 there was a similar campaign with perfumed scratch stickers. Contrary to the statement of a German mail service personnel, the scents are not securely locked in the ink. None can be sure that somebody rubs the stamps on the dispatch or mechanical interaction will release these substances. At that time when the mail arrived it was already fragrant and it will be again this time.

Potentially such deliveries could sensitize people who have not suffered from an allergy yet. Have the applied scents adequately been tested for that risk? Would you bet your life on their harmlessness? Did you know that most of the scents used in Germany are not tested for tolerance? According to the “Special Report on Allergies, 2000″ (“Spezialbericht Allergien, 2000″) by the German Federal Government, there are about 15 to 25 percent of general population affected by an atopic disease, that was over 20 million cases, and one-third are sensitized for allergies, that was about 27 million. Should not everything be done, to keep this data from growing?

Scents trigger a variety of physical reactions for people with this sensitivity. Depending on disease and state of health, they range from harmless irritations to life threatening conditions. The following troubles can be caused individually or in combinations:

Tiredness, sneezing, irritated eyes, redness, itching, blisters, inflammations, swelling and burning of the lips, nasal mucosa burning, burning of the tongue, toothache, cough, voice failure, labored breathing, vertigo, sickness, headache, migraine, speech disorder, disturbance of memory, permanent painful vomiting, cardialgia, tachycardia, state of shock, absence, coma.

Often, such an incident increases the sensitivity for other substances or undoes a recovery which was hardly achieved by a strategy of avoidance and healthy living over a long period.

If nothing else, artificial scents could disturb the aesthetic perception of healthy ones and never reach the sensuality of their prototypes. Lay some apples from an organic farmer in your bedroom and compare it with the odor from these stamps.

Considering all of the above, we request, that the health damage which may be expected for those people in the general population who are sensitized by scents be recognized and, as under the terms of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, that the circulation of these perfumed postage stamps be immediately stopped.

Kind regards,

Silvia K. Mueller, Bruno Zacke

CSN – Chemical Sensitivity Network

—-

We thank Christi and Jim for translation help.