Is Beauty Killing Us Slowly?

As the famous adage goes; “beauty is pain,” but should it be killing us…?

I recently read an article in a local newspaper that centred around the growing concern over chemicals used in cosmetics, lotions and other beauty products which is stimulating a worldwide debate over whether we are slowly poisoning our bodies.

Over recent decades, the incidence of cancer has escalated to epidemic proportions. Stacey Malkan, author of the award winning book, “Not Just Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry” and co-founder of the campaign for Safe Cosmetics in the U.S, believes that the two are undeniably linked. What is deeply worrying is that now cancer is striking nearly one in every two men, and over one in every three women. Even more disturbing is the recent recognition that this already high incidence of cancer is going to increase further and by the year 2050 will be doubling in comparison to the current high incidence rate.

In an article titled “10 Things to Know about Cosmetics and Cancer” Mulkan states, “personal care products that we apply to our bodies daily –including soaps, shampoo’s, lotions, deodorants, colognes and make-up – commonly contain chemicals. Some of these chemicals can be   toxic or harmful to our bodies; such as endocrine disruptors, allergens, asthma triggers, carcinogens and neurotoxins.”

In May 2010, the US President’s Cancer Panel issued a report detailing concerns about the chemical exposures in our daily lives and the lack of scientific data showing safety. Research on toxic and endocrine-disrupting chemicals in personal care products and cosmetics was highlighted in the report as one area for which environmental cancer research is needed to improve our understanding of environmental cancer and to support environmental cancer hazard assessment and control.

A few alarming facts:

• According to the Environmental Working Group’s Skin Deep database; 1 in 5 personal care products contain at least one chemical linked to cancer.
• It was revealed that 17 out of 28 children’s products, including many marked “pure” and “gentle” contained both formaldehyde and dioxane.
• Ingredients in products such as hair dyes, anti bacterial soaps, skin lighteners, fragrances and even sunscreens (!!!) are linked to cancer.

How can a “trusted” brand add any value to the lives of consumers when it is on the contrary selling us hopes and dreams from which we ultimately awake to the harsh reality of irreversible damages done? Personally, I find this all very paradoxical. With numerous cosmetic houses competing against each other in a $40 to $50 billion industry, it has been revealed that many spend just as much, if not more on advertising and promotion as they do on R&D. The cosmetic industry is notoriously ranked as one of the highest advertising and marketing spenders, with perfume and cosmetic companies spending on average 19.2% of their net sales on advertising. To contrast this, compared to other global industries they are the lowest spenders on R&D. Maybe cosmetic houses should start spending less on trying to sell us a time bomb wrapped in pretty packaging and more on developing innovative, safer products rid of harmful chemicals ensuring the safety and longevity of consumers.

The Consumer Protection Act was introduced in order to safeguard the wellbeing of consumers allegedly making South African consumers amongst the most protected in the world. The 8 Fundamental Consumer Rights were drawn up in accordance with the United Nations guideline for consumer protection (1985). Among these 8 fundamental consumer rights is the Right to Good Quality and Safety. This translates to the right to be protected against products, production processes and services which are hazardous to health or death.

Section 58 (1) deals with Warning concerning fact and nature of risks. What this means is that now the supplier of any activity or facility with which certain types of risk are associated must specifically draw the fact, nature and potential effect of that risk to the attention of consumers. It will only be beneficial to us to exercise this right as consumers as it was intended for our own public good.

A foreword of advice: -start paying less attention to the superficial marketed benefits of a product and start paying more time to what’s inside a product. We all want brands that care for our well-being both inside and out; support the brands who take the time and effort to actually give a damn.

Tags: consumer protection, dangers of chemicals in cosmetics, Research & Development in Cosmetics, toxic beauty

The Ugly Truth

The CPA was promulgated on the 1^st April last year with the noblest aims in the world and was properly constituted to safeguard consumers against unscrupulous business practices. The National Consumer Commission was set up as the governing body responsible for executing the workings of the Act. However, it appears that like most other things this government is doing, it is falling flat on his face because of human incapabilities.

This was very clear from the information disclosed during a Carte Blanche episode last Sunday where NCC Commissioner, Mamodupi  Mohlala, came across as being unable to cope with the large number of complaints and demands lodged by members of the public. It was openly admitted that the NCC are dealing with insurmountable backlogs. If this is evident scarcely a year after the act came into being, one shudders to think what the situation would be like in another few years.

Ignorant manufacturers and distributors of products and services watching this program must have jumped for joy realising that despite the protection that this Act is supposed to deliver to consumers the chances of their questionable practices have very little chance of being exposed.

In order for the CPA to meets its aims in promoting consumer activism, the problems being faced by the NCC must be corrected at ground level by introducing sufficient numbers of trained personnel and ample funds in order to enhance the workings of the Act.

Let’s hope that this can be addressed promptly so that implementation of this Act was not done so in vain…

To watch the clip follow this link: Carte Blanche – National Consumer Commission: Part 1

Tags: Carte Blanche, Consumer Protection Act, Consumer Rights, Mamodupi Mohlala, NCC SA

The Ultimate Beauty Product; ‘Fotoshop by Adobe’

 

Not completely CPA related, however still an interesting find. This video, by filmmaker Jesse Rosten, challenges the perfection presented in beauty commercials and magazine covers as achievable. How? – “Fotoshop by Adobé” of course!

Inspired by a late night beauty product infomercial, Rosten expressed on his website that “the commercial showed before and after portraits that, to the eye, looked like the same photo just photoshopped.’ In the video, Rosten satirizes Adobe Photoshop as the ultimate beauty regimen; – “Maybe she’s born with it? Nah, I’m pretty sure it’s Fotoshop.”

Rosten’s video is a parody of your stereotypical cosmetics advert through which he pokes fun to all the tropes we’ve come to expect; -the soothing yet authoritative female voiceover; the woman whipping her hair back and forth and twirling with joy; and the alleged results to back up the overstated claims usually superimposed into cliché promises of “the next revolution in beauty.” The magic ingredient? “Pro-pixel intensifying faux-tanical hydro-jargon microbead extract featuring nutritive volumizing technology.”

The best line in the video? “Just one application of Fotoshop can give you results so dramatic, they’re almost unreal…istic.”

(Brew-Hammond; 2012)

Tags: airbrushing, cosmetic adverts, false ideal of beauty, Misleading Advertising, photoshop

Northglen News Article

Hi All

I got an article published in the Northglen News!

To read the online version, follow this link: http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/553f2b63#/553f2b63/12 

Tags: Consumer Protection Act, Gia Liebenberg, Northglen News

Food for thought; – “Airbrushing in a jar: A new wonder balm claims to ‘blur out’ any wrinkles or spots, turning the clock back several years in 40seconds” ??

This article was found in feminine section of the UK Daily Mail  and proposes that there is a new anti-wrinkle cream out on the market that claims to use nanotechnology to “‘blur out’ any wrinkles or spots, ‘turning the clock back several years in just 40 seconds.’” Inflated claim? -A new way to hook consumers? true or false? I would love to know your opinions on this matter…

“For all the hype about make-up and skincare, what women actually want from a cosmetic product is very simple. We want it to make us look better than we normally look. Preferably right away, please!

It doesn’t have to turn us into Lara Stone or Jennifer Aniston, just cover up our wrinkles, minimise uneven pigmentation and generally wipe away a few years. Instant air-brushing, in other words.

The latest wonder-working wrinkle-buster claims to do this and more, turning the clock back several years in 40 seconds flat.

Anti-ageing miracle cure: Makers of the Nanoblur balm claim it can make you look younger in 40 seconds

We’ve all become so immune to the extravagant claims of beauty brands that our reaction to them tends to be short and pithy. But Nanoblur, as the newcomer is called, is confounding sceptics around the globe and shot to the top of the sales charts in 22 countries before arriving in the UK last week.

‘People want instant gratification in all areas of their lives; that includes cosmetics,’ says Brandon Truaxe, CEO of Indeed Labs, the Canadian company behind Nanoblur.

‘The reality of this industry is there has been scam after scam, so people’s patience runs out. But this really does deliver results.’

Nanoblur is a cream full of minute high‑tech particles that scatter light, making skin look miraculously better — clearer, fresher and younger — in seconds, by blurring wrinkles and pigmentation.

Hidden gem: The cream is full of minute high-tech particles that scatter light, making skin look better

The idea of using optical diffusing elements to confuse the eye and minimise the appearance of wrinkles is hardly new, and has, for years, been employed by cosmetics companies in face-flattering products (see Other Light-Diffusing Miracle-Workers at the end of this article).

But Nanoblur has taken the technology behind this idea to a new level of sophistication.

‘Our particle sizes are hundreds of times smaller than older formulas,’ says Mr Truaxe. ‘That means they can find their way into the smallest imperfections and use tricks of light to iron them out.’

These particles are on the nano-scale — at 700 nanometres — but too big to slip into the skin (only particles less than 400nm in diameter can do that), so they stay on the outside of the skin, to reflect light.

SKIN DEEPWomen spend, on average, £24,000 on wrinkle-reducing treatments over their lifetime

‘If you give a photograph to a digital artist for improvements they will usually start by blurring out imperfections,’ adds Mr Truaxe.

‘That is what this product does. It refracts light in so many different directions it has the effect of looking through frosted glass. Most other products that try to do this are primers, which you use on the skin before applying make-up. Ours is a “finisher” — it is the final step.’

The product evolved over three years after Dia Foley, sales director of Indeed Labs, noticed how cruel high-definition television could be faces and worked with a cosmetic chemist to create something to help.

On their website, there are images of women (without make-up) wearing the product on half their face to show the difference it can make. Their skin isn’t just smoother, but clearer, too, as pigmentation marks have softened into near-invisibility.

Can it produce those effects in real life? Astonishingly, it can. When I smoothed the water-based product on my bare face it dried quickly and — hey presto! — my skin looked better. It seemed smoother and more even in tone. The dark circles under my eyes were less obvious and my oily T-zone was matt.

It’s an ideal cheat for looking fresh-faced and I can see why it has been a hit with men who would not contemplate wearing make-up.

I haven’t got the knack of applying it over make-up, the other way to wear it. You are meant to apply it on top of foundation and blusher, but I find it smudges foundation.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2047147/Nanoblur-new-wonder-balm-claims-blur-wrinkles-spots-But-does-work.html#ixzz1aSKd4mUk

Tags: Cosmetic Advertisements, Inflated Claims, Misleading Advertising, nanoblur

What’s in a Label?

 According to  Consumer Protection Act (CPA); any label or trade description that is atttached to goods, displayed alongside them or is contained in advertsing material from which a consumer can place an order, must be in plain and understanable langauge. (Melville, 2011).  Section 24 of the CPA, deals specifically with the labelling of products and prohibits any packaging, labels signs or advertisements that would likely mislead a consumer about implied or expressed characteristics of a product.  Also, suppliers of cosmetic products that contain genetically modified components must label the products in accordance with the applicable regulations.

A label should thus include the appropriate warnings concerning fact and nature of risk of any product. Section 58 states that a supplier of any service or resource with which certain types of risk are associated must distinctively, “draw the fact, nature and potential effect of that risk to the attention of consumers in accordance with the requirements of Section 49 (Melville, 2011: 96). The types of risk that must be pointed out are: – “(a) risks of an unusual character or nature; (b) risk of which a consumer could not reasonably be expected to be aware or anticipate; (c) Risk that could result in serious injury or death” (Government Gazette, 2011: 110).  If for some reason a supplier fails to comply with these guidelines they may be held liable for damages caused by goods.

Section 61 states that now, a producer, importer, distributor or retailer of any goods is liable without proof of negligence (on the part of the supplier of the goods), for any harm caused by goods. As a consumer, you now have the power to lawfully seek recourse against the party or several parties (if more than one party is potentially liable) for damages caused. A supplier can be held liable if the harm resulted from product failure, defect or hazard or inadequate instruction or warnings regarding any hazard arising from or associated with the use of any goods (Melville, 2011: 98). The harm for which a person may be held liable includes: – “(a) the death of, or injury to, any natural persons; (b) an illness of any natural persons; (c) any loss of, or physical damage to, any property, irrespective of whether it is movable or immovable; (d) any economic loss that results from any of the types of harm listed above” (Government Gazette, 2011: 112).

Tags: Consumer Protection Act, labelling of products, liabilty in cosmetics

Defining Consumer Protection & the Need for Government Regulation

According to Ardic, Abrihim and Mylenko (2001), government intervention in consumer protection is necessary as there are, “inherent information asymmetries and power imbalances in markets in which the consumer is left vulnerable.”  In a paper Titled, “The Rationale for Government Intervention in Seller-Consumer Relationships,” the argument made is that consumer protection is a public good and like other public good (such as disease control), consumer protection, “is not provided in socially optimal quantities in the absence of government intervention” (Lane, 1983:419). The author intends that consumers are often ill-informed and seldom try and act in their own best interests to maximise utility. Government intervention in the form of consumer protection is thus required in order to: diminish the consumers’ risks of physical and economic loss, harm, or damage to public satisfactory standards; keep product liability and malpractice insurance premiums at levels authorising firms or practitioners to operate at acceptable level of quality performance and remain in the market” ( Lane, 1983: 427).

According to the department of Trade & Industry, “consumer protection is an integral part of a modern, efficient, effective and just market place.” It is believed that empowered consumers are important drivers of competitiveness as they, “ demand competitive prices, improved product quality and better services, and thus provide momentum and drive for innovation and better business practice.

The term “consumer protection,” refers to, “the preventing of physical or financial damage to the buyer of goods or services for personal or household use” (Lane, 1983: 419). In the broader sense, consumer protection includes laws and regulations that ensure fair interaction between service providers and consumers. Consumer protection can also encompass other bodies such as non-profit organisations, businesses and individuals in order to create, protect, and enforce the rights of consumers who buy products and services.

A consumer protection framework thus usually enforces, “the introduction of greater transparency and awareness about goods and services, promotion of competition in the marketplace, prevention of fraud, education of customers, and elimination of unfair practices” (Ardic, Abrahim & Mylenko, 2011:2). Consumer protection policies include aspects such as consumer complaint handling, dispute resolution and consumer information initiatives (Oftel, 2002:3).

Tags: Consumer Protection Act, Consumer Rights, Government Regulation