Green Options

If you go to the Organic Consumers Association website you will see that they are upset about the way that stores like Whole Foods market products as “natural.”  They believe (and they are probably right) that consumers will confuse this with “Organic.”  In fact there are no real rules about what can be called “natural” and savvy marketers have realized that almost everyone likes the concept of “natural” and they have tapped into that for selling power.

The problem for the Organic community is that their own, highly regulated farming system is also built on the concept of “natural.”  I have a good friend who was on the board of CCOF (California’s organic certification leader) back in the days when the definition of “USDA Organic” was being hammered out (1990-2002).  He explained that one reason it took so long was that there was a philosophical struggle between the Organic stalwarts who wanted it to be driven by what was “natural” and by the USDA that wanted to bring some science into what was safest and best for the environment.  The “natural” voices prevailed.

In shocking news, the Canadian government has announced that two chemicals used in cosmetics are carcinogens that are severely harmful to human health. A further two chemicals found in lipstick and other personal care products have also been found to be highly toxic to the environment.

The two cancer-causing chemicals, isoprene and epichlorohydrin, have been added to the Cosmetic Ingredient Hotlist to prevent their future use in cosmetics. Health Canada is also proposing that manufacturers use best-available technology to control releases of isoprene.

The cosmetics chemicals posing a danger to the environment are the siloxanes D4 and D5, which are used as emollients to soften the skin and are found in most personal care products on the market in Canada and the United States.