Mar. 01 – When it comes to cosmetic ingredients, buyer beware (Cosmetics labels)

The Sacramento Bee discusses new regulations in play for cosmetics manufacturers that sell in the California market:

Certainly, the issue of ingredient safety continues to be a hot-button topic in California.

In August, the state Legislature approved SB 484, better known as the Safe Cosmetics Act. The bill, by Sen. Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, faced heavy opposition from the cosmetics industry but was signed into law in October by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

In a nutshell, the bill requires cosmetics companies that sell products in this state to disclose to the Department of Health Services any ingredients – and their concentrations – that are identified by the state as being linked to cancer or birth defects.

It also gives the state the authority to demand any existing health and safety studies from the cosmetic manufacturers. Further, if the state determines that dangerous exposures are taking place, it can regulate those in occupational settings, such as nail and beauty salons.

SB 484 is to go into effect is early next year.

In the meantime, watchdog groups point to California’s Proposition 65, which voters passed in 1986. It requires the governor to publish an annual list of chemicals that are linked to diseases.

For example, last year, dibutyl phthalate (or DBP) was added to the Prop. 65 list. This chemical is a common ingredient used in some nail polishes to make them shiny and chip-resistant. It’s also found in hairspray, deodorant and perfume. In the last item, it’s used to dispense the scent evenly so that it lasts longer.

To learn if your company’s cosmetics labels meet California’s requirements, please contact Nexreg Compliance.

See full article: Sacramento Bee.