Banned in Europe, allowed in USA - Cosmetic Science Talk

Banned in Europe, allowed in USA

Design of anti-aging creams, gels, and serums; shampoos; and therapeutic cosmetics. In-house label and box design capability.

Comments

  • I generally avoid non-technical terms such as "vile" and "nasty" when discussing raw materials, but that is just my opinion. not a hard fast rule.

    I believe that you will see that MIT/MCT combinations became more common as the bias against parabens grew. While these combinations can be used properly, they were never a go to system for me.
    markfuller@microformulation.com Microformulation.com Microformulation Cosmetic Consulting provides Custom Formulations for both large Commercial accounts as well as smaller entrepreneurs. We can provide Naturally compliant Formulations under the NSF, NPA, Whole Foods and USDA Organic Certifications.
  • they are still permitted in Europe, but they're restricted to rinse-off products only - this is the status they had before the limit for MIT was increased, and the scope of usage was widened, in 2005
    UK based formulation chemist. Strongest subjects: hair styling, hair bleaches, hair dyes (oxidative and non-oxidative) I know some stuff about: EU regulations, emulsions (O/W and W/O), toothpaste, mouthwash, shampoos, other toiletries
  • edited July 12
    they are still permitted in Europe, but they're restricted to rinse-off products only 
    True, cosmetics manufacturers, joined in Cosmetics Europe, voluntarily decided to ban MIT in (leave on) skin care products and wet wipes. Dermatologists had a great influence in this decision.
    MIT is used in a lot of rinse-off products here. In a concentration up to 0,01% is allowed.

  • This preservative is used in most of the major shampoo, conditioner and hand wash products in Australia. It is also used in many dish washing liquids and cleaning formulations as it is cheap and works well at low concentrations.

    It still appears on the list of allowed preservatives in Europe. http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/cosing/pdf/COSING_Annex V_v2.pdf

  • It has had horrendous effects on my poor dogs and cost me a lot of money in vets bills, and the problem is only gradually improving. This in my opinion is a very dangerous skin sensitizing preservative and should be banned completely. Note that this was in a rinse-off (shampoo) application, the manufacturer was Hartz, it wasn't something I made. Please also note that if you Google consumer complaints about Hartz, you will see a LOT of consumer aggravation. Also Facebook groups about this.
    Design of anti-aging creams, gels, and serums; shampoos; and therapeutic cosmetics. In-house label and box design capability.
  • @ozgirl
    I see there's nothing about MIT being restricted in leave-on products, though it is a recent list. Strange. Maybe due to the forementioned voluntary decision?

    @Belassi
    Do you know the % in the Hartz product?
  • I have no idea what percentage Hartz are using.
    Design of anti-aging creams, gels, and serums; shampoos; and therapeutic cosmetics. In-house label and box design capability.
  • @Belassi
    The strange thing about the links in your first post: the article is brand new, but regarding MIT it refers to an old journal of the European Union (2009), which shows restrictions indeed. The recent one from 2017, however, shows no restrictions at all and just names MIT as an accepted preservative.

    ^ I didn't read the second part of Bill's answer well enough, I assumed the restrictions were still valid.

    How are your dogs doing at the moment? I hope the improvement you mentioned has been speeding up.
  • The dogs are slowly improving but I am still getting outbreaks on one of them. I don't know how Hartz can sell such a product, there are gazillions of complaints about them.
    Design of anti-aging creams, gels, and serums; shampoos; and therapeutic cosmetics. In-house label and box design capability.
  • The US FDA does not regulate pet products.
  • If the FDA doesn't regulate pet products, then who does?
    Design of anti-aging creams, gels, and serums; shampoos; and therapeutic cosmetics. In-house label and box design capability.
  • From the FDA...

    "Animal Grooming Aids

    The animal counterpart of a cosmetic is commonly referred to as a "grooming aid." The Act defines a cosmetic as pertaining only to human use (21 U.S.C. 321(i)). Therefore, products intended for cleansing or promoting attractiveness of animals are not subject to FDA control. However, if such products are intended for any therapeutic purpose or if they are intended to affect the structure or function of the animal, they are subject to regulation as new animal drugs under the Act."

    The claims are regulated by the FTC & if there are any claims that it is a drug that would fall under the FDA, but for just pet shampoos...I don't think there are any regulations in the US.

    Relevant article

  • I don't think there are any regulations in the US.
    Words fail me. Absolutely incredible.
    Design of anti-aging creams, gels, and serums; shampoos; and therapeutic cosmetics. In-house label and box design capability.
  • It's in line with the regulatory philosophy here in the US. We assume that companies are motivated to make safe & effective products. If they make harmful ones, there are lots of lawyers willing to take cases and sue companies. So, if someone is harmed by their product they can get relief in the courts. If there were a huge number of complaints then companies would change. 

    MIT may negatively affect some people but the vast majority of consumers (>95%) are not effected by it. This is likely why it hasn't been banned.
  • @Belassi, I'm very sorry about your dogs.  Please ask your vet about giving them silymarin, from milk thistle extract.  I give it to my dogs after vaccines, regular heartworm medicines, and one time after food poisoning from approved commercial dog food (which I don't feed them anymore, because I make it now).  I think also SAM-e is good, but I forget about that one.  But please definitely research administering silymarin to dogs.

    I have documents on these preservatives I hope to find later and post here.

    @Perry, you are the first one to inform me about no regulatory oversight in US on these pet products.  I think it is a questionable philosophy, considering my experiences in the wild with human nature.  This is why there is the common phrase, "Buyer beware."

  • edited July 18

    Layman’s article from a chemistry Ph.D.

    https://chronicleflask.com/tag/methylisothiazolinone/

     

    Minutes from Year 2014 meeting + appended studies

    http://www.cir-safety.org/sites/default/files/methylisothiazolinone.pdf

     

    In vitro neurotoxicity of MI (Year 2002)

    http://www.jneurosci.org/content/22/17/7408

     

    Neurotoxicity of MI + in vivo fetal implications (Year 2006)

    http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/317/3/1320.long

  • @Belassi, your dogs may be of a breed/genotype that is especially vulnerable to MI adverse reactions.

    Save your bottle of the poison shampoo to test for levels, if you are going to take them to court.

    Godspeed recovery and health to your pups!
  • edited July 18
    http://www.cir-safety.org/sites/default/files/methylisothiazolinone.pdf
    Fascinating. Thanks for that. The report of 48 hr reactions is EXACTLY what happened to my dogs. I am a writer, so I think I will write some pieces about this and send them to all the major news outlets. Including:
     The methylisothiazolinone has been named "Allergen of the Year" by the American Contact Dermatitis Society
    Design of anti-aging creams, gels, and serums; shampoos; and therapeutic cosmetics. In-house label and box design capability.
  • Interestingly, this year's "allergen of the year" is...

    Alkyl Glucoside
      
  • Not surprised by that either! I have commented previously about glucosides causing skin eruptions.
    Design of anti-aging creams, gels, and serums; shampoos; and therapeutic cosmetics. In-house label and box design capability.
  • All "allergens of the year":

    ACDS Allergens of the Year 

    2016 Cobalt
    2015 Formaldehyde
    2014 Benzophenones
    2013 Methylisothiazolinone
    2012 Acrylate
    2011 Dimethyl fumarate
    2010 Neomycin 
    2009 Mixed dialkyl thiourea
    2008 Nickel
    2007 Fragrance
    2006 p-Phenylenediamine
    2005 Corticosteroids
    2004 Cocamidopropyl betaine
    2003 Bacitracin
    2002 Thimerosal
    2001 Gold
    2000 Disperse Blue Dyes

    https://www.contactderm.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3467

  • Shocking to see Neomycin & Corticosteroids as allergens! usually both are API in variety of skin ointments and creams. More shocking its coming from contact dermatitis society! 
  • @David
    Wow, the status has been changed as we speak, this month! Thanks for the link, it was a bit confusing.

    @Belassi
    I'm also astonished how animal health seems irrelevant in this...
    I'm glad to read your dogs are doing better, hopefully they all will fully recover very soon.

  • @Doreen81 - to be fair I'm sure Hartz has tested their product on dogs and in their view the product is safe for animals to use.  They are a rather large company and would be open to class action lawsuits if they weren't tested.

    It also wouldn't make sense for a company to sell a product that harms a significant number of their customer's pets. 

    I'm sure it happens as these same things happen with cosmetic companies. Safety testing is no guarantee that a consumer (or their pet) won't have a negative reaction.  It simply gives confidence that it is ok for the vast majority of consumers.
  • http://www.hartzvictims.org/2015/12/27/poison-shampoozodiac/
    and countless complaints here. Honestly I feel like I want to punch whoever formulated Hartz's shampoo in the face.
    Design of anti-aging creams, gels, and serums; shampoos; and therapeutic cosmetics. In-house label and box design capability.
  • That's understandable.  Especially when their website touts pet health and safety as a core company value.
  • Why is glycerin banned in Canada? And allowed in the US?
    And is vegetable based glycerin a lot different? Thx  
  • I don't think USP grade glycerin is banned in Canada.Vegetable glycerin is derived from Palm oil mainly while animal is Tallow derived.Should be little or no difference as USP grades are vacuum steam distilled and or carbon filtered to meet USP standards.
Sign In or Register to comment.