-
38 out of 60 shampoos found to contain harmful manufacturing solvent in tests by Hong Kong consumer
herewith the link for those interested http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/health-environment/article/2106847/38-out-60-shampoos-found-contain-harmful
-
14 Replies
-
I’m not sure how this is even a story. All of the shampoos fall within the safety limits set by the China FDA. What am I missing?
-
seems like a lot of nonsense as products are within accepted levels for China.
While the concentrations of 1,4-dioxane in the samples all fell within mainland China’s limit of 30 parts per million, seven shampoos exceeded the European Union’s ceiling of 10ppm. -
no i agree this is not a story more like fake news but i wanted to put it out there
-
This is a common scare tactic. Many have been indoctrinated to fear the presence of a component and not to address the acceptable levels. This is a common misnomer when chemophobia is the focus. In this case the items fufill the safety thresholds. We see this in the US as well. Clients will not use PEG’s or other ethoxylated compounds, even if the ppm of the 1,4 dioxane is below the threshold allowed in California. Many, if not all current materials are processed in a manner to meet these safety thresholds.
-
The 1,4 dioxane is a by product of raw material manufacturing. Most of the time its not even listed on the COA or SDS with the raw material.
-
Many of the detailed TDS’s list the ppm of 1,4 Dioxane, especially since California has established a permissible level. If not, this information can be obtained from the supplier.
-
Personally, I think it is comforting to know that there are Watchdogs out there looking out for consumer interests. Especially with a carcenogen like 1,4-dioxane.
-
@Pete - It’s good to have Watchdogs as long as they are not Fearmongers who lose credibility. The presence of 1,4 dioxane says nothing about the relative safety of the product. It is not a carcinogen at the levels found in these shampoos.
-
“38 contained 1,4-dioxane, an ether commonly used as a solvent in manufacturing”. And that’s the result of a quick google search when a writer publishes something he doesn’t understand.
Seems more like a marketing war than anything else. I guess “natural” and “organic” manufacturers are getting more agressive.
The lab results are not important, it’s how are published. The big question is how this will affect the industry, are the big companies like P&G going to change the formulas and avoid using ethoxilated surfactants, or will they deffend their products?. We will have to wait and see how this will affect the production and cost of raw materials.
-
Firstly, I doubt this article was even a blip on the radar of the large manufacturers. It isn’t getting reposted ad nauseum and is from a small news source.
Secondly, we get exposed to “natural” and the scare tactics online. In the larger markets that P&G operates in, it is much less of an issue than you would believe.
-
Oh I didn’t mean just this article, and obviously they can be their own competition. So if they decide to make a move like push on the market sulphate free products that would affect us all. Just like they are doing with parabens, now people think it’s poison.
-
The avoidance of Peg’s due to the presence of 1,4 Dioxane is really old news. Most natural standards simply ban Peg’s and that is about all it amounts to. To put it into perspective, even under Prop 65 in California, they have an allowable minimum level which most products meet easily.
Simply, the larger companies use these products all the time. When your Marketing standard allows them, try out some of the PEG-Emollient such as the Olivatis line from Coast. You will like the performance.
This was more properly news years ago. If I were concerned about any raw material growing with market bias, I would pay attention to the Alkyl polyglucosides such as Decyl glucoside. It was just named allergen of the year and the fear mongers are starting to post about it.
-
Ah, a supplier offered me the EcoSense line, I shouldn’t even try then?.
What about thiazolinones?. Because all big players are still using them, even after being chosen as allergen of the year and many bad reviews.
-
What about thiazolinones?
Caused a lot of damage to my two dogs after I used a commercial dog shampoo containing that preservative. Stay away.
Log in to reply.