Cosmetic Science Talk

Cosmetic Science discussion form. For people who want for formulate cosmetics and get advice from other formulators around the world.

Home Cosmetic Science Talk Cosmetic Industry proposition 65

  • proposition 65

    Posted by rodb1958 on June 2, 2020 at 11:52 pm

    hello all, 
    in formulating a product we can control most parameters and select raw materials to avoid conflict with prop65. I am finding it difficult to get my head around heavy metals which, arguably, will be found in most cosmetic products complying with industry regs. The majority of HM have a safe harbour level, some do not (nickel for example). Does this mean almost every cosmetic product should have a Ni based Prop65 warning? Or, is it unrequired if the product complies to safe cosmetic standards? Whats an acceptable max quantity?
    Please advise a somewhat frustrated aussie, many thanks.
    rodb

    EVchem replied 2 years, 8 months ago 1 Member · 0 Replies
  • 0 Replies
  • EVchem

    Member
    June 3, 2020 at 12:45 pm

    https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/proposition-65//safeharborlist032519.pdf

    Nickel on this list has a NSRL of 0.8 ug/day, and further they specify the nickel as “refinery dust from the pyrometallurgical
    process”. I’ve never seen anyone give a warning for nickel. If you suspect your raw material  to be contaminated with nickel you could test the finished product for that specifically and see what concentration you fall at. 

    Prop 65 gives me a headache, and at this point I don’t think it achieves it’s intended goals because their rules are so open to interpretation and obfuscation.