‘“Now everyone gets work done. Will you?” reads the front-page teaser for Joel Stein’s piece about plastic surgery, “Nip. Tuck. Or Else. Why You’ll Be Getting Cosmetic Procedures Even if You Don’t Really Want To,” in the June 29, 2015, edition of Time.
The bandwagon effect continues inside: “Not having work done is now the new shame,” Stein writes. “Cosmetic surgery has become the new makeup.” He quotes a young-adult novelist: “This is the first generation that thinks about plastic surgery as almost a given.”
Stein’s article concludes: “All of our friends are going to have to keep up with us. And then all of their friends, until everyone is getting every procedure they possibly can.”
Even by the standards of newsweekly hyperbole, this is ridiculous.’
‘New research published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology shows that many Americans aren’t protecting their skin as much as they should. Researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) asked people how often they use sunscreen when out in the sun for over an hour and only 14% of men said they regularly slathered on sunscreen. Women, at 30%, were twice as diligent about putting on sunscreen—while men were more likely than women to report never using sunscreen.
The problem isn’t only compliance. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) released its 2015 sunscreen guide on Tuesday, which reviewed more than 1,700 SPF products like sunscreens, lip balms and moisturizers. The researchers discovered that 80% of the products offer “inferior sun protection or contain worrisome ingredients like oxybenzone and vitamin A,” they say. Oxybenzone is a chemical that can disrupt the hormone system, and some evidence suggests—though not definitively—that adding vitamin A to the skin could heighten sun sensitivity.’
‘Scientists found intersex fish in three river basins in Pennsylvania, a sign that the water may be tainted with chemicals from human activity.
Male smallmouth bass with female characteristics — namely, immature egg cells in their testes — were discovered in the drainage areas of the Susquehanna, Delaware and Ohio rivers, according to a new study led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
Such abnormalities are linked to estrogen-mimicking chemicals, which likely got into rivers and streams from agricultural runoff and human waste, the researchers said.’
- Intersex Fish Linked to Human Activity
- Pesticide Turns Male Frogs into Females
- As more male bass switch sex, a strange fish story expands
- Intersex fish: Endocrine disruption in smallmouth bass
- Fish swimming in water tainted with Prozac exhibit ‘antisocial, aggressive and even homicidal behaviour’
- 12 Worst Hormone-Disrupting Chemicals & Their Health Effects
‘Cosmetics companies have promised to remove plastic “microbeads” from their products, following an investigation by The Independent on Sunday which revealed these tiny particles are ending up in fish and other marine creatures after being washed down bathroom sinks.
Thirteen companies, including international cosmetic firms that sell the exfoliating washes and creams with microbeads made from polyethylene and other plastics, say they are planning to stop using them. Only German discount supermarket Aldi could not give a firm commitment on removing the beads from its facewash. Tony Baines, of Aldi said: “This is something we continually review.”
Tesco, Procter & Gamble, Estée Lauder, Clarins, Superdrug and Sainsbury’s all said they will remove microbeads, but were unable to confirm when.’
- Why do people want to ban ‘microbeads’?
- Ban on microbeads in consumer products gains momentum
- New York calls for ban on face scrub microbeads
- California starting process to ban microbeads from store shelves
- Microbead pollutants in cosmetics washed into the sea and ending up in the food chain
- Plastic microbeads from your toothpaste can lodge in gums, may end up as pollutants in rivers
A wide range of consumer products contain certain nanoparticles that can harm our DNA, according to a new study from Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Harvard School of Publich Heath. Manufacturers use nanoparticles to improve texture, kill microbes, or enhance shelf life, etc., in consumer products such as cosmetics, sunscreens and clothing. The researchers looked at five types of engineered, industrially-used nanoparticles – silver, zinc oxide, iron oxide, cerium oxide, and silicon dioxide. These nanoparticles produce free radicals, called reactive oxygen species, that can alter DNA.
The zinc oxide nanoparticles often found in sunscreen to block ultraviolet rays, and the nanoscale silver used in toys, toothpaste, clothing and other products for its antimicrobial properties were found doing substantial DNA damage. But what is the consequence of this DNA damage? While it may not necessarily kill a cell, the researchers say it can lead to cancerous mutations if the damage is not repaired. On the other hand, silicon dioxide, a common additive found food and drugs, had little adverse impact on DNA. Iron oxide and cerium oxide also showed low genotoxicity.
In a finding that surprised even the researchers conducting the study, it turns out that both rich and poor Americans are walking toxic waste dumps for chemicals like mercury, arsenic, lead, cadmium and bisphenol A, which could be a cause of infertility. And while a buildup of environmental toxins in the body afflicts rich and poor alike, the type of toxin varies by wealth.
SEE ALSO: In vitro neurotoxicity of methylisothiazolinone (NCBI)
SEE ALSO: Methylisothiazolinone, the Toxic Ingredient That Could Cause Nerve Damage (Anna Marie Gianni)
SEE ALSO: The Safety of Paraben Substitutes (Skin Inc.)
Two chemicals in cosmetics and toiletries could cause an eczema epidemic, experts claim.
The preservatives, found in shower gels, deodorants, hand lotions and washing-up liquids, are thought to be behind a rise in skin irritations.
The British Society of Cutaneous Allergy wants ‘immediate’ action to protect consumers against methylchloroisothiazolinone and methylisothiazolinone.