Formulation & Science
Packaging & Design
Business & Financial
Regulation & Safety
Internet Live Events
Naturals & Organics
Videos & Audio
Shows & Conferences
Other industry events
News & Analysis
But is it really necessary to do so?
If we look deeper into the subject I am quite sure that not more than 5% of formulators and scientists have a seriously critical opinion on parabens. And I would dare to say that they have not the biggest influence as we can see that the respected opinion leaders in the field are all here, writing comments to defend parabens. Well, why not?
However I think that every article about it (also the pro-paraben ones) is fuelling the debate, so also the defenders should think about if it is worth putting so much effort into this battle with people, they say, have nothing to say.
There are just a few points that could be seen in a more open way also by the pro-paraben fraction.
First I believe that talking about such ingredients, even criticising them, by no means leads to a serious limitation of raw materials and the flexibility to formulate as I read in one of the comments. I think the opposite is true, because everybody can see, that there are new options coming into the market, not only alternative preservation systems (that, by the way, have been around for decades and have been tested and considered as safe as many listed preservatives by experts), but also new ingredients being brought onto the list of allowed preservatives. Thinking about new ingredients (also alternatives to whatever preservative) is scientific progress and nothing to worry about.
Second I totally agree with Dene, defending the safety of parabens and saying that everybody can read the label - as long as people have the patience of finding one ingredient among many with funny chemical names (for non-chemists this is not so easy maybe). And has everybody ever tried to read labels with grey letters on yellow labels in very small fonts? Not always easy. That's why some manufacturers put such claims on the front, and by the way, if one does a store check, it is quiet difficult to find these products that claim to be paraben free, because there are not many.
And third I think that the free from-labelling not necessarily implies that these ingredients are dangerous. I agree that some people who want to, will believe so. But on the other hand, ever thought that fat or sugar etc. are a danger to health? In fact they are essential components for our nutrition, every human being needs them. But still there are so many food products labelling that they are sugar-free or have only reduced fat content etc. Is that really a problem for for the food industry and are sugar producers or oil mills defending their product and criticizing such labeliing? No, because there is no need for it.
Consumers like product diversity, so let us relax, produce different cosmetics with different (and I agree: with no misleading) claims and labelling - and let the consumer decide what she or he wants to buy.
Posted by Fernando Ibarra07 January 2010 | 23h01
Please fill in the box below to tell us why you feel the post breaks our rules. When you are finished, click on "Send" so that it can be reviewed by a moderator.
We will not publish your email on the site
Back to: Paraben-free claims could backfire in 2010
CEW Newsmaker Forum: Jane Lauder, Global Brand President, Clinique
New York City / Event
CEW 2017 Beauty’s Top Talent Awards
New York City / Award
Subscribe to our FREE newsletterSUBSCRIBE
Cosmetics Formulation & Packaging in Europe
Cosmetics Formulation & Packaging in Asia-Pacific
About us |
Editorial Calendar |
Site map |
All sites |
Recommend this Site |
Contact the Editor |
Terms & Conditions |