Organic cOsmetics DO “natural” One  Better

 

 

Organic cOsmetics

If you were thinking all-natural was the answer to your skin care woes, “organic” has now taken over and has become the new cosmetics buzzword. Consumers are inundated with organic claims on all manner of products, and with frequent media stories surrounding the potential health risks and unknowns of anything remotely synthetic, it’s no wonder that curiosity about organic products is at an all-time high and that product sales are skyrocket- ing. Celebrities and cosmetics companies are launching skin-care products labeled organic faster then you can say “But is this really good for my skin?”!

Organically speaking, what does the term “organic” mean in the world of cosmetics, and principally for skin care? Shockingly, it doesn’t really mean anything because there is no comprehensive definition, and so different organizations and businesses have sprung up, each trying to become the authoritative source giving the stamp of approval—for a fee of course. Then there’s the battle the organic lines have with other lines, each saying theirs is the real deal and everyone else is fibbing. Is it any wonder that many consumers looking for genuine organic products are completely bewildered? As it is, you can basically call your product organic and there is really no one to stop you, no matter what it contains. That’s expected to change as organic harmonization details are hammered out, but as this book goes to print, the term is still used loosely.

Mostly those using the term “organic” or “all natural” are perpetuating the myth that synthetic ingredients are automatically bad and natural ingredients are automatically good. Today it seems that only organic ingredients are good and even natural ingredients are now bad unless they are obtained organically. Making people afraid of something, whether it’s a single ingredient or an entire category of ingredients, is part of the way natural and organic products are marketed.

The truth is more complicated. Consumers are waylaid by the labels, trusting (albeit blindly) that the one they’ve chosen is the right brand. In reality, what ends up happen- ing more often than not is just an exchange of one marketing scheme, as with traditional cosmetics companies, for a new one where products are labeled to say they include organic plants.

As you venture out to shop for a great skin-care routine, thinking that healthy-sounding product labels mean the products will take the utmost care of your skin, let me help you with some background. Arming yourself with the facts surrounding organic products will give you the best balance for your budget and your skin.

 

 

Organic FOOD’s relatiOn tO cOsmetics

Since October 2002, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), national regulations have been on the books that specify exact standards for determining what precisely is meant when food (not cosmetics) is labeled “organic,” whether it is grown in the United States or imported from other countries. As is stated on the USDA Web site, “Organic food is produced by farmers who emphasize the use of renewable resources and the conservation of soil and water to enhance environmental quality for future generations. Organic meat, poultry, eggs, and dairy products come from animals that are given no antibiotics or growth hormones. Organic food is produced without using most conventional pesticides, fertilizers made with synthetic ingredients or sewage sludge, bioengineering, or ionizing radiation. Before a product can be labeled ‘organic,’ a government-approved certifier inspects the farm where the food is grown to make sure the farmer is following all the rules necessary to meet USDA organic standards. Companies that handle or process organic food before it gets to your local supermarket or restaurant must be certified, too.”

What does any of this have to do with cosmetics? Many consumers are already attracted to any cosmetic that claims to be natural, no matter how bogus the claim. To make their products stand out from the rest, cosmetics companies are starting to use the term “organic” on their product labels. But as Consumer Reports (August 2003, page 61) stated, “With no hearings or public discussion, the USDA extended its rules on organic labeling to cosmet- ics. There are now shampoos and body lotions labeled 70% organic based on the fact that their main ingredient is … water in which something organic, such as an organic lavender leaf, has been soaked.”

Tim Kapsner, Senior Research Scientist at Aveda, made a salient point by stating that “In absence of a true industry standard, companies applied the USDA organic food stan- dard for beauty and personal care products ingredients and products. But the USDA’s food standards were never designed for this industry, and its strict guidelines limit certain types of ‘green chemistry’ and pose significant challenges for those seeking to create certified organic products.”

Note: For more detailed information on the USDA organic standards, visit their Web site at www.ams.usda.gov/nop or call the National Organic Program at (202) 720-3252.

 

green chemistry DeFineD

As mentioned above in the quote from the Aveda chemist, green chemistry is typically described as “the design of chemical products and processes that reduce or eliminate the use or generation of hazardous substances. Green chemistry applies across the life cycle, including the design, manufacture, and use of a chemical product” (Source: www.epa.gov/ gcc/). It is also known as sustainable chemistry, and the goals of those utilizing this method to manufacture products include reducing waste, saving energy, and eliminating negative environmental impact. It’s a movement that has all the right goals in mind, including work- ing with all types of raw material suppliers to ensure that the ingredients they develop are as “green” as possible. This includes hazardous chemicals (think bleach, ammonia, disin-

 

 

fectants, preservatives). Green chemistry does not discourage these necessary yet hazardous chemicals, but rather looks for ways to make them less dangerous.

Keep in mind that the majority of hazardous chemicals pose minimal risk to us or the environment when they are used as directed and disposed of properly. Green chemistry doesn’t rely solely on natural ingredients, but this type of product formulation is far more realistic and ends up being more helpful for skin, relying on the best of both worlds— nature and science. Green chemistry advocates strive to use as many natural and sustainable ingredient sources as possible, but as any cosmetics chemist will tell you it is impossible to make a 100% natural product that can successfully fight acne, skin discolorations, sun damage, sun protection, or other skin problems. For example, at the very least, synthetic preservatives are needed to control the growth of bacteria and potentially harmful microbes even in products composed of natural ingredients. Natural preservatives just don’t have the efficacy, formulary compatibility, or cost-effectiveness required to make safe, reliably preserved products (Source: David C. Steinberg, Preservatives for Cosmetics, Second Edition, Allured Publishing, 2006).

Work on furthering the concepts and practice of green chemistry has been part of the Environmental Protection Agency’s agenda since the early 1990s. You can expect to see more examples of and claims for green chemistry as it becomes more mainstream—and much of this progress is dictated by consumer demand for safer products.

 

the Organic market: Full steam (DistillatiOn) aheaD!

The forecast for continued strong sales of products labeled as organic is nothing less than robust. As a category, organic (and natural) products are worth $7.3 billion. From 2005 to 2007 there was a 53% increase in launches of organic products, including many new brands that appeared in well-known retail outlets such as Wal-Mart, Walgreens, and Target. Companies large and small are jumping on the organic bandwagon, whose wheels and fuel (meaning contents) are presumably composed of organic materials.

As you might expect, at least those of you who have been reading my reviews and inves- tigations over the years, the problem is that almost without exception the formulas are not as organic as they’re made out to be and the overuse of irritating, skin-damaging ingredients is the rule rather than the exception. When you add the routine inclusion of numerous synthetic ingredients in many products erroneously labeled as “organic” to that, it’s clear consumers are setting themselves up to fall for false claims and an unhelpful, potentially damaging skin-care routine.

What about the numerous products on the market indicating they use Fair Trade in- gredients? The concept of Fair Trade is another that has an ethical and emotional pull for consumers seeking natural products with sustainable ingredients. It is their assurance that some of the ingredients in the products they’re considering were obtained from farmers or indigenous people who were treated and compensated fairly for the natural ingredients they supply. In order for a product to advertise it contains Fair Trade ingredients, those ingredients must be certified by the Fairtrade Labeling Organisation International, an

 

 

umbrealla group made up of 23 member organizations who’ve set worldwide Fair Trade standards. The cosmetics industry is taking this claim seriously, and why shouldn’t they? Sales of Fair Trade ingredients have increased seventy-fold in the last 10 years (Source: www. cosmeticsdesign.com).

 

check the laBels FOr the truth

It takes only a quick look at the ingredients list on a cosmetic to notice that there are a lot of words that are completely unrelated to anything resembling a plant, much less a plant that can be labeled “organic.” Plenty of synthetic ingredients are found in products from cosmetics lines that boast about their all “natural” and now “organic” content, even those that have followed the proper channels to be certified organic. Despite this discrepancy, the hope and desire for “healthier-sounding” products will be an emotional pull for lots of consumers, particularly women shopping for themselves and their families. Add to that the perception of organic products as more environmentally friendly and they become even more difficult to resist.

Things become even more confusing when you consider that most “natural” cosmetics lines are sold at supermarkets that showcase organic produce and food products. When specialty grocery stores sell products that have strictly regulated organic labeling, many cus- tomers will never notice that the products in the other half of the store, where the cosmetics are sold, are backed by no such regulation, despite the similar labeling.

 

Organic in name Only?

It may surprise you to learn that, as of late 2008, there are still no FDA-approved standards that must be met before labeling cosmetic products as organic. The same is true in Canada, except in the province of Quebec. Another element that’s complicating this issue is the fact that even though lots of cosmetics actually do contain organic ingredients, it’s rarely the case that the entire formula is organic. Why? There are various reasons, but mostly it’s because a number of synthetic ingredients, such as preservatives, are essential components of many cosmetic formulas (there are no natural preservatives that can keep all microbes such as fungus, mold, and bacterium at bay). They’re there for a reason: The organic ingredients are not stable and will deteriorate without them. Plus, in contrast to organic food, a certain amount of synthetic ingredients are required in cosmetics to help keep the ingredients mixed together and stable, and to apply smoothly on the skin and look appealing. What good is an organic or all-natural skin-care product if it’s unappealing to use on a daily basis?

It also helps to remember that you can’t put avocados (or any other food item) on your face to “feed” your skin. Natural or organic does not mean better skin care. Blueberry or grape juice doesn’t make for great skin care, won’t fight acne, won’t deal with skin discolorations, and won’t protect from the sun. Plus what it takes to get a plant out of the ground and processed to remove the insects and dirt, and then get it into your product, stabilized and ready for packaging, and eventually ready for you to use, isn’t the most natural process in the world.

 

 

To make a long story short, these factors help explain why, until acceptable standards are in place, any cosmetic can sport an organic label without having to prove the claim— and many cosmetics companies are doing just that. Remember, most creams, lotions, gels, serums, toners, shampoos, conditioners, and cleansers are about 60% to 90% water, and by the current lax regulations that makes almost any product organic.

Ultimately what’s more important than getting labeling standards in place is the fact that lots of plant extracts and essential oils have irritating properties that won’t help skin in the least (think lemon, lavender, peppermint, menthol, lime, camphor, cinnamon and more). So what difference does it make if they’re organically grown or not? Environmental impact and sustainable farming notwithstanding, peppermint is a problem for skin, whether it’s grown with or without pesticides. It may resonate with you emotionally and morally that your skin-care product purchase helps organic farmers during challenging times (it does for me), but if what’s inside the finished product isn’t going to help your skin, then it’s important to know that there are other ways for you to help the environment without lowering your skin-care standards. In summation, there are other ways to support the “Green” movement that don’t involve buying poorly formulated or irritating cosmetic products.

 

Organic Outrage: the inDustry Battles itselF

Because the cosmetics industry at large knows the organic movement isn’t a passing fad, there is a consortium of natural product–based companies attempting to standardize the definition and labeling of United States–sold cosmetics as organic. They are doing this not only out of frustration at seeing so many products mislabeled as “organic,” but also no doubt because of what has occurred with regard to organic cosmetics in Europe in recent years.

According to the Web site www.cosmeticsdesign-europe.com, the Organic Farmers and Growers, a leading UK certification body, developed a cosmetics and body-care standard for companies that wanted to lure consumers with an organic label. Products that meet this group’s standards (which are rigorous, but still respectful of current European cosmet- ics regulations, including the issue of animal testing) are allowed to sport the group’s logo on their products, indicating to consumers that they meet organic standards. According to a July 2007 report in Organic Monitor, “With the absence of any major regulations and private standards for natural & organic cosmetics in the USA and Canada, North American companies are increasingly making products according to European standards.” For more information on this group, visit www.organicfarmers.org.uk.

In late 2008, after six years of deliberation, leading European certification groups proposed a harmonized set of organic standards to the cosmetics industry. Known as the Cosmetics and Natural Standard (COSMOS), the groups behind this harmonization already account for over 1,000 certified cosmetic companies selling over 11,000 certified products in over 38 countries. Previously certified products will only need to go through the certification process again if they desire the COSMOS seal. Otherwise, the existing standard for which these products were originally certified will remain valid. Products that haven’t been certi- fied by COSMOS are expected to begin the process in spring 2009. For more information on this topic, visit www.cosmos-standard.org.

 

 

In order for a European-sold and–manufactured product to qualify as natural, it must contain no more than 5% synthetic content. Companies selling such products won’t be required to disclose the percentage of natural ingredients that are organic. European-sold and –manufactured products wishing to gain organic approval must contain at least 95% organic content. Further, if an organic source is available for any natural ingredient in the product, it must be used rather than the non-organic source. All organic ingredients must also be processed via “green” manufacturing to ensure a minimum of synthetic chemical involvement.

Although those standards are a positive step for harmonization, keep in mind that this addresses only the issue of plant origin and ingredient processing, not good skin care. Again, we aren’t talking about diet. You can’t put broccoli or lettuce on your face and have it be lunch for your skin.

On the flip side, another group of U.S.-based cosmetics companies (including Estee Lauder brands, Jason Natural, and L’Oreal), not widely known for being champions of organic products, created the Organic and Sustainable Industry Standards (OASIS), whose guidelines are said to best those of organic certification groups such as Ecocert and the organic seal program run by the United States Department of Agriculture. Under OASIS guidelines, a cosmetic product the manufacturer wants to be labeled organic must contain at least 85% organic content. Plans are in place to tighten this requirement to 95% by 2012, bringing the goal of an almost entirely organic cosmetic product closer to the homes of consumers everywhere. OASIS also has certification systems in place for 100% organic products and allows the statement of “Made with Organic” if a product has no less than 70% organic content.

Sounds good, right? Well, another organic-minded group doesn’t think so. The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is taking the group to task for allowing synthetic ingredients to be present in products labeled organic, as well as not having a monitoring system in place to alert people to the presence of chemical by-products when certain ingredients, such as surfactants, undergo a process known as ethoxylation.

The OCA based its organic standards on those of the National Organic Program, which is chiefly concerned with organic food. Members of OASIS have pointed out that the standards of the National Organic Program do not apply to cosmetics because the ingredients and manufacturing necessary to make cosmetic products (organic or not) are outside the simplistic scope of what it takes to grow and certify food as organic. And that is an understatement—a pomegranate doesn’t have to sit in your bathroom for a few months before you are done using it!

Nevertheless, the Organic Consumers Association didn’t want to back down. They sent cease and desist letters to OASIS companies selling products labeled as organic but con- taining nonorganic cleansing agents or synthetic antioxidants. OASIS is arguing that their standard permits use of such nonorganic ingredients in cosmetic products because there are currently no suitable organic alternatives. OCA is arguing that in addition to allowing synthetic ingredients in products labeled organic, OASIS consists of “conventional industry members” who have the goal of diluting organic standards to their advantage.

 

 

For OCA to assert that their own “standards” don’t serve them over and above the consumer is sheer aggrandizement. It’s the pot calling the kettle black and nothing more. Traditional cosmetics companies are not doing a disservice to consumers. OASIS is trying to define organic cosmetic standards for the entire industry, something that is currently lacking. What difference does it make if L’Oreal or Burt’s Bees spearhead development and integration of organic standards?

As usual, this all comes down to the smaller natural-product companies not wanting larger corporations to use their financial clout and resources to make changes before they can do so (or without their approval), or to act first to get the advantage of their market- ing manipulation.

I realize some small business owners’ egos may be bruised if OASIS succeeds with their standardization efforts but it is important to keep in mind that large companies with ex- tensive research and development facilities and staff can work more effectively on finding organic solutions to the need for synthetic ingredients (if they are needed). Smaller compa- nies behind the OCA, such as Dr. Bronner’s, can only dream of achieving such a feat. One thing is certain: Paying closer attention to organic standards, regardless of affiliation, will pave the way for more accountability and regulation for a term that has been undefined and misused for far too long.

What needs to be at the forefront of organic standards is thinking about what the con- sumer needs, not marketing claims. It always comes down to creating formulations that are the best for skin. If it serves skin without risk, any ingredient, synthetic or organic, ought to be included in your product. To stick with the claim that only natural ingredients are good will cheat skin of some incredibly important benefits (Sources: The Rose Sheet, March 10, 2008, page 3; March 24, 2008, page 3; and March 31, 2008, pages 3–4).

It is worth mentioning that there are smaller cosmetics companies (such as Juice Beauty) that are also members of OASIS; the group is not just for large, internationally distributed cosmetics companies.

 

Other Organic & PrO natural grOuPs

In addition to the United States pro-organic groups mentioned above, there are a few other groups in Europe and the United States that deserve mention.

Ecocert is an independent, accredited organic certification group based in France. They’ve been on the scene since 1991. Although the group is based in Europe, they work with over 75 countries and inspect the majority of organic food companies in France and a good portion of such facilities elsewhere, too. Ecocert has branches in several major countries, including Spain, Germany, Japan, and Canada. For more information about Ecocert, visit www.ecocert.com.

Cosmebio is a professional association linked to companies selling organic cosmetics. This group is associated with Ecocert and uses their “Bio” label on certified products meet- ing their standards for organic content and processing. Products that have the “Bio” label contain a minimum of 95% natural ingredients or ingredients of natural origin. They also

 

 

must have a minimum of 10% organic ingredients. For more information about Cosmebio, visit www.cosmebio.org (Note: this Web site is in French but can be translated).

BDIH is a natural products certification group based in Germany. They are part of the Federation of German Industries and Trading Firms for pharmaceuticals, health-care products, dietary supplements, and cosmetic products. They developed standards in co- operation with cosmetic ingredient manufacturers specializing in natural ingredients, and their guidelines can be found at this Web address: www.kontrollierte-naturkosmetik.de/en/ the_guidelines.htm. A product that conforms to this group’s standards can be legitimately labeled with their “Certified Natural Cosmetics” seal.

The Natural Products Association (NPA) was founded in 1936 and is the United States’ largest non-profit company overseeing the natural products industry. They represent all manner of natural products, from health and beauty aids to foods. In late 2008, NPA announced that they had certified two cosmetics lines with their Natural Standards Pro- gram. Those two lines are Aubrey Organics and Burt’s Bees (the Burt’s Bees certification wasn’t too surprising given that Burt’s Bees Chief Marketing and Strategic Officer is also the chairman of the Natural Standard Program committee). In order to gain the NPA’s seal on products, companies must prove at least 95% of their ingredients are derived from natural sources, which is on par with but not as rigid as EcoCert and emerging European standards.

Please keep in mind that certification has nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, to do with skin-care benefit. This is all about the source of ingredients, not the all-important research concerning the benefits and the results consumers are looking for in their skin-care products. A stamp of approval on a piece of steak from the USDA does not tell you how a diet of steak may impact your arteries, heart, or brain. Exactly the same principle holds true for skin care, no matter whose name or certification is on the product.

 

shOPPing FOr Organic cOsmetics

My preference is that you would never go shopping for any skin-care product without the research and analysis from me and my team about its long-term benefit for your skin. After all, discussing and debating whether a product is organic sidesteps other essential issues, like the need for sun protection, and the skin’s need for antioxidants, skin-identical ingredients, and cell-communicating ingredients, even if many of the most stable and most “bio-available” of these are synthetically derived from natural sources. And that’s not to mention providing help for exfoliation, fighting acne, rosacea, skin discoloration, and yes, even wrinkles. The entire discussion about organic ignores the need for great skin-care products. Meanwhile the research shows pretty clearly that when the world of synthetic cosmetic ingredients is combined with natural ones that work and don’t irritate the skin, you are in the right place to take the best possible care of your skin.

You also need to be aware that there is no substantiated, published research anywhere proving that organic ingredients are superior to nonorganic or synthetic ingredients. Choos- ing organic is not essential, but it is a preference many consumers have.

 

 

If organic is the only way you are willing to go, and until formal standards are available in the United States and the rest of the world, the best approach is to buy products certified by the USDA or Ecocert or one of its related groups. These aren’t perfect systems, but when a product bears one of these organization’s seals it gives you an honestly transparent way to decipher just how natural and organic the product you’re considering is.

As burgeoning groups work to solidify organic standards that can be followed globally, shopping by seal and also by the company’s reputation for integrity is the best consumers can do. Of course, unless your attitude is organic-or-nothing, there is every reason to com- pletely ignore any claims of that nature (pun intended) and instead focus on finding the products with ingredients that copious research has shown are truly beneficial for your skin. If some of those products happen to contain organically certified ingredients, great. But if not, consumers don’t need to lose sleep over missing out on this segment of the worldwide movement to go Green.