My photo
Resia Pretorius is a Professor in the department of Physiology, University of Pretoria. She is also Director of the Applied Morphology Research Centre at the University. She has published over 150 research articles in rated scientific journals. She has also been study leader to 28 MSc and PhD students. In December 2011, she was named as winner of the African Union Kwame Nkrumah Scientific Awards for the Southern Region in the category: Basic Science, Technology and Innovation.

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

The Formaldehyde Debate: Are our beauty products harming us?











Report in Longevity Magazine: April 2012




Formaldehyde is currently used in many beauty products, and examples are the Brazilian Blowout as well as acrylic nails. It can be recognized by a very strong and distinct smell. This product is also used in preserving human tissue. Although it is used in beauty products, it is a known carcinogen (cancer causing agent), with no safe levels of use. Due to the fact that only scheduled products are regulated in South Africa, it rests upon us as consumers to educate ourselves about the products that we use. Is this, however, our responsibility to research every single product? Where does the responsibility lie?

117 comments:

  1. I feel that it is our responsibility as well as the pharmaceutical and cosmoceutical industry to make us aware of the safety of the compounds in the products that they sell.

    Silindile Ngcobo

    ReplyDelete
  2. How can it be the consumers' responsibility to check/research every product that they use? Most consumers don't have a scientific background, and thus would not know what to look for. Most people are only interested in the results of a particular product - and not what it contains.

    On the other hand, if all of these products are to be regulated, it will increase the cost of these beauty products - which would most likely cause a decrease in their demand.

    Nevertheless - My opinion is that the responsibility lies with the industry, even if it is only to warn consumers about the dangers of some of their ingredients. The consumer can then decide for themselves whether or not they are willing to use this product.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree on the one hand with Silindile - we as consumers should educate ourselves about the products we use and it is also really easy to get such information as we have the internet.

    However, I also agree with Alieske: we as consumers might not have the scientific background and might even find the information as overwhelming or too complex to understand so we tend to shun the responsibility of checking up on the safety of the products we use. I for one would never have guessed that acrylic nails might increase my chance of getting cancer - I automatically assumed that these products are regulated.

    In the end, I would also say that the industry should regulate the products and inform consumers about the dangers of using certain products. I don't want to have to watch Dr. Oz to know what's good for me and what isn't. I as a consumer have certain rights and if the industry does not regulate products to ensure the consumers who use it are safe, then they are violating my rights!! I wonder if there is legislation about this topic...and what the new consumer protection act says about this!

    ReplyDelete
  4. As a consumer you have a certain level of responsibility to yourself to have more product knowledge and to acquire more information than that which you are provided with by retailers and producers of goods. But producers and retails need to take more responsibility as well especially if they may have negative effects on consumers, because if they don't inform consumers this could result in law suits for them.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Consumers should be warned of the dangers, but it is then their responsibility to make an informed decision. Boxes of cigarettes come with a warning, yet people still smoke. There is no possible way for the every single product out there to be scheduled or regulated especially if you can buy cheaper unregulated products from China for example. People only tend to care that the product is going to kill them, when they are actually dying and have ignored the warnings. "But doctor I only sat in the sun for an hour a day....why do I have skin cancer?" The answer is obvious, they were told it had a risk but did it anyway. You cannot make people take notice or care, but you can help the ones who do. Scientists find something that is bad for us everyday, it is extremely hard to keep up.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think all the resposibility lies with the people who produce the product........

    ReplyDelete
  7. I totally agree with you Nicole

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thank you Alieske, I was just backing up your argument. I recently received this from a friend "HUH? It also makes cleaning agents... honestly all up for the advancement of humans by means of chemicals but if they(the chemicals) are known to be harmful (and this one clearly causes allergies, infant defects as well as 'the mentions') I believe it should be the within “South Africa’s” responsibility to remove it from the market, else the pharmaceutical industry to at the very least, provide disclaimers/ warnings. I honestly wouldn’t have known about formaldehyde unless you posted about it."- Megan
    I tend to disagree on the point of getting it removed from the market as that's just unrealistic, but awareness is achievable and by sharing this article, word will travel.

    ReplyDelete
  9. In a way the consumer has a responsibility to check the ingredients that is used in the products that they buy, BUT the general public doesn’t have the knowledge that we as students have at this moment so how would they know if something is harmful if the producers does not tell them that it is harmful.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I honestly think that the government should review this matter and thus put certain regulations to it. I dont think it should fully be our responsibity to test each and every beauty/cosmitic product we buy. As a consumer, you only have to check if the right composition of formaldehyde is added, nothing more, nothing less.

    ReplyDelete
  11. yes the government is under no obligation to test products/medication that is under the schedule 4. However, they are aware that the pharmaceutical and cosmoceutical industry are using way more formaldehyde in the products than is "safe" to use. I would say this is where they should take responsibility. The cosmetical industry is getting away with murder and they know that they can get away with it. I personally don't have the time to check all the ingredients in all my beautyproducts, with all their side effects, dangers and whether all the ingredients are added in the right amounts. i will be on google for a week! i personally think that the cosmetic industry should inform us about the dangers of the ingredients and also make sure they use the right amount of each. we do pay alot for all of these products, the least they can do is protect us

    ReplyDelete
  12. I believe that cosmetic companies should definitely test for and indicate the health hazards that their beauty products may potentiate. ALthough they are currently under no obligation, I do not believe it is morally correct to with hold important information like that from their consumers.

    The general member of the population might not neccesarily have any chemistry or biology and physiology background, so any compounds that could be carcinogenic for instance, may be substances that are not even in their frame of reference. There are routine, everyday beauty products like facial creams that are a low risk for adverse health effects, and i feel those products should not have to be cross-checked by consumers beforehand. But, procedures that are done monthly or every other month, are procedures that use chemicals with long lasting effects. When a consumer considers a specialized treatment like that, i would suggest checking the pro's and cons of that treatment to make an informed decision.

    It has never done anyone any harm to put in a little effort and do some research on modern-day beauty products and their contribution to health or illness!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Clearly many people share your point of view Karlien. "My opinion on it is that if a company knows that their product is carciogenic, it should be their duty to display clearly on the packaging that it can cause cancer, just like cigarette packages have to. It shouldn't be the consumer's responsibility to find out if it causes cancer, because essentially, what they're doing is selling a poison, but not telling anyone that it's poisonous."- Villiers

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thankfully, I was reffered to this blog by my cousin Alex. Upon first read, as a male, this didn't bother me much... Selfish, I know, but when I came to think about it, it actually is quite disturbing.

    I totally agree with the comments above that there should be some sort of warning on the packaging, at least then consumers will have the choice, as with cigarettes, to partake. Consumers such as myself, who isn't studying any sort of scientific degree, and honestly thought Formaldehyde was just a fancy word Panic at the Disco used in one of their songs.

    At the end of the day, most people will choose looking good over being healthy, the warnings will inform, but not deter. After all, I still like my steak with extra crispy fat!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Steven, its true that many people choose looking good over being healthy (take for example all the absurd diet pills out there)but dont you think the decision to make that choice should lie with the consumer, if they are unaware of the health risk they cant actually make a decision, the are in effect being decived....
    I still feel (like karlien) that if you produce it you have a responsibility to inform consumers of possible risks pertaining to usage- if you communicate the risks and people still choose to use it, it is their problem

    ReplyDelete
  16. I don't see why is is our responsibility to check such info, you can verify if you want but in my opinion i think there should be regulator on health products, i mean i encounter alot of people at gym that use supplenents that are supposetly safe for your body and what they say is in the product is not in the product. An example is usn they took one of their products off the shelve to be tested and was discovered that there were substances in there that were banned in sports, meanwhile we think this product is working but its got roids in it. kso ithink before products are out to the public there must be a test on them before they can be regaurded "comsumer friendly"

    ReplyDelete
  17. just imagine if you had to do research on every product you use in you aily lives...ridiculois!

    ReplyDelete
  18. This seems to be a big issue, as consumer you cant evaluate all products (and how do you know the ingredients listed and % contribution is trustworthy), and lots of consummers dont have the needed knowledge. As mentioned a external evaluater will increase the cost of the product. The producer is economically motivated and probably doesnt care about the health of the consumer-- so what now?

    ReplyDelete
  19. The issue ultimately boils down to trust, can you trust a company to prioritize public safety over maximizing profits? Can you trust your government to competently regulate that industry? Formaldehyde is known to be a highly toxic compound which has been incorporated into products that women use on their skin, so the answer in this case is obviously 'no' for both questions. The information required by the average consumer to protect themselves from exploitation may be overwhelming, but you don't have much of choice in the matter. No one can be expected to know all there is to know on all possible topics but in most cases research has been done and published by credible scientists so the information is out there. All hail Google.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I believe it lies with the company that produces the product to reveal the harmful effects. To a certain extent, the consumer will need to have some knowledge about the product (but not discover for themselves if it is carcinogenic), but in beaty products it usually only concerns if they will have an allergic reaction or something like that. Not many consumers concern themselves about whether it is carcinogenic, and even it is is, many disregard that information.

    This could be because in this day and age, so many studies are done and one day a product is carcinogenic and the next is it prevents cancer (could be an anitoxidant). Take for example eggs: there were big warnings at one stage that they increase cholesterol, and then studies were done to disprove this, and still now there are many people that don't know what to think.

    Even if consumers are made aware that is it carcinogenic, the question then needs to be asked if they will even beleive it, and if so, will they even then stop using the product? As Steven said, the average consumer will probably choose beauty over health. The company does need to let the consumer be aware of the harmful affects first, but as consumers it is then ultimately our decision whether to use it or not, and as a result, if there are any side effects, it is of our own doing.

    It is our right to know about the product and the effects it could have, but it is also the consumers responibilty to educate themselves and make informed decisions about the product

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Tammy for referring me to this blog.
      I have to agree with you as we should not be kept in the dark concerning the products we use, especially if they could compromise our health!

      Alessia

      Delete
  21. I agree with those saying it is the responsibilty of the producing companies to state whether their products contain harmful products or not.

    The average consumer does not know much about the substances used in cosmetics (or most other products for that matter) and thus won't know whether these substances are harmful, not even to mention which concentrations of the substances are safe to use. It is ubsurd to expect consumers to research every product they use.

    Companies producing cosmetics that contain potentially harmful substances, whether carcinogenic or harmful in any other way, should be regulated by law to identify these substances and briefly explain to the consumer what the risk is in using that product. Warning lables on cigarette boxes are compulsory, why should other harmful products be excluded from this law?

    If this is the case then cunsumers can, as in the case of smoking, decide for themselves whether it is worth the risk or not.

    With this information available, people working with nails or the Brazillian Blowout can also decide whether their job is worth the health risk or not.

    ReplyDelete
  22. There are two sides to every argument, from the perspective of a product manufacturer and that of a product user. Ultimately both have a degree of responsibility with regards to safety of products and the use of said products.

    A manufacturer does have the responsibility to warn customers of potential risks but it is where the line falls as to how far a company must go to warn consumers that is the contentious issue. Should an airline put warning labels all over their tickets and websites that warn consumers that there is a slight chance that the plane may crash and use of their airline is at the consumers own risk? Should the manufacturer of coffee warn consumers that too much is also a risk? Where is the line drawn as to what is an acceptable warning level? Should it be dependent on the risk and statistical chance of that product causing harm to an individual?

    Packaging on ciggarettes currently contains numerous warnings and images of the risks involved, yet for most people, smoker or not, the risks are known from a young age, so how necessary are the scare tactics of governments considering smoking continues?

    Within reason i believe it is necessary for a manufacturer to make easily available the risks involved with use of their products, via a website or telephone number for example. Should a customer care enough to want to find out the risks of that particular product, such information should be readily available through the manufacturer. It should not require a degree in advanced research to trawl the internet and "discover for yourself" how and why the product is a danger to you from other resources.

    Again the line as to what companies and products should have available risk information is a tricky line to define. Should an apple producer put a risk statement on their website stating that eating 100 apples a day is not advisable? Probably not. But should a company such as the one of this discussion warn consumers of harmful chemicals? I believe so yes.

    If the normal day to day ( month to month ) use of a product poses little to no risk to a consumer, then a risk warning is perhaps not necessary, risk information could be available on a separate page on a website for example. If the normal usage of a product does pose a risk to the consumer, as with use of Brazilian Blowout, then warnings should be present in a more obvious manner, the hairdresser should warn the customer of the risks before treatment, perhaps the customer should sign a disclaimer stating that they are aware of the risks and are happy to proceed with the use of such a product.

    A consumer does have the responsibility to try and find out more if they are unsure of the risks. The information should therefore be readily available.

    ReplyDelete
  23. It is not our responsibility to research every product.If you place yourself in the shoes of a consumer with no biological education on chemical products, your mind will be so boggled by the time you have tried to research everything, you will either just use the product with the assumption in your head that it is safe for you, or you will be totally paranoid and end up using no product at all.
    It is a part responsibility of the companies to mention that certain ingredients may be harmful to the consumer but at the same time we as consumers should not be ignorant about such factors.Not telling them to go and do indepth research but to just be aware of high risk carcinogenics and life threatening chemicals.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Personally i thnk its difficult to side with either...on the one hand as a consumer it is
    your responsibility to gather all the knowledge necessary when purchasing goods or
    services in terms of your health however the professionals involved in such service
    industries should be extremely knowledgable in terms of the products or services they are
    providing especially if it contains such a great health risk,as most consumers are
    unaware of these risks.Lets be honest how many of us really go into the chemistry of the
    products we use? These health threats really need to be broadcasted especially since
    carcinogens are such a shady area.Can't it possibly come with similar warnings as that of
    cigarettes or alcohol? Or surely there must be some sort of consumer protection act which
    ensures that all products and services which contain health risks come with necessary
    warnings?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I believe that it is very well the responsibility of the beauty companies producing these harmful products to indicate that the products should be used with caution and care. And more importantly develop products that won't detrimental to the individuals using them, or the environment.

    I also think that its imperative that the government takes some form of action to ensure that these products are not put on the shelves with such ease...There should be proper protocol and proceeders to follow with regards to assessing the types and degree of harmful substances within beauty products. AND if they have serious side effects,like the excessive amount of formalin in the Brazilian Blowout that has the ability to fixate your lungs , by law these products should be banned and taken off the shelves if no safer alternatives are found.

    When companies and the government allow products which they KNOW are harmful to be used by individuals, it signals a complete lack of integrity and compassion for the consumer.

    I do also however believe that such changes cannot be made over night and that the consumer should always be cautious when using certain products, they should always be open to being educated about products adverse effects, and decide whether or not to use them.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I agree with Jamie, it is a fine line between the warning being necessary and it being ridiculous. Where do we draw the line?

    Formaldehyde is present in so many products and substances that it simply isn’t possible to regulate it. It is present in the upper layers of the atmosphere and under certain weather conditions, for example in the winter months when the temperature drops it forms part of smog often seen over metropolitan areas, how is this to be regulated?

    It is absolutely true that instating a law regulating the use of possible carcinogens would perhaps cause the production of some products to not be cost effective for these companies and they would have to stop producing them. Apart from this the government would never be able to pass a law where there has to be warnings for all carcinogens or possible carcinogens. Those companies’ lawyers would simply argue that living in a metropolitan area during winter (when smog is most often seen) could also cause cancer and that eating allot of meat is also carcinogenic.

    There are simply too many carcinogens already out there that cannot be regulated. In a country where people die of hunger and HIV related disease and violent crime is rampant, I personally do not think that enforcing regulations regarding formaldehyde in lipstick and other beauty products should be a priority to the government.

    ReplyDelete
  27. In my opinion it is completely unethical for companies who make beauty products to include chemicals and substances that are of a harmful nature in their products, especially as their are a cosmetic company. I mean it is understandable for some pharmaceutical companies to have chemicals in drugs that have side effects and may be harmful if we use it, but the end of the day these are medicinal drugs and sometimes only used as a last resort, not to make someone feel pretty!

    There should definitely be restrictions and laws which protect the consumers of these products, especially if they are unaware of the health hazards and dangers which these products contain. The manufacturers must clearly indicate on their label when a specific chemical that is used may be harmful to its consumers. And a clear label does not mean they can print somewhere in the corner of the label in font unreadably small that it contains formaldehyde. It should be clearly visible and should also include that formaldehyde for example is a known carcinogen and it may cause cancer. These laws should be created by the government and should be enforced with a strict penalty if they are not followed.

    If there is then clear warnings on packaging that this product might be harmful or contains harmful chemicals, the consumers can then clearly see this and then make an informed decision on whether or not they still want to use the product. It would just allow users to be aware of the dangers and if they please they may go and do a bit of reading or research before making their final decision.

    To expect the manufacturers to stop producing the product is also a bit unrealistic and, I feel, unnecessary as there is clearly a market for them and also it is not a sure thing that you will have a 100% chance of getting cancer if you are exposed to formaldehyde, its not arsenic. In large quantities it is however a big risk factor and therefor they should make the public aware thereof and not hide this information.

    Tobacco companies are forced by law to issue warnings on all their boxes and tobacco is also not a controlled substance, but it is known to be harmful and i cannot see the difference between the two products from a harmful point of view. Cosmetic companies should thus be kept to the same standards and take responsibility for their products. But just like cigarettes, these beauty products will still be used by many despite its potentially harmful nature and obviously it can be a productive company and product so i cannot justify us wanting them to take the product of the market, but I do however strongly feel there should be clear warnings on these products for consumers to at least make a informed decision rather than being blindsided with cancers and other health risks. And for the beauty queens who still will use these products, a long happy life is more important than a short one filled with illness and you thinking you're pretty!

    ReplyDelete
  28. It is all good and well that the company that produces the product must make aware the dangers of their product. But in the end it is the responsibilty of the person who is using the product to make sure that they are fine with it. As an example, my entire family are smokers, they are all aware of the danger that is associated with smoking. But this is not due to the warnings on the box, none of them have got any background in what the labels mean, and I am pretty sure that this is applicable to 50% of smokers round the world. It is due to the education of the seniors in the community.

    It all comes down to what the customer wants out of life. I have no problem with the treatment being out there with the warning signs telling people about the dangers of it. You will never stop people doing what they want to do, be it smoking, drinking or eating unhealthy foods.

    What must the warning be though if the producers of the treatment were to put a warning on their label? A skull and cross bones with the words, 'Warning! May cause cancer'.

    Everybody has a choice in life. I enjoy many foods that are deemed unhealthy, such as fatty meat, fizzy drinks and many others. Must fatty foods now also have a warning sign to warn people about the dangers of it? There was a case recently where a 30 year old female died of a heart attack, and the doctors say that the main cause of the heart attack was due to the woman drinking on average 8 litres of coke a day. Must coke now have a warning sign on it. It has got its ingredients on it, but I doubt many people will be able to understand what each one does.

    It all comes down to the education you give to people. If somebody really wants it they will be willing to live with the risk.

    To answer the two questions though.I dont think it is our responsibility to research every product. But at the same time I dont believe that putting the products' dangers will do anything to deter people. I think the responsibility lies with parents or gaurdians. And still then it lies with the individual who will be affected.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I agree with all of the comments that it's the producers responsibility to inform the customer and help him to understand and know all off the facts regarding the product

    And after the information given to the customer they can deside wheter to use the product or not. Only then the responsibility moves to the customer himself.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I don't believe that the responsibility to research all ingredients of a product lies with the consumer. Especially not in South Africa, where so many consumers lack basic education. I think it is up to the companies producing the products to display warnings of potential adverse effects on the product, and then leave it to the consumer to decide.I agree with Sean in that once a person has been told of the risks of using a product, the choice ultimately lies with them.
    While I do believe that it is important to know what risks exist with products, I do not agree with suddenly going and investigating every product available to us. If we start cutting out all known/ potential carcinogens, then we need to start looking at food, or ALCOHOL. What about smoking, or using a cell phone or standing in the sun?
    I do believe that a certain amount of responsibility lies with us in the Science fields. Why else have we chosen this route? I believe we should use our knowledge to conduct research and help educate the general public, but we must not scare them. Products that use illegal amounts of potential carcinogens should be removed or at least have warnings on them, but those that are within the "safe" amounts should not be used to scare the public.
    However the ultimate responsibility lies with the government. If there is no legislation regulating the amount of carcinogens in products, then companies are going to continue to cut corners to maximize results and profits because they can...

    ReplyDelete
  31. I totally agree with Sean. As much as great responsibility lies with the manufacturer in making an awareness about the risks associated with using the product, We the consumers make the ultimate decision of purchasing the products.

    will a big red label reading WARNING: FORMALDEHYDE on your favourite nail polish, or shampoo really stop you from purchasing it? Will being a well informed customer really change the way you buy your products?

    ReplyDelete
  32. I believe that the responsibility does not completely lie with the consumer, just like most people on the blog do. Kylie made a great example by stating that most South Africans do not have the basic education to understand the safety hazards of products containing for example formaldehyde.
    In purchasing a product we trust that the health and safety board has done the necessary tests ensuring the safety of the population, in other words done their jobs. So when something as unsafe as formaldehyde is so easily found and sold in many common household products a huge alarm bell should be sounding off. Where does the problem lie exactly, whose to blame? I think those are not necessarily the right questions to ask.
    When you see the products containing these substances one' tends to notice that they are cosmetic and not basic necessities. They are not needed and in my opinion should not be used, especially products such as hair relaxer, nail polish removers. etc. This suggests that some, if not all, the responsibility should lie in the consumer purchasing the products.
    If you feel the urge to use certain products you know contain a high amount of chemicals you should be self conscious and do a little bit of research as to the effects or purposes of some of those chemicals.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Does anyone know if there is any legislation concerning the carcinogenic content of products in SA? Or is there completely none at all? And does the SABS not regulate these things maybe? Because as far as I know, they supposed to be the national company in SA that certifies products, indicating that the standard is adequate, and I would assume therefore not completely detrimental to our health? I wonder if they have any control over something like this, that is in fact carncinogenic...

    ReplyDelete
  34. I completely agree that ultimately the decision lies with the consumer as to whether or not they want to buy the product or use the service but I also do think that they should be made completely aware of its dangers before having thier gel nails or brazilian blowouts done as I doubt many actually know what formaldehyde is or what it is used for or its possible risks...if after that they still want to go ahead then by all means they should.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I believe that comparing the amount of formaldehyde in these beauty products with trace amounts in the atmosphere over a festering metropolis is ultimately redundant. Of course things like that cannot be regulated, the focus here is on what can. The amount used in these beauty products is way over a safe limit, indeed more than used in embalming fluid.
    Cigarette companies even control the amount of tar and nicotine in cigarettes "as per government agreed method" but display warnings of the dangers that still exist.
    The question here is how much formaldehyde (if any) is regarded as 'safe'? I also think that the focus shouldn't necessarily be on the consumer who gets their hair straightened once every few months but on the people working with these products every day. That kind of exposure to that amount of formaldehyde is most probably much more dangerous than spending hours in a dissection hall with your face in a cadaver even. I believe that the responsibility lies with the government to test the effects of this amount of formaldehyde on people working in this environment and to educate the public on the risks involved. If these levels are found to be gravely unsafe, they should be lowered to a relatively safe amount but then will the products still work? If not they can't make these products illegal, can you imagine being in possession of Brazilian Blowout or acrylic nails being a criminal offence? Ultimately the decision to work with or use these products is a personal one, but it should also be a fully informed one. people should not be expected to research it themselves as most people trust whatever is sold to them without a second thought.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I agree that it would be preferable to place some the responsibility on the government and on that in an ideal world the companies that produce these products would act morally correct or would at least place a warning for any harmful ingredients. But look at the reality; they will never do this if it drags their profit margin down unless forced to by the law. We live in a third world country where 47.1% of the people do not have enough money to buy food (SA stats2011). They will not buy these beauty products, nor will many others who do have enough money for food but not enough for luxuries. What should the government of these people focus on? Passing legislation on products that only about 3% of the South African population can afford in the first place?

    Here is something else to think about:
    According to the South African police department statistics 19 202 people were murdered in South Africa in 2006 and the South African medical research council reports 4525 Trachea/ bronchi/ lung cancer related deaths for that same year. So as I see it, you are more likely to be murdered (not to mention road accident fatalities) than die of lung cancer, even if you are hairdresser who works with the product every day.

    So whose responsibility should it be? The manufacturer’s. Whose responsibility is it? The consumer’s and I personally think the government should have other priorities (In our country at this time).

    ReplyDelete
  37. "The truth of the matter is that we do live in a third world country where priorities are totally different to first world countries.We are only starting to see sell by dates and ingredients printed on food packaging.
    It is my opinion that consumers should be informed exactly what is in the products they are buying and the hazards thereof. It will then be up to the individual to make an informed decision. Not that it will ever happen but it would be good to see labeling that said '20 bunnies died to make this product' ignorance is not bliss and what you don't know could kill you"-Pamela

    ReplyDelete
  38. The few years I have spent at University have taught me many things – for example: If your glove breaks or you get a mouth full of ‘stuff’ while dissecting a cadaver preserved in formaldehyde, don’t panic. You won’t die. In fact – the lecturers that present the module spend a good deal of their week inhaling these fumes. As the article mentions - a wide spectrum of research techniques uses formaldehyde to preserve tissue specimens. Thorough research like this includes months – even years – of work. Time spent touching, inhaling or in the general vicinity of harmful agents exactly like formaldehyde.

    Also, things that are illegal or harmful will almost always be more popular and therefore “more fun”. Think about it: who gets Brazilian Blow waves or Acrylic Nails? Who buys magazines called Longevity with that lady from Friends on the cover? Girls – that’s who. And who teaches these girls that they need these things? Their mothers of course. Their teachers, their aunts, grannies and friends. I can tell you – that most of these people have never even heard of formaldehyde. And even if they knew what it was and they knew it was harmful, would that change anything? It certainly would. In the same way alcohol and cigarette sales have changed since they added warnings to the packaging. Companies know these things, they play upon them. Even if they get sued or badmouthed, they still get the publicity they want. It would be naive of us to believe that they actually care about the people’s welfare instead of their money.

    Another thing I’ve learnt: Everything in moderation. All substances can be considered poisonous – the effect of the drug depends on the dose and the duration of said dose. If you absolutely NEED to have straight hair, go for it. You could just as easily be addicted to caffeine (like me).

    So my point – if you’ve skipped ahead past all my disjointed thoughts, read this:

    Firstly: Some things are a necessary evil. Formaldehyde works well in preserving tissue for research and the world would be hard pressed to give it up. Plus, with all the lab safety and things scientists learn, they are as safe as they can get. They know what their working with.

    Secondly: Peer pressure. Humans are of such a nature that we will rather follow the crowd than think and act for ourselves. If your lifelong friend and hair stylist tells you that this product is safe, you wouldn’t even think about looking it up.

    Lastly, and in conclusion: It is my opinion that the responsibility falls to the educated people - scientists, doctors and leaders. It is our responsibility to induce a state of mind that encourages curiosity and suspicion. We (and I do count myself among the privileged few who had the opportunity to learn) have to be the ones to spread the word. It is our responsibility to be the “cool kids”, to be followed into the right direction. And if that means getting involved in social networks, blogging, buying girly magazines and communicating on a level that everyone can understand, I’m all for it. I agree that this is an effective way to reach people and I will follow Professor Pretorius’s lead and spread the word. It is our responsibility as students to teach the generations that look up to us.

    (Oh and just an afterthought: Nicole Slark, I almost fell off my chair when I read the comment about the bunnies. I wrote something similar, but erased it because I couldn’t think of a proper way to phrase it. That nailed it.)

    ReplyDelete
  39. Clarisa, I think your opinion is spot on, it is our responsibility as educated individuals to make those around us aware of the dangers of using such products...

    However, my biggest concern is what about the the hairdressers and nail technicians working with these products all day long, can they not at least ensure that safety precautions like gloves and masks should be worn when using these products, as well as educate them about the risks. I mean so many of them "swear" by there products "it's the best ever". Many of my family members including myself have gotten my nails done, or had a brazilian blow out, and your hair with these chemicals is heated with straighteners and your nails dried with UV lighting, and I'm sure that this has even more detrimental effects!!!

    And where do we go from here, we chat and blog and educate those we love, but is that enough? what more can we do to make a real difference?

    ReplyDelete
  40. Initially I was of the opinion that the responsibility lies mostly with the companies/government, but I have to thank Kylie for opening my eyes to the fact that we as (upcoming) scientists also have a responsibility to educate the general public/consumers, and yes also not to scare them.

    ReplyDelete
  41. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  42. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I also agree with Marieke and Silindile, we have technology at our disposal and we should be able to use it and research and find out more about the products we use and be that much more informed about what we use on ourselfs but not all of us are scientists. Most people in our country dont have much knowledge about the scientific side of the products we use. So i feel that the government should atleast tests the porducts that are being used in our country and to prevent the import or production of health risk products to help the people and those lacking the knowledge.

    ReplyDelete
  44. These beauty products need to come with a disclaimer: the same way that cigarettes do. It might not stop people from making use of them, but at least they will be aware of the dangers involved.

    The beauty therapists who come into contact with these products on a daily basis are those who need to be most worried though, and if I were one of them and I read this article, I would definitely have made a law suit against the money-hungry companies who make these products.

    ReplyDelete
  45. I would like to respond to Tammy's comment about the SABS. I thought she raised a good point, so I went to their website to see if they are involved in any cosmetic testing. I have to say that I could not find anything that suggests that they are. The cosmetic industry is such a large industry, so shouldn't it also be regulated by the SABS? Does anyone know if they are indeed and I just missed it?

    ReplyDelete
  46. That is quite interesting that they aren't, or at least I have seen no indication that the SABS is involved. I wonder if there is any one company that does regulate the cosmetic industry then? Or if it really is just a government issue that needs to be dealt with. Perhaps if it is the Government, they need to delegate and find a company that can be responsible for cosmetics and the contents thereof.

    In any case, lots of people have said that as we are studying scientists, and are privy to information such as this, it is now becoming our responsility to educate those that aren't aware. I couldn't agree more. This article and blog are a small step in the right direction in allowing the general population to make informed decisions and educating them with regard to the contents of the products that are so readily available, whether harmful or not.

    ReplyDelete
  47. It is the consumers responsibility to know whats in the product,however we do need something like the FDA to regulate the amount of formaladehyde(or any other potential carcinogen) that goes into cosmetic products.I think the government and the consumers have an equal responsibility with regards to this matter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. When it comes to profit vs. health (especially with cancer usually taking years to show up after initial exposure) the cosmetic and pharmaceutical companies will only choose health after an uproar is made by the consumers. For this to happen they need to be made aware of the dangerous chemicals in the products they are buying. An independent body, like the FDA, with no financial gain in the selling of products, should be the ones who regulate and warn the public about carcinogens and other dangerous chemicals. No normal person will ever look up the possible hazardous effects of every chemical of every product they ever use.

      Delete
  48. I have read most of the previous comments and ideas on the matter,but it was one comment that specifically intrigued me. It mentioned the consumer protection act and asked the question on what role it plays in our current formaldehyde dilemma. I researched it with the hope to answer my question.


    According to the Government Gazette 2009, the consumer protection act (Act no 68 of 2008) entails the following “ To promote a fair, accessible and sustainable marketplace for consumer products
    and services and for that purpose to establish national norms and standards
    relating to consumer protection, to provide for improved standards of consumer
    information, to prohibit certain unfair marketing and business practices, to
    promote responsible consumer behaviour, to promote a consistent legislative and
    enforcement framework relating to consumer transactions and agreements.” It further states that this act is to protect the interest of all consumers especially those who are abused and exploited by the market place. According to this document this act should be endorsed in order to:
    • improve access to, and the quality of information that is necessary so that
    consumers are able to make informed choices according to their individual
    wishes and needs
    • protect consumers from hazards to their well-being and safety;
    • promote and provide for consumer education, including education concerning
    the social and economic effects of consumer choices
    • facilitate the freedom of consumers to associate and form groups to advocate
    and promote their common interests
    Thus according to this document we as consumers have the right not to be exploited by the market place (Such in my case where the product’s advertisement was not truthful) about hazards to our wellbeing. We as consumers have the right to be informed and educated about the products we buy and use. So to me it would then be the chemical or pharmaceutical company’s responsibility to correctly inform and educate consumers. Especially if chemical concentrations that exceed FDA requirements are used. Then we as consumers have the choice to make about using the product.

    BUT the consumer protection act also gives us the right to associate and form groups to advocate and promote common interests about products. I see this right as a responsibility as well. A responsibility that we as scientists have to inform people about dangers of chemicals we know of. By informing our friends, family or even members of the public we can educate consumers.

    So in conclusion we all have a part to play in making the world a more informed and healthy place.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I believe that there should be stricter regulations regarding the use of carcinogenic substances in all products, even more so in beauty products! These regulations should be enforced with a firm hand, and all parties should be held liable for the consequences of their products. I think government should definitely consider it to make formalehyde a controlled substance, or at least if more than a certain concentration of the substance is used it should be controlled by higher committees. The government could also restrict the use of formaldehyde to only scientific setting.

    The consumer should be able to sue these manufacturing companies for their poor information and advertising, for having no clear warnings regarding the carcinogenic agents in their products. Consumers should also hold the government accountable for not controlling these companies, for allowing them to misinform and mislead the consumers and for breaking the consumer laws and legislations.

    ReplyDelete
  50. It is surely the right of the public to be made aware of the dangers of these products and to be fully conscious of the effects which they have on our health. Our health is possibly the most important thing we have, it is our own responsibility to educate ourselves and even more so to educate others with regard to substances detrimental to our wellbeing.

    Directly related to this is the responibility of the company producing these products to clearly point out their dangers to the public. These companies must be held fully accountable for any harm caused to unsuspecting consumers who are completely ignorant to the detrimental effects of these products.

    Raising awareness regarding these products and procecures and thus allowing consumers to make an informed choice is definitely a must. However, more than just an increased awareness is required - solutions are needed in order to minimise the damage caused by these products, this being especially important for the beauticians who handle these substances on a day to day basis.

    A firmer stance is needed - perhaps a boycott of these products and procedures until the companies that produce them decrease their risks to a safe level? To allow anybody to fall prey to this 'beauty at all costs' scenario would be sad.

    ReplyDelete
  51. If a company is using known carcinogen in their product then they should definitely have a label or something on the packaging alerting consumers to the risk of using the product. But seeing as thats not going to happen unless they are made to do it, there should be stricter laws in place. So on one hand it is up to the government to enforce these laws. But they aren't going to do something until they are aware there is a problem so it falls on the consumers to create awareness of this issue. I'm not saying that it should be our responsibilty but at the end of the day we are responsible for our own health.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Reading articles from the USA, it seems that the whole debate is not the formaldehyde content of the product but the lack of a warning label on the product. In some cases it has also been stated that the product states it is “formaldehyde free”.
    Also, yes chronic exposure to a carcinogen such as formaldehyde MAY lead to cancer. But this is only one of many carcinogenic components hair stylists are exposed to. Many scientists work with formaldehyde in the embalming fluid and no cases in South Africa has been reported on caner from Formaldehyde.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I agree with all of the arguments, the consumer cannot be held completely responsible for the safety of a product. The manufacturer/ company should do research for not only the products harmful effects but also the people who need to administer the product for example the hairdressers. Even a warning label would be a good start. But in this profit driven world even this seems almost unattainable.

    I think the consumer’s main role should be the identification of harmful substances as well as spreading information and knowledge by word of mouth. Very much like this blog. I think this is the only way to really make a difference, because I went to a salon and asked to see their “Brazilian blow” solution. The percentage of formaldehyde present was less than 1%. The owner of the salon then told me due to a client asking about the smell and doing some research the salon went and purchased the more “natural” option.

    I went on the internet and found that most companies are now selling products with "Zero formaldehyde." This is a visible difference. I think we as consumers should rather do things like this blog and simply spread the word because taking on these pharmaceutical companies and demanding restrictions and better legislation for formaldehyde in cosmetic products when the country is facing more deaths due to violent crime just seems a little futile to me.

    Although I agree with Tammy, Kylie and Robert that there should be a party that governs these products, and they must remain independent to prevent bias and bribes to pass products. So both consumers and manufacturers have their work cut out for them, the question is who and when will they step up to the plate?

    ReplyDelete
  54. I was chatting to Tammy and she told me to check this blog out.

    I studied Psychology. I now have a Master's degree (cum laude) and am currently doing my PHD. I mention this for 2 reasons:
    1. To emphasize that I am not a Medical Sciences person.
    2. To provide evidence that I am an educated person.
    And, as an educated person, not in the medical sciences, I have heard of formaldehyde. But, as an educated person, not in the medical sciences, I honestly don’t know much about it.
    This isn’t because I am ignorant or have been living under a rock. I have read articles on it and I have googled it. So I've got a few of the basics. But I don't feel like I can say that I am truly informed about it. Tammy made a good point in saying that 1 study will tell you one thing while the next article will disprove or argue against it. I myself have done quite extensive research, albeit in my field and not in medicine, and know how easily studies can manipulate words and findings to suit their argument. Furthermore, I look at some labels but most of the ingredients are just really big words that don’t mean anything to anyone unless you’re in the field and actually know what they are. So companies can put all that info on the products but it really means nothing, even to educated people. Only educated MEDICAL people will know what’s going on. Then is it up to me to go and google all those ingredients to figure out what they are? Maybe I should. What do all the people do who don't have internet do? That can't read?
    I believe any attempts to create awareness on the topic aren’t reaching the right people.
    So what do we do? You obviously get the extremists who will choose to vehemently support one side of the argument and will do everything in their power to adhere to it, but the average Joe will just sort of carry on doing what they've been doing anyway, because 'what I've been doing has got me this far, hasn't it?'.
    The manufacturers can put the info on the products, but unless it is made understandable and relevant then people will not be able to make informed decisions about whether to use it or not.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Thank you Tammy for making me aware of this situation! This is alarming and it is of paramount importance that systems are put in place to protect the public. We are honestly not in a position to do individual research as consumers.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I was reading some of the comments that say that it is partially our responsibility as consumers to do the research on products. Yes, I am all for being well informed about products. but what about all the people not involved in a science field or those who have never done any kind of research in their lives? There is so much misleading information out there that it could easily cause unnecessary panic. This is why companies such as SABS exist, where qualified and trained professionals know how to research and test these products... Shael is absolutely correct when stating that we are not in a position to do this

    ReplyDelete
  57. Once again. Even if people know that a certain product is dangerous, they will continue to use it. All the people I have shared this to could not care any less, their reactions were that everything in the world can harm you. They will still carry on with life. just like people with there cigarettes. I think the simplest solution would be to put a label that says may cause cancer and let people decide from there.

    ReplyDelete
  58. People still smoke cigarettes despite the warnings on the packaging,even if information about the possible carcinogenic effects of formaldehyde are printed on the packaging of cosmetic products people are sitll going to use them.Today beauty is far more important than one's health people.The government can only go as far a regulating the 'safe acceptable' amounts of formaldehyde in these products but it is the consumer that has the final say.

    ReplyDelete
  59. In my opinion, if the person knows the risk and still continues doing it, then that is their own fault. I will inform all parties involved if I do decide I want a Brazilian blow wave or anything else that contains formaldehyde (because I am an informed consumer now) but I am pretty sure, even though you will tell them about the risks etc, they will still want to do it. They will still want your money. The biggest risk is for the person performing these beauty treatments on other people and not really on the consumer itself, except if you get it done weekly or so. It is thus not the consumers’ responsibility to know the risk factors but the employee. It should be part of their training/studies and they should inform the consumer before the treatment is done. That's what doctors do so why can't beauty technicians also do that?

    ReplyDelete
  60. "Every single product we use which is not natural and does "miracle" changes and so on to your hair, skin, nails and so on contains chemicals which are harmful to ones health. Take hair dye for example, loads of women and men dye their hair over and over KNOWING its bad for their hair and can possibly promote hairfall etc. If that formaldehyde stuff is a danger to ones health, and has cancer causing properties, shouldn't it come with a giant label on it with a health risk & cancer warning?? Just like tobacco & alcohol which is sold. Its not like people won't use it, because they will (like with alcohol and cigarettes even though its loaded with dangers and warnings), its definitely NOT up to the consumers of the product. The big heads who create the product should put the warnings out there and be honest. They probably don't even use the products themselves knowing how harmful it is... Us consumers of any product on the market are totally unaware of the ingredients of most of the products we buy, yes some have the ingredients stated in them but to us we don't understand what that ingredient is and what it does and where it comes from. So basically what I'm saying is us consumers "trust" the 'creator' of the products on the market & available to us, thinking they would have our safety in mind, meanwhile, they don't. They just want the money & the power. That is all that this world is coming to. Money, power and greed, and us normal human beings barely able to survive each other (society being out of self-control) are the ones who have to suffer and are "THEIR" real life human guinea pigs...
    Just my 2cents! ;)"
    - Comment by Chelsea Bell

    ReplyDelete
  61. IT is True that these products contain chemicals in them, but i believe that the companies manufacturing these products such as hair or even nails knows to what limit the chemicals have to be placed in the products in order to avoid consequences when making use of these products.

    ReplyDelete
  62. I think that every company should have a few researcher on their team to do research on new products before it is open to the public. The dangers should then be brought under consumers attention,if they still use the products it is their own problem. Like cigarettes...we all know that it causes cancer yet no one is discouraged to use them.

    ReplyDelete
  63. I think its partially our responsibility then the manufacturer as well to inform us(consumers) of the effects of the products we buy. Most manufacturers do not honestly make us aware of the consequences of their products, simply because they just want to make money out of us, they really dont care. So for our safety I would personaly advice everyone to atleast know the consequences of the products they using...

    ReplyDelete
  64. So we are all pointing out the obvious problems. But what are the solutions?

    ReplyDelete
  65. I spoke to a hairdresser and she did not even know what formaldehyde is, let alone what it does to the body. This only shows that if no one tells the people that works with the products that it is harmful to them how would they know. She also told me after I told her about the negative effects of formaldehyde, that she can’t afford not to use the product because it is a major income for her. Is this really fair to these people that has to use these products everyday?

    ReplyDelete
  66. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  67. We as individuals or consumers don't have the power by ourselves to solve these problems that is why there are groups in place that should prevent this.

    But here i agree with Luise we only show the problems what are these solutions??
    Letters to the groups that should prevent these problems. so that studies should be done before these products can be used further.
    Should we as students who are busy with higher education step in and make groups to prevent this from happening.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I just think that the majority of the responsibility should be with the producer, how ever I'm a strong believer that the consumer should also inform themselves of the risks involved in product use !

    ReplyDelete
  69. There is a responsibilty in each of the parties invloved, bu it should be noted that level of responsible for each of the parties invloved is not the same.

    Firstly,the regulating authorites that monitor the manfacturing companies that makes these products should bear the primary responsiblity.They should put more pressure on the these companies to inform the companies the consumers about the hazards of using these products.In other words, in should be mandatory law, in to protect themselves and the unsuspecting consumers.failure to comply with these will result in heavy fine or possible jail time.

    Secondly, the hair or nail technicans who perform these treatments on the consumers should have a certificate from a verified institution that states that they have the correct qualifications to do these techniques and have suffient level of knowledge to inform their customers should any questions arise. As with the above-mentioned, failure to comply with these will result in heavy fine or possible jail
    time.

    thirdly, the consumers also owe it to themselves to educate themselves evn in the most basic form about the harzards on the products that they use. consumers should ask questions and rea the labels of the products

    ReplyDelete
  70. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  71. If people want to embalm themselves while they are still alive let us give them that chance.Although it is our responsibility to know,we don't have the time to google every ingredient listed on a product,thats why we need the government's help.Tobacco laws are a good example in this matter,warnings are printed on the packing and yet some still smoke.The 'educated' are more knowledgeable,therefore they can make informed choices

    ReplyDelete
  72. I’ve read through all the above mentioned comments and I totally agree with those saying it is the Government’s or the manufacturing company’s responsibility to check and regulate the carcinogenic/toxic levels. But I want to address this matter at a different angle:

    *We all are so concerned about the safety of the consumer but the actual people we should worry about, is the hairdressers / beauticians who work with these products everyday! The consumers are only exposed to these toxins for 1-3 hour every 6weeks to 3-4 months, as the people who work in the salons are exposed everyday for up to 10 hours.

    *The idea of creating awareness on the products via warning labels are a good ideas but if this products are so harmful to us why not rather take the products of the market and replace it with others products that are safer and more consumer friendly to use?

    *The people what are responsible for the testing and approving the products should start doing their jobs properly and not release products with such high toxic levels that can harm the consumer. And also the law system should also be stricter to prevent such products to be sold.

    ReplyDelete
  73. I agree with you mariska . The actual target group is the people exposed to formaldehyde every working day . And I also feel that the government and cosmetic producers should be held accountable. The accountability should ultimately lead to the withdrawal of the product from the market!

    ReplyDelete
  74. My aunt is a hairdresser and she doesnt even know what formaldehyde is. When I told her that it is carcinogenic she was shocked. She can't afford to turn people down who wants brazillian blow waves as it is a very expensive procedure and it is a good income.
    Isnt there maybe an alternative that can be used instead of formaldehyde with less negative effects???

    ReplyDelete
  75. well, i'll say that cosmetic companies jsut like many other companies will first concern themselves on their benefits. It is true that they check their product to prevent contamination after use bt how far do u think they go in checking them?
    Even if a product that they made is only 45% reliable and safe but 60% efficient they'll use it, commercialize it rather than discard it and go for further studies to make it even safer to use. cause remember, the more effort they put in looking for the safest product, the more money they invest in it and eventually they dont want that. that is nt how they do business.
    But not only that, the other reason why many cosmetic product are almost always source of diseases is because of ttechnological limits.Like u know very well, the reason why we cant treat cancer efficiently is because of the incapacity of targeting directly the malfunctionning cells without affecting the normal cells in the process. same with these guys, the technology and knowledge they have is simply not enough sometimes to foresee and address all problem that may occur.
    That is my point of view on the matter
    ..

    ReplyDelete
  76. After reading the blog on the harmful effects of formaldehyde I agree with most of the bloggers that we shouldn’t have to research products that are available freely to the public. It is time consuming and information such as the internet is not always reliable. I believe by law whether a product seems 'friendly' or dangerous it should be tested before it is allowed to be put on the market. Labels should have information of the contents and their effects (good and bad); things like steps on how to use the product to minimize effects of the product could also be place on the labels.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Common questions raised when I asked my friends and family were; if the % is way above recommended allowance why is it not banned and aren’t there any alternatives?
    After doing research I found that in things like the Brazilian Blowout formaldehyde is just a by-product of the product, it is only released when heated. This is then the reason to why the % of the product is not controllable and emphasis on masks being worn needs to be made!!! Regards to alternatives there wasn’t much substantial information but it seems that alternatives are not readily available and have just as bad long-term effects.

    I believe the only way to solve this problem is through education. My cousin who is a beautician said that they learnt about the chemical, how to properly use it and the consequences of it. So why don’t people in these fields take precaution, maybe emphasis of the dangers weren’t made clear. Maybe a solution is to bring the law into these fields of work and employers who don’t wear masks and don’t offer masks to their clients when using these products should lose their qualification. Indemnity forms must be signed by clients not wearing masks. This seems drastic but in the end its people’s quality of life and prevention of harmful health risks need to be made. We should all avoid these types of products at all costs for a better quality of life.

    ReplyDelete
  78. I think a general consensus has been reached, and from what I have heard from people I have spoken to outside the blog they too have similar thoughts on the matter. Whats to be done then? Where do we go from here?
    Firstly we need to raise awareness on the issue. This will lead to a general demand from the public on ways the issue should be resolved. Eventually some one, either the government or the manufacturers will have to take responsibility. I believe change will come about in some shape or form as a result of political pressure, but all of this is only possible IF we can raise awareness on the issue.
    I believe this blog is the first step, talking to people not part of the blog is the second. From most of the comments i have read on the blog I can see almost everyone feels the same as to what needs to be done.
    I'd like to thank Ms Pretorius and to all my fellow bloggers say that we know what must be done.

    ReplyDelete
  79. The solution lies with our government. These companies get away with filling their products with great amounts of formaldehyde and in doing so, trick the consumers. Because Formaldehyde is usually used in its pure form it is often altered and so it becomes difficult for you as the consumer to know if the product contains fomaldehyde by just looking at the list of chemicals used and somestimes as Tarryn stated, it is a by-product.

    In article I recently came across http://www.ewg.org/hair-staightners-that-hide-formaldehyde/ was a list of company names that claimed that their productss were formaldehyde-free but when tests were done, great amounts were infact found.

    The only solution I see is for the government to involve laboratories to test all brands and not rely on their claims that their products are 'safe'. As consumers, we are often forced to rely on what the manufacturers say about the product, and if the manufacturers trick us, our only help lies with the government.

    ReplyDelete
  80. I agree that the responsibility lie with the manufacturers of the product, they have the knowledge about the chemicals the products contain and the influence they have on the enviroment and the human body. Consumers in a whole doesn't necessarily consist of the ability to be able to identify the carcinogens that the products contain, and in fact doesn't know the risk it contains when using them. And as stated in most of the above comments, everyone feels pretty much the same about this. Therefor the manufacturers need to make a greater effort to advise the consumer of the risk factor using a certain product.

    ReplyDelete
  81. I agree that it is the manufacturer's responsibility to ensure that the products they put on the market are safe. Them not doing so only goes to show that they are more interested in making a profit than in the actual health and safety of the people that buy the products. Why should we as consumers have to worry about the safety of the products we use? As stated by some previous comments, not everyone has a scientific background. We should only have safe products on our shelves and this should be regulated by the companies that manufacture them.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Some people feel that it is their own responsibility as consumer, because the cosmetic companies sell products, not reports on possible side-effects or health consequences. They feel the companies provide excellent products - the products deliver fantastic cosmetic/aesthetic results, which is the only desired effect that these companies (and, usually, the consumers) strive towards.

    The products need to be regulated and tested, and only THEN, when it is classified as safe, be distributed to the public. They don't need to indicate all possible dangers, but if any contra-indications apply to the product, it should definitely be indicated.

    ReplyDelete
  83. My Name is Carita van Rooyen
    I went to test this formaldehyde theory in practise - just how bad is the fumes that's produced? So I decided to get myself some acrylic nails :) It looks very beautiful and stunning BUT the smell of the formaldehyde fumes, made my eyes water and caused me great discomfort.
    By this little experiment I could define my opinion better in this debate. MOST OF THE PUBLIC ARE UNAWARE OF THE CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS OF THIS COSMETIC PRODUCT AND ALL OTHERS. It's alarming for me to observe that, especially the South African nation, don't question service at all that much. In buying beauty/cosmetic products we want to take care of ourselves, it is indeed a service that we are paying for and we as consumers need to get the best from the producing and selling companies. AS Alieske mentioned, not all of the public has a biological background and most of the things concerning this field are too difficult to grasp for people educated in other fields. It is thus however, the producing and selling companies' responsibility primarily to inform the public of the dangers of using these products, like the cigarette companies do on their packets - like Nicole mentioned above.
    If the public has been informed of the risks and dangers pertaining to a certain product, the remaining responsibility lies at the consumer to make an informed decision about whether or not they want to take the risk in using these products as Marieke mentioned.
    It is sort of a parallel to the situation of the organic vs. Non-organic foods: people were informed and now, if you prefer organic food you may now go to Woolworths and buy yourself some.
    Yes, of course testing and informing people about these negative effects of these cosmetic products will make them more expensive as ________ mentioned – but cancer is more expensive on the consumer at the end, isn’t it?

    ReplyDelete
  84. I agree totally, it is shocking that this information is withheld from the public. A life and one's health is much more important than beauty. I almost went for the Brazilian Blowout, and thankfully my daughter told me about this blog. The Brazilian Blowout was highly recommended by my hairdresser, and not once was there a warning given about the dangers and side effects of this product. But after this shocking truth I would inform my family and friends about this matter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you Ansie. Its very concerning how all this is witheld from the consumers. Had I not been in this FLG 311 class, I'd have probably never known about the carcinogenic effects of formaldehyde. It makes you wonder what other commonly used products could be harming our health...

      Delete
  85. I was referred to this by Tammy, and decided to do a little of my own research. In the research that I have done on this topic I have found certain sources stating that formaldehyde is not anymore carcinogenic than food that was heated in a plastic container, and other sources stating that contact with formaldehyde could be very carcinogenic. In this day and age where information is so readily available on the internet and with people being able to post absolute nonsense on a website, then how are we as consumers supposed to know what and what not to believe. We are not all scientists and no one can really know what is truth and what is not about every product. How then can it solely be the responsibility of the consumer to research a product to find out whether it is safe or not? I believe the companies need to provide us as consumers with a general idea of safety and somewhere where we can find out from an ethical source whether their product is truly harmful or not.

    ReplyDelete
  86. I was debating this with some people, an interesting point that came up relates to that consumer protection act that was passed...shouldn't this mean that the manufacturers are legally required to reveal such information? Well in any case, it should be the manufacturer's responsibility to inform the general public if there is a health risk, and they should be held liable. Revealing this sort of info is a necessary liability for any company and i doubt it would result in that much loss, people smoke even though they know the risks, and then it wouldn't even be the manufacture/ company's fault. Although with the state of the world today, companies wouldn't want to risk even the tiniest loss, so back at square 1 I guess...Although I personally believe that as a consumer, you should research everything you intend to do/buy , we should no better then to accept things at face value.Although not everyone has our level of education, and in that case, it should be up to teachers, doctors, parents etc. to promote inquisitiveness during childhood. Although even when the consumer is informed, the result and choice remains the same, but even so, we have the right to be informed and protected.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Wow. You all make quite valid points. I think that in order for South Africa to tackle this problem the government should put a regulatory body in place, the equivalent of the FDA (Food and Drug Administration in America and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)in the UK. In this way South African consumers will be assured that the products they're using are not only good quality but safe as well. Because right now, we do not have that assurance at all. With the busy lives we live, there's no time for us as consumers to research the effects of 10+ different compounds contained in just one of our cosmetic products. And to carry out the same research on 5 or more other products would be too tedious and demanding!! We might as well start out own private regulatory bodies!!

    ReplyDelete
  88. I also agree that some internet information is not reliable and this can confuse alot of people. Most people cant distinguish between reliable and un-reliable work and so the wrong information is passed on. I feel like this makes it even more important for the government to try their best to do research and lab testing on the products being inserted in South African markets and this should apply to all countries. This doesnt rule out that we as people have a responsiblity to do our best in being informative and making sure we know what we are using.

    ReplyDelete
  89. I agee with you Thumbiko and Refilwe. But we need to bare in mind that a we can not campare ourselves with America neither wait for the governmrnt to implement certain legislations. We need to be real,this is South Africa, think of te rurals,the uprisen uninspected beaty salons.We who can,and now that we know, rest it our responsibility to chech and inform the un-informed.Science is dynamic,hence if we care, we should update ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  90. I found some interesting information about formaldehyde posted allready in 2010 on this webpage:
    http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/12/22/five-products-that-contain-formaldehyde-is-your-health-at-risk/

    And further shocking information on this webpage:
    http://www.cosmeticsinfo.org/ingredient_details.php?ingredient_id=1083

    I find this shocking because there is few people calling a spade a spade, regarding this ingredient and most of the people are just running/playing around the bush.
    It's like you are leaving your four year old child to go and play soccer on the N1 high way during Easter weekend. <===> analogus for the production companies giving products that may cause detrimental effects in generations to come.
    If something is wrong it's wrong, if something is bad it's bad - no price tag or beauty-tip should shaddow this fact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with Carita what is wrong is wrong and using formaldehyde is wrong due to recent evidence provided by scientists that it is carcinogenic. But I must give it to the production companies that were able to take a cell fixative (formaldehyde) and use it in beauty products to give beautiful looking skin that could last for longer, they provide longativity to the consumers. They show cased beauty that could last for longer and who on mother Earth does not want that?. Consumers got what they wanted which is to look great in public and to not look they age. We as humans we are more concerned about what people think of us and our appearances to the public the side effects well we just close our eyes and hope that it does not happen to us. So my opinion is that the responsibility lies on the production industries to inform the public about the dangers of using their products, they should have campaigns that not only markets they products but also tells the consumers where ever they consume their products that it may harm their lives, and it up to the public to be alert and take care of themsleves at the end of it all it is the consumers decision to buy the product or not to buy it.

      Delete
  91. Thumbiko has presented a very valid point. An effort has to be made to educate the public about the potential dangers of the products they use. Formaldehyde may be one of many other dangerous compounds on our shelves. Obviously the consumers won't be willing to do this so a body has to be put in place to make sure the public is aware and to keep all dangerous products off the market.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i meant producers will not be willing, not consumers.

      Delete
  92. I still think the responsiblity lies with the government. The people of this country elected them to keep us safe (umong other things). They should test ALL the products that are available to the public, because some people might still choose to use certain products even if they know it is harmful to themselves and others. If all of the potentially harmful products are banned, other products will be made that has the same effect without endangering people, while if the harmful products are allowed, no new experiments will be done.

    ReplyDelete
  93. I'm wondering why manufacturing companies keep using a known harmful substance.. are they oblivious to possible law suits? That seems unlikely..

    ReplyDelete
  94. I agree Susan, it certainly seems as though there aren't any repercussions for putting these harmful products on the market. If there were serious consequences for doing so, i think we would see all potentially harmful products being removed from our shelves.

    ReplyDelete
  95. I think cosmetic companies must take responsibility for labelling their products, and the harmful effects that they have. Consumers do have the scientific knowledge to know whether a product is carcinogenic or not. These are the same people that would go to great lengths for beauty. I think the choice of whether or not to use these products should be theirs.

    ReplyDelete
  96. The manufacturing companies need to be honest and come clean with the consumers – PUT IT ON THE LABEL. Tell us what it contains! In a beauty product I suppose a lot of the ingredients will be foreign to us and the names are long and strange and we don’t know how to correctly pronounce them. But it should be common law that ALL products of any nature (especially food) have clearly legible labels that our eyes can see without the use of a magnifying glass. If one of the ingredients is harmful to humans then it should be on the package in red. It is then up to me the consumer to read it and find what that ‘strange’ name means and to decide if I want to use it or not.
    I don’t think promoters/companies should be so proud in advertising products that clearly have harmful ingredients, if we stopped cigarette advertising and soon alcohol will too then advertising these beauty products that have carcinogen (cancer causing agents) should not be allowed either!!!
    It looks like the more informed we are the more un educated we have become and these large companies are partly to blame, they love to hide behind laws, by laws and old regulations that need to be seriously updated.
    Bottom line is – law should say – they have to disclose everything and educate consumers to some of the harmful ingredients.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Although some of the responsibility does fall on the consumer, it is not really their job to research these products, and most consumers won't as people have a tendency to follow the road that is more convenient and it is more convenient for people to just trust and have faith in the credibility of the products that are chosen to go to store without doing any research themselves. The producers of these products know that and that is how they get away with it.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Most people were very unaware of the side effects of the products they are using. As mentioned above, some people are not scientifically advanced and might not know of the dangerous side effects that formalin has. They might be aware that it is in the product but are they truly aware that this product might have more side effects than advantages. As soon as this article was read, many concluded that they would rather use a hair straightner everyday than go for the Brazilian blow way. They then proceeded to conclude that although it is also our responsibility to check the products we use, we do so when shopping for them by reading the labels. When we have our hair or nails done we rely on the people concerned that they know what they are doing and have made sure that their products are not harmful. Few salons are aware of the side effects of the formalin that they are using in their products. It is therefore the pharmaceutical company’s responsibility to carry out routine checks on these products and to inform the public of their side effects. It was also mentioned that it is also the salons responsibility to do a routine check on their product before they make it available to their customers.

    ReplyDelete
  99. really don't think it is the responsibility of the consumer to have to check every product we buy, as it is not only formaldehyde that is currently being used in beauty products that is a carcinogen, but many chemicals such as ethylene oxide which has been found in many soaps and products in America which claim to be 'organic' and 'natural'. The majority of consumers are not educated in the field of chemicals and their effects to our health. It really is firstly the responsibility of the companies and scientists involved in producing the product to research and test their products to see whether they're safe for use; and secondly, because money is always the main objective of companies and there will be many that claim their products are safe when they aren't, regulations and standards should be set in the country which thoroughly test a new product before it is made available on the shop shelves and continuous, routine testing should take place thereafter. It is, in my opinion, the right of the consumer to be able to trust products made available to us in shops. Even if the products which have been tested and are deemed safe are branded with a symbol or something consumers will recognise to say that it has met the standards, it will help in eliminating the unsafe products from the shelves

    ReplyDelete
  100. In reading all the posts and replies, it is clear that an awareness is being created around the harmful effects of formaldehyde particularly as a carcinogen.

    With the background knowledge of formalin containing formaldehyde, it is clear that this chemical is dangerous. It preserves tissue.
    It is that main point that i shared to my peers and family and the most common reaction I got was "Why are they using formaldehyde if they know what it can do?"
    As BeanE and Vishal have enlightened me on the consumer protection act, and Nicole has elaborated on the fact that we still are a developing country but we still need to be provided with information regarding products we use, I have arrived at a conclusion that if an individual is to use a product, the necessary information and warnings should be readily available and should not be as vague and conflicting as I have seen in some comments. Information on the internet should be sufficient to help an individual to make an informed decision whether to continue using the product or stop using it and use alternatives such as zero formaldehyde products which Alex has discovered and, at the same time, spread word and create awareness.

    Because of the amount of small companies and manufacturers limiting or providing vague information about their products in South Africa such as the simply slim debarcle, the tar content in USN fitness supplements and inconsistent concentrations of formaldehyde, I believe that the government needs to step in and become more strict on such alarming practise.

    At the end of the day, the consumer should be provided with reliable and tested information in order to decide whether to use the product or not. Banning formaldehyde is a tedious process for this developing country and it is not advisable as countries overseas use the product but emphasize the importance of warning labels. That should be the main protocol for manufacturers/companies.

    ReplyDelete
  101. There are a lot of issues that are brought to light. The bottom line is that the fact that the product is harmful.

    It is most definitely the responsibility of the producing companies to inform their consumers of all dangers of using the product and what the consequences are. This should be clearly labelled
    In the same sense it is the consumers responsibility to take serious note in what the dangers are and thus making a conscious decision.... "is the product worth the risk! "

    ReplyDelete
  102. As I explained what formaldehyde is to my siblings and friends, a key variable stood out.

    Education
    And although mentioned above, I believe that the importance thereof is greatly undermined.

    It started out with me always explaining what formaldehyde is, exactly, and where this chemical is often found. They were horrified. One of my peers actually mentioned that he was disgusted at the blatant disregard for human safety and the abuse of the fact that not all individuals are as educated as we are. To quote: "Hoe moet die normale persoon wat NIE so geleerd is weet wat dit aan 'n mens doen? Dis nie asof hulle op die houer of met lewering van die diens jou waarsku dat dit moontlik kanker van veroorsaak nie." And I agree fully.

    The irony of this situation is that not less than a week ago we had family visiting us. As the conversation progressed and I make ready to exploit the new found peers to inform about formaldehyde, an interesting topic came to light.

    My 10 year old niece had just received a Brazilian Blow-wave

    I was shocked. No. I was HORRIFIED. How can the parents allow a CHILD to be exposed to such harmful chemicals? And I asked them, to which they replied "Well, how was I supposed to know?" And that is exactly my point.

    How is one supposed to know that a simple beauty
    treatment (or any other product or service for that
    matter) can be potentially life threatening?

    And although my fellow peers have already mentioned the consumer protection act, research indicates that yet another "loophole" in the act can be highlighted. It's effectiveness is proportional to the amount of prior knowledge an individual has regarding said product or service. Yes they do inform us that the service or product contains formaldehyde, but as experience tells us, who really knows what formaldehyde is?

    When one buys a carton of cigarettes (not that I smoke :) ), one not only knows the dangers thereof due the rigid and expensive campaigning the companies now have to abide to, but the follow-up decision is completely within your responsible reach.

    Another example is the simple act of buying and using Handy Andy®. We all have been taught how to use it and not ingest it as it can be very dangerous. And if ingested, a routine is to be followed, prior to a visit to the nearest medical aid center. People do not even know what they use on their nails or hair, let alone the action that needs to be taken to prevent any bodily damage.

    Yes we are a developing country, and yes we do not have all the luxuries that our first world counterparts have, but shouldn't it be the responsibility of our Government to maintain order and constantly be aware of the products and services available in our economy. I fully believe that it is. The amount of possibly dangerous services and products that are available "on-shelf" without people even realizing that they are damaging their bodies is completely inhumane.

    ReplyDelete
  103. I think that responsibility is with both the consumer and the retailer. Retailers should be informed about the types of products they use as well as the disadvantages of using them. They should also make it open to their customers that they may be side effects, whether immediate or over time, of using these products, such as formalin in the Brazillian blowout.
    The consumer also has the responsibilty to enquire about the contents of the most or some of the produts they use, so they can be well aware if something goes wrong

    ReplyDelete
  104. Its the cosmetic companies responsibility to label their products, and the potentially harmful effects thereof. Buyers don't the scientific backround to know whether a product is carcinogenic or not. The choice of whether or not to use the product should be up to the consumer.

    ReplyDelete
  105. When it comes to this matter it sure is a tricky situation:

    -On one side we have the formaldehyde which has been proven to be carcinogenic and that is present in a wide range of products. Most people, educated or not are not aware of this fact and are users of such products, thus exposing themselves and others to the risk. This is because they lack the specialized knowledge on the specific product and its effects or have no access to such information.

    -On the other side we have the producers of these products, and the government and its regulatory entities. They are aware of the fact that formaldehyde used in such products and that they are widely used. Nonetheless they do not raise any awareness of the fact. On this, the companies could lose a lot of profit and this could also affect the governments economy, and the fact that there are no safe levels and much research is needed yet, is left with little ground of action.

    But, nonetheless, my opinion is like many others, that the government should enforce such companies to at least have some sort of warning, like the cigarettes or other such as the side effects or risks on many medical or cosmetic products. It should be the consumers choice, informed choice that is, whether to use or not the product. It is true that many times many people do not even read the labels of the products they use, but in such cases the producing companies would have no blame or fault as they did their part, make the information available for the consumers. It is a shared responsibility, where consumers should also inform themselves of what they are using, but it starts with the producing companies and government to make such information available.

    ReplyDelete
  106. I did abit of research in my neighbourghood what I found was not suprising, people do not even know what is formaldehyde and what it is actually used for in cell culture laboratories and this was about 90 percent of the people I interviewed. The Other 10 percent of the people that I had asked about their products that they consumed which contained formaldehyde, they said it makes no difference to them to know about such things what was important to them was that it delivered good result for that moment espacially in salons with customers busing in and out. Their concern was about keeping their customers happy and their businesses profits increasing. What I concluded was that people (the consumers) need to be knowlegded about this dangerous chemical and the effects it might have on their health. This is the production industries duty to organise these campaigns for the public.

    ReplyDelete
  107. point of the matter is a consumer should LEARN THEIR CONSUMER RIGHTS in South Africa(Consumer protection consists of laws and organizations designed to ensure the rights of consumers as well as fair trade competition and the free flow of truthful information in the marketplace. The laws are designed to prevent businesses that engage in fraud or specified unfair practices from gaining an advantage over competitors and may provide additional protection for the weak and those unable to take care of themselves. Consumer protection laws are a form of government regulation which aim to protect the rights of consumers. For example, a government may require businesses to disclose detailed information about products—particularly in areas where safety or public health is an issue, such as food. Consumer protection is linked to the idea of "consumer rights" (that consumers have various rights as consumers), and to the formation of consumer organizations, which help consumers make better choices in the marketplace and get help with consumer complaints.)

    Other organizations that promote consumer protection include government organizations and self-regulating business organizations such as consumer protection agencies and organizations

    ReplyDelete
  108. Science is not for everyone and other people do not know wath formaldehyde is or even what a carcinogen is. They can go through the product and read it but they would not understand what it means. In this case the sellers should make it easy for the consumers to understand and know how this products are harmful to them

    ReplyDelete
  109. Scince is not for everyone and the sellers do no expect the consumers to be aware of scientific language. Most people do not know what formaldehyde is or what a carcinogen is. In this case the sellers are responsible for their own products and shoud be sure that the product is not harmful before they can put the cosmetics to the shelves.

    ReplyDelete
  110. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Thanks for sharing this blog.I like this blog very much. really such an nice and decent information shared here with awesome stuff.Herbal black dye We are involved in offering an excellent range of superior quality Herbal Black Dye to our clients.

















    ReplyDelete
  112. The dress you wear, the shoes you run with, and the hats that protect you from the sun not only help you in protecting yourself from the forces of nature; they also serve as your statement of fashion that everyone else has been following as well. People seem to be adaptable to the fact that every time fashion icons wear a different set of clothes, they should wear the articles as well. These fads may wear down and die down like clockwork, but people don't seem to mind. Sensitive eyelash glue

    ReplyDelete