Printable View
ok I found out about this site through my Body+soul mag. It shocked me. Products I thought were good aren't!
http://cosmeticsdatabase.com/index.php
I am throwing out a lot of my lip balm keeping the badgers pass though. That is a good one at least! And Dr bronner's! Knottedyet already knew this!
I'm one of those strange women who rarely uses lotion or other things on my skin. It makes not one bit of difference for very long on my dry winter skin, so I stopped wasting my money long ago.
I have occasionally wondered when they would find stuff like that can be bad for you, too.
Karen
I'm partial to lead based Mexican lip balm.
Best remedy for super dry skin: olive oil. When you get out of the shower, put it on your still wet skin and then towel off. It works wonders. Best deodorant: Thai Deodorant stone. I think it's some salt, but a million times better than aluminum whatever they use in conventional antiperspirants.
on a side note, heard a rumor that Nalgenes make you sterile....
You are to funny!Quote:
Originally Posted by zencentury
http://www.thegreenguide.com/doc/114/nalgeneQuote:
Originally Posted by pinkychique
A workmate's friend makes the following hand stuff down in Margaret River here in Western Australia...mmmm it smells mmmmm
http://www.margaretriversavi.com/soc...txtcategory=30
Love my Dr. Bronner's! Wash my bod, my hair, my clothes, my dishes, my dog, all with the same bottle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandi
The lip balm (Dr. Bronner's/Sun Dog Magic) is my favorite lip balm of all time. (much better on my lips than Burt's Bees, which is now owned by Chlorox anyway)
I like the Dr. Bronner's/Sun Dog Magic lotion, but not as much as I like my plain grape seed oil (face and body) or plain olive oil (hands and feet)
Interesting. This site requests users to petition Congress to require manufacturers to prove the safety of their products before they are allowed to sell them.
One of the items in the petition is:
All chemicals used in cosmetics and personal care products must pass a strict safety test that protects the most vulnerable in the population, before products are allowed to be sold.
So campers, what do you suppose a "strict safety test" would involve?
Could it be ... animal testing ????? :eek:
yup.
Most likely. I'd rather have educated consumers than stricter testing laws. Whichever is done, though, it's always an uphill battle. I remember reading about what a battle it was over listing ingredients... whew!
Well, hell's bells, already two of my four cosmetics are tested on animals it seems. I am not a fan of that practice. How cruel!! Test on humans if you are so unsure; I need to make an extra buck or two.Quote:
Originally Posted by jobob
On another note, better start hoarding the bunnies so labs can't find them.
Unlike a lot of environmental additives (paints, fabric treatments, plastics etc.), the artificial chemicals in personal care products already are tested on animals. That's where the EWG data comes from. They're tested on animals, found to be dangerous, and passed for human use anyhow. Companies that use chemicals that someone else has tested can claim that their finished products aren't tested on animals. Completely natural products like Dr. Bronner's or pure coconut oil get waived because they're grandmothered in as Generally Recognized as Safe. (Although on a side note, the pharmaceutical companies are now testing natural foods on animals so that they can make health claims. :mad:)Quote:
Originally Posted by jobob
Some people (i.e. for-profit corporations) have instilled the idea that "progress" means abandoning ancient ingredients and traditions, and that anyone opposed to that abandonment is a "Luddite" (which the history and reality of Luddism is actually another discussion...). In reality, it's more about selling people Vytorin because their patent on Zocor is about to expire. The lotion in the colorful plastic package at Wal-Mart (or the natural food store) doesn't necessarily work any better than the ugly weed growing in your backyard, or the nondescript jar of oil in the baking aisle.
Occasionally there is room for improvement, and for products that really do show some practical value, there's been a lot of advances recently in in vitro testing on human tissue. Yes, those advances do unfortunately involve comparisons with animal testing. But IMO the discussion about animal testing for pharmaceuticals and surgical techniques - whatever your position on that - is a completely different discussion from the question of animal testing for cr*p that they just want to sell you for around the house.
I have super coarse hair. Would the bronner's make it really frizzy? Do you use conditioner?Quote:
Originally Posted by KnottedYet
That's pretty interesting. Looks like the Cetaphil sunscreen/moisturizer that I use may actually cause cancer AND is tested on animals...
I'm somewhat skeptical about the real danger. And as far as animal testing is concerned, I hate it, but honestly, if you've ever used a prescription or OTC drug or taken a supplement, somehow, you've benefited from animal testing.
True, very true. In some ways i guess animal testing is a necessary evil in a lot of ways. You would not want your child to be the first one to use a new thing and have it kill them or perm damage them. Still don't like the cosmetic side of testing for stuff we really do not need. Meds I understand. Perfum,lotions etc....I don't. Besides there are enough out there now can we stop the testing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrea