I’m Just Saying …

Last month I wrote a series on The Debate over Natural vs. Synthetic Cosmetic Ingredients. Later I read a piece by Nick Morante on one of the industry forums I subscribe to. Nick logged over 30 years as a formulation chemist with Estee Lauder before striking out as an independent cosmetic company consultant and writer.

I find his articles to be very cogent, enjoyable and to the point. In his article, Mineral Powders – True or False?, he addressed the question of whether mineral powders are really made up of all minerals as some companies claim their products to be.

He said the article was “not an attempt to criticize all the products currently on the market making [all mineral] claims, but a look at the chemistry behind the ingredients used in making them.”

As a “for instance”, Nick pointed out that any iron oxide ingredients added to cosmetics for use in the United States are required by the FDA to be synthesized in a lab. Why? – In order to limit the amount of heavy metal contaminants such as lead, mercury and arsenic.

Doesn’t that really make you think we’re generally better off relying on qualified chemists with FDA oversight to formulate the products we put on our bodies? Lead, mercury and arsenic are certainly all-natural ingredients, but I don’t want to smear them on my skin.

I’m just saying …

You can read the full text of Nick’s article here.

Tags: natural cosmetics, natural vs synthetic ingredients, FDA oversight, heavy metals in cosmetics, mineral powder makeup claims, , cosmetic formulation, cosmetic safety, mineral makeup ingredients