The photo below came from a very recent acquisition. It is a lip oil. When I looked at the ingredients there are some that bothered me. From the bottom up are the highest conscience offenders.
Iron oxide is basically rust. Iron oxide Cl 77499 is a form used in cosmetics.
CI 77499 is a black iron oxide (click here) containing iron and oxygen and is used in cosmetics as a coloring agent. It is naturally available from the mineral magnetite however, for use in cosmetics, it is synthetically made to filter out any impurities. In general, iron oxides are long-lasting, once they are applied, they usually don’t need to be reapplied.
The italics and regular print have no real significance except to make it easy to read. The difference between brownish print and blue is the origin of the information. The brownish print is my personal point of view. I believe it is an informed point of view based on experience, education, and common sense. Take it for what it is worth to you. Always be discriminating to your own life experience AND circumstances. That, I believe, is important especially to women. Women are far more vulnerable to opinion by nature. They care and in that they care about many things, including the ability to listen, love, and comfort others in their lives. That quality is not a tough girl issue. Tough girls have problems not addressed well by other women. BUT, that quality does play into vulnerability. It is not necessarily something that should be addressed by the woman, but, the government that protects the woman and all that is important to her gender, including education, career, work, and pay.
In addressing the ingredients in cosmetics I believe the industry is highly sensitive to their acceptance. Cosmetics are an integral part of many women's personal identity and in that women should be able to purchase and use all cosmetic products with a large margin of safety. The word there is large. Often government inspections of the ingredients of anything means it is not largely safe, so much as individual product safe.
Let me explain.
The body, be it woman or man, consumes all sorts of elements everyday, from the oxygen we breath to the food and water we consume. There is an overall tolerance to those elements by a body (weight and age matter) to maintain health and not exposure to potential disease. Other than frank poisoning or microscopic organism exposure most other disease results from exposure and time. The best example in history is tobacco. The covert protections of the product (advertisement dollars) for profit is also historic.
That is a personal choice, but, is it really?
The other example we are now facing is that of the climate crisis. The petroleum industry, even today, is acceptable as a necessary evil by some and generally a great cash flow principle by others.
But, the point is that over time elements OUT OF BALANCE to the body (unable to eliminate them safely) will result in disease. In the case of tobacco it is a breathing difficulty in COPD and grueling treatment and/or death by cancer.
The idea a balance can be achieved is realistic and should be demanded by every governance in the world.
Below is an alternative to check when it comes to cosmetics. The USA has a different standard than the EU. Personally, I see the more stringent standard as the most safe. Look, a person's health and well being is everything. It is longevity and quality of life. A governance that is serious about that highest safety standards have their people at the heart of their decisions and regulations. The governance should never and I do mean never burden the people with danger or the demand for their own expertise to determine the safety margins in their lives.
The European Union takes a more restrictive approach. (click here) Blue 1 (listed as E 133) is permitted, and aluminum lakes of it are allowed, but only in specific food categories with defined maximum concentrations, typically ranging from 20 to 200 milligrams per kilogram of food depending on the product. The EU also sets limits on how much aluminum from lake pigments can end up in the final food, a concern that doesn’t have an equivalent cap in U.S. regulations.
Labeling rules differ too. In the U.S., lakes can be listed with a simplified name like “Blue 1 Lake,” dropping the FD&C prefix. In the EU, manufacturers must declare the color by its full name or E number on the ingredient list.
I am bothered by the word lake (click here) in most any ingredient. It indicates a form of synthesis involvement in the end product that has been used in the cosmetics and/or medications. It raises red flags for me.
See where this is going?
In one instance the product is applied to the skin and the other the product is ingested. It is possible for cosmetic ingredients to be absorbed by the skin. Any lipid product, like oil, will result in absorption and not simply a decoration that sits benignly on the skin and simply wiped or washed off.
What if a woman is taking medication with a Lake Product as well as using it within a lip oil? The burden the body carries is not to question the amount and regulate it. It is not insulin monitored by the pancreas. The body accepts what the person ingests and applies. It is up to the conscience of governance to prevent problems with choices. Personal governance is time consuming and takes time away from quality of life causing anxiety and rather than happiness. This type of governance is affectionately known as a "nanny state." The macho political voice considers that an insult while those understanding the implications of a nanny state welcome the oversight and worry free living.
Tartrazine (TZ, also known as FD&C Yellow No. 5 or E102) (click here) is a synthetic, water-soluble yellow food dye widely used in the food and pharmaceutical industries. Some studies have associated TZ with allergic reactions, especially among people with dye sensitivities or pre-existing allergies. Recent research also suggests a possible link between TZ consumption and the worsening of behavioral disorders, especially in children, including symptoms such as hyperactivity, irritability, restlessness, and sleep disturbances. Experimental studies in laboratory animals have highlighted potential risks associated with prolonged or high-dose exposure, including toxic effects on the nervous system and liver function. In addition, increasing evidence indicates that TZ can induce oxidative stress (OS) by increasing the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which can contribute to cellular damage and inflammation. Although the evidence remains inconclusive, there are recommendations to limit the intake of synthetic food dyes, especially in children’s diets. The purpose of this review is to examine the potential toxic effects on health of tartrazine by analyzing findings from experimental studies in cell cultures and laboratory animals, as well as correlations observed in humans. We focus on documented adverse reactions, including possible neurotoxic, hepatotoxic, oxidative, and behavioral effects. Through this, we aim to contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the risks associated with exposure to this synthetic food dye.
No matter what one called it, FD&C Yellow 5 or tartrazine it has been linked to birth defects.
There is also a Brilliant Blue (E133) made in India. (click here)
Food colorant brilliant blue (click here) causes persistent functional and structural changes in an in vitro simplified microbiota model system
FD&C Blue No. 1 Aluminum Lake has been regarded as a long term exposure poison in the past. The word salt in this formulation does not refer to sodium chloride, NaCl, table salt.
The color additive FD&C Blue No. 1 (click here) is principally the disodium salt of ethyl [4-[p-[ethyl (m-sulfobenzyl) amino]-α-(o-sulfophenyl) benzylidene] - 2,5 -cyclohexadien - 1 - ylidene] (m-sulfobenzyl) ammonium hydroxide inner salt with smaller amounts of the isomeric disodium salts of ethyl [4-[p-[ethyl(p-sulfobenzyl) amino]-α-(o-sulfophenyl) benzylidene]-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene] (p-sulfobenzyl) ammonium hydroxide inner salt and ethyl [4-[p-[ethyl (o-sulfobenzyl) amino] - α - (o -sulfophenyl) benzylidene]-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene] (o-sulfobenzyl) ammonium hydroxide inner salt.
I think I've made my point. The elimination of synthetic food dye as a problem in modern day society is a huge mistake and has happened over time by governance administrations reaching for profits over people. The list here can be gone through element by element. Good luck in considering this a simple issue in a complicated life of 2026. It takes time people should not have to spend resulting in the higher protections of human body chemistry to eliminate disease.
