Weblog
Sunday, 20 January 2008
-
Blogger Identity Crisis!
Hi Friends,
I know for shame I have been AWAY for so long. Of course life got in the way but more importantly, ever since I got into reading labels I went on a rampage looking for ONLY GREEN products. HOWEVER, when I started back last summer it wasn't such a HUGE TREND like it is now so I had very limited options (BURT's BEEs?). Happy to report that there's more products out there since it seems like many people are getting concerned about the environment as well as thinking twice about what's actually in their food and cosmetics.
Yet it's still hard to find "green" cosmetics because either they aren't good or you are extremely limited. So I'm definitely not completely green, but I'd like to incorporate as many great healthy-friendly and eco-friendly products as possible. BUT OF COURSE, I finally decided it's not a perfect world so I won't eliminate all NON-HEALTHY and ECO-FRIENDLY stuff on my blog or in my life. I'll just try my best since that's the best I can do until BIG BUSINESS decides to have a heart or rather the GREEN movement gets so big that they realize it's their new cash cow (i.e. Clorox just bought Burts Bees, L'Oreal bought Body Shop etc.)
Basically, NO MORE BLOGGER IDENTITY CRISIS.
Disclaimer: I am not encouraging everyone to only by organic, but rather it just happens to be that most products that are organic seem to have less harmful chemicals. Again, this isn't always the case so please read the back of the label always.
Here's two recent products I've tried..
1. Origins Foaming Facial Wash from Organic Line
This reminds me of Cetaphil without the parabens and with some foam. It's a milky liquid infused with aloe and olive oil. So far, I like it since it's gentle, doesn't have parabens (chemical preservative linked with cancer), and does a fairly good job of cleaning your face. If you are a heavy makeup-er, definitely follow up with a toner.
Origin's Facial Moisturizer from Organics Line
For awhile, I was using Burt's Bee's Radiance Creams (night and day) with Royal Jelly but somehow they just didn't seem to be able to moisturize my dry winter skin. So I was very happy to find another alternate moisturizer that felt like a REGULAR creamy moisturizer instead of a goopy honey texture with Burts. I really like this lightweight moisturizer since it absorbs quickly and is gentle. I think anyone skin type would be fine with this.
J (my bf) loves it. He actually used the first bottle all by himself. My only gripe is that if you have extremely dry skin, you probably need to find something creamier. I wish they had a cream version. Also in my opinion this product is pretty pricey for such a small tube ($42). Lastly, the smell is very ORIGIN/ AVEDA-ish, you know what I mean, all infused with herbs. Either you'll love the smell or hate it. I'd definitely test it out before you purchase it because the fragrance could definitely turn you off.
3. L'Oreal Voluminous Mascara (Waterproof)
Pros= doesn't clump. That's it.
Cons = mascara is like hairspray it's suppose to instantly keep every hair in place-- this definitely does not. I am so glad I didn't go buy the non-waterproof version since waterproof dries faster.
Wednesday, 14 November 2007
-
Let's start a revolution!
it's catching on and i hope it will also save some lives.
Here's a great article on the green movement in makeup!
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/21758430/
Friday, 12 October 2007
-
Lead in Lipstick--not surprised.
Group raises alarm over lead levels in lipstick
Updated Fri. Oct. 12 2007 4:14 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
A U.S. consumer group has found lead levels in some lipsticks that exceeded the recommended levels for candy.
The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics had 33 brand-name red lipsticks tested.
About 60 per cent had detectable levels of lead, ranging from 0.03 to 0.65 parts per million (ppm). The remainder had no detectable levels of lead.
Here are some of the products with the highest lead levels:
- L'Oreal Colour Riche "True Red" - 0.65 ppm
- L'Oreal Colour Riche "Classic Wine" - 0.58 ppm
- Cover Girl Incredifull Lipcolor "Maximum Red" - 0.56 ppm
- Christian Dior Addict "Positive Red" - 0.21 ppm
One-third of those brands containing lead exceeded the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's limit of 0.1 ppm for lead in candy.
The group said that limit was established to protect children from ingesting lead.
"It's unconscionable that women should have to worry about lead in lipstick," said the campaign's Stacy Malkan. "We want the companies to immediately re-formulate their products to get the lead out and ultimately, really we need to change the laws and force these companies to be accountable to women's health."
However, a trade group representing the cosmetics industry said the report is nothing new and that women have nothing to worry about.
"I think the levels are actually quite low. I consider these to be trace levels, really low and not something that would present a cause for concern," said John Bailey of the Cosmetic, Toiletry, and Fragrance Association.
The cosmetics industry argues that women don't ingest very much of the lipstick they wear.
Malkan argues that cosmetics can be made without lead.
The group said that lead, a neurotoxin, can cause a host of problems, particularly in children. Pregnant women and young children are particularly vulnerable, it said.
In a statement, Bailey said lead is not intentionally added to cosmetics, adding, "Despite the negligible levels of lead found in some lipsticks, cosmetic companies are committed to reducing that level even further."
The FDA sets strict limits on lead levels used in lipstick colours, "and actually analyze most of these to ensure they are followed," the statement said. "The products identified in the (CSC) report meet these standards."
In response, a Cover Girl representative said the company stands behind its products. L'Oreal said its products are tested and meet U.S. Food and Drug Administration standards. The maker of Dior says the only lead in its products are naturally occurring and harmless.
Friday, 05 October 2007
-
KISS--Keep It Simple Stupid!
As many of you know, I'm a reformed makeup junkie. I read labels and I try my best when I can to stay away from products that contain harmful ingredients. But, I admit it can be confusing when all the scary ingredients look and sound like xuyjgsnfgjsf;sld--How is a girl suppose to remember this when she's at CVS trying to figure out which cleanser won't kill her.
I found the Cancer Prevention Coalition has a really compact list that is easy for you to print out and toss into your purse for any quick ingredient checking when you are shopping.
Here's the link: http://www.preventcancer.com/consumers/cosmetics/narita.htm
Or just see below:Carcinogenic Hazards of Mainstream Industry Personal Care and Cosmetics Products
Product Ingredients and Contaminants with Evidence of Carcinogenicity
HIDDEN CARCINOGENS
Contaminants
ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES: in, LANOLIN
ARSENIC, LEAD, BLUE 1, GREEN 3: in, COAL TAR DYES
DIOXANE: in, PEG, POLYSORBATE, LAURETHS, ETHOXYLATED ALCOHOLS
CRYSTALLINE SILICA: in, AMORPHOUS SILICATESNitrosamine Precursors
DEA
TEA
BRONOPOL
PADIMATE OFormaldehyde Releasers
BRONOPOL
QUATERNIUM 15
DIAZOLIDINYL UREA
IMIDAZOLIDINYL UREA
DMDM HYDANTOINOvert Carcinogens
ONE THING I WOULD ADD TO THIS LIST IS PARABENS!!!!! ANYTHING THAT HAS PARABENS IN IT IS BAD--remember they are known to produce tumors in animals.
DEA
TALC
FLUORIDE
SACCHARIN
CRYSTALLINE SILICA
COAL TAR DYES
BLUE 1
GREEN 3
PARA-PHENYLENEDIAMINE
Wednesday, 26 September 2007
-
Can you help a sister out?
Hello! I know there's some xanga savy people out there so definitely help me out. I've had this blog for probably over 2 years and I have alot of enteries. I would love to be able to have something on the side where I could get a table of contents so people can readily access past posts. I do not want to shell out for premium so if anyone has any ideas how I can do this and make the blog better, please let me know.
Thanks, AB


