BLOG.BOTANICABASICS.COM

Toxic Baby Alert!

Sandra — 2010-09-06T07:01:00Z

I've been swamped with catching up, making and packaging products to get ready for the coming-up-fast Fall Festival Craft Shows Season and the coming-in-faster-than-anticipted Holiday Open Housees and Gift Season. And somedays, my health refuses to cooperate with me and my to-do list. I've even had to take a couple of weeks off from my Farmers Markets. Not wanting to leave anyone hanging though, I've reached out to esteemed industry persons get help to further inform and educate my readers on the threats and perils facing the Handcrafted/Handmade Cosmetics Industry. We are under threat from spurious over regulation and reporting that will do absolutely nothing to make cosmetics safer -Cosmetics, which by the way have a near perfect safety record. We are under attack from reckless scare mongers with hidden agendas who use junk science, no science and outright fear mongering to help draft badly written proposed legistlations. The latest threat is known as The Safe Cosmetics Acts of 2010, HR 5786.

I give you today's guest repost from Robert Tisserand, an internationally recognised pioneer in essential oils and aromatherapy since the late 1960's. His wisdom and sacastic wit so accurately hits many nails dead on. There will be more from him, I promise. And how cool is this: When I started my blog a year and a half ago, I named one of my catagories -for my sarcstic side- " I'm Just Saying..." When Mr. Tisserand started his blog last January, guess what he named it? I knew instantly why and what he meant.

This article post is reprinted with the kind permission of Robert TIsserand 2010.

Toxic Baby Alert!

Concern: Inhalation of toxic gases

Target of alert: Pregnant mothers

Introduction
One of the greatest health threats to an unborn child may come from a totally unexpected source. A CFSC (Campaign for Scaring Consumers) directive is currently being formulated to advise pregnant women not to change the diapers of their babies, or even be in the same room when a baby discharges body wastes.

After an extensive literature review, the CFSC is advising that there is a high risk of fetal toxicity following the mother’s inhalation of the chemicals occurring in feces and gastrointestinal tract gases, since these contain significant quantities of hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide, methane and ammonia. Once in the bloodstream, these gases pass with ease from the maternal blood circulation to that of the fetus. Their adverse effects have been documented as follows:

Hydrogen sulfide
An insidious, unforgiving and highly toxic gas that is heavier than air. At low concentrations it smells like rotten eggs, but at higher concentrations it deadens the sense of smell so that no odor can be detected, and it may cause dizziness, unconsciousness and death. It is both an irritant and asphyxiant. Locally, it irritates the mucous membranes of the eyes and respiratory tract.

Systemically, it affects the central nervous system and may inhibit the brain’s respiratory center, which is generally fatal. There is little experimental or human health data on long-term exposure to low concentrations of hydrogen sulfide (Beauchamp et al 1984). All reported human cases of acute hydrogen sulfide poisoning have arisen from inhalation exposure (Smith & Gosselin 1979).

Carbon dioxide
A completely odorless and tasteless (and therefore even more insidious) gas that is heavier than air. It displaces the oxygen supply in the bloodstream, and can thus cause unconsciousness and death.

Methane
A capricious, unpopular and highly-strung gas that can create an explosive atmosphere. It also displaces oxygen.

Ammonia
A pernicious and unashamedly aggressive gas that is lighter than air. It has a pungent smell that is toxic in very high concentrations (Appelman et al 1982) and can irritate the eyes and respiratory tract (Petrova et al 2008). Ammonia also displaces oxygen in the bloodstream.

Toxic synergy
A combination of hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide (neurotic, bordering on psychopathic…) has been known to cause death from asphyxiation. Chronic exposure is associated with increased neurotoxicity and respiratory disease (Hansell & Oppenheimer 2004).

Discussion
Gases like hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide and methane are made by the breaking down of undigested food in the large intestine. Thus created in the deepest confines of the digestive tubery, these gases have to escape somehow. Most people release 1 to 3 pints a day, in an average of 14 “episodes”. Between 30% and 62% of healthy people produce methane. Most foods that contain carbohydrates (starches and sugars) can cause gas (Shahakian et al 2010). Feeding a baby with any form of milk is unwise, since it contains sugars, and is therefore likely to cause the baby to produce gases that may affect its unborn sibling.

Conclusion
The CFSCs expert advisers are acutely concerned over this problem, and urgently invite your comments before formulating appropriate legislation. In the meantime, pregnant mothers are advised to avoid exercise, naked flames and carbohydrate-containing foods, and/or to live apart from babies, young children or, as a precautionary measure, anyone else at all. Further information can be found in the CFSC’s Fetal Advisory Regulation Team Fatal Feco-Fetal Effluent Affliction Report (FARTFFFEAR).

References
Appelman LM, Ten Berge WF, Reuzel PG 1982 Acute inhalation toxicity study of ammonia in rats with variable exposure periods. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 43:662-665

Beauchamp et al 1984 A critical review of the literature on hydrogen sulfide toxicity. Critical Reviews in Toxicology 13(1): 25-9

Hansell A, Oppenheimer C 2004 Health hazards from volcanic gases: a systematic literature review. Archives of Environmental Health 9: 628-639

Petrova M, Diamond J, Schuster B et al 2008 Evaluation of trigeminal sensitivity to ammonia in asthmatics and healthy human volunteers. Inhalation toxicology 20:1085-109

Sahakian AB, Jee SR, Pimentel M 2010 Methane and the gastrointestinal tract. Digestive Diseases & Sciences 55:2135-2143

Smith RP, Gosselin RE 1979 Hydrogen sulfide poisoning. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 21: 93-97

Post-script
Some possibly tasteless light relief in the midst of heavy wrangling about the safety or otherwise of cosmetics (see my previous blog). Let me add that I am very concerned to hear that all kinds of nasty toxic chemicals have been found in the cord blood of babies by the Environmental Working Group. Let me also add that, with the exception of lead (naturally present in the iron oxides used to make lipstick red) and synthetic musk compounds, none of the 15 chemicals listed by the EWG is likely to be either found in or derived from cosmetics.

Totally Not Soap & Cosmetics Related

Sandra — 2010-08-20T08:34:00Z

OMG! This is one of the funniest facebook themed send ups I've ever seen.

OMG WWII on FACEBOOK !

As I told others, it's pretty dead on, in a warped, social networking kind of way. This is some funny stuff. And lord knows we've all needed some humor these few months.

Enjoy

What's The Real Agenda And Who Benefits From It? Pt 2

Sandra — 2010-08-11T10:35:00Z

OR Who are the Keyser Sözes of The Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010?

"...The EFFECT of this legistlation is not to put you out of business. The PURPOSE of this legislation is to put you out of business."

I was floored by this. I was just stunned. I had not seen it that way. And it made me jam on my brakes to a screeching, treadmarks of burned rubber halt. And I thought about what my BFF said. And I thought some more. I've been thinking about what they said and this frak'd up from the floor, wrong on so many levels piece of potential legislation for about 2 weeks now. It made me ask myself "Okay, who will benefit from this? Who are the usual suspects?" That thought then flashed in my mind one of my favorite movies: The Usual Suspects . If you've seen the movie, you know what I'm talking about. If you haven't seen it or have forgotten it's plot (it came out in 1995), it's about a criminal getting revenge while playing a game of cat and mouse and hiding in plain sight. And the scene that literally flashed in my mind was when Kevin Spacey's character Verbal Kint talks about his boss, Keyser Söze.

"...Nobody ever believed he was real. Nobody ever knew him or saw him or anybody who ever worked directly for him. But to hear Kobayashi tell it, anybody could have worked for Söze. You never knew. That was his power. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist".

To truly understand where I'm coming from, you really should see that whole scene. And then the ending scene of the movie. (I've linked, not embedded, because the scenes goes into some NC17 violence and might make some uncomfortable. You've been warned).  The first scene describes how Keyser Söze came to be who he is. And the second, how he disappears, with most none the wiser. While the story's characters are gangsters, thugs, bad cops and murderers, the idea is the same. These scenes are telling and perfectly describe what I think is going on with this potential legislation. Watching them again and thinking about what my BFF said made me realize there is DEFINITELY something else going on behind the scenes of this proposed legislation. I think it's a plan to go out, reek havoc, decimate and destroy the competition. Like Keyser Söze. Create shields and walls and blinds around you and always have them wondering if you actually do exist. Make them think it someone or something else. Never deny, never admit, stay off the main grid, don't protest too much, but cower enough to make them think you're scared too. Get others -others who may not even know you or your agenda exist- to do your dirty work.

So who are the usual suspects?   I started to think about all the previously mentioned infighting, bi#ching, moaning and lawsuits that has been going on back and forth over the last 10 years between the USDA Certified Organic Cosmetics players, the Natural Cosmetics and Natural Based Cosmetics players (there's a difference) and also the fakers who put the word natural or organic on every label they possibly can with almost nothing "natural" in it. Then I added in a few of the small, medium and larger sized Natural/Natural Based players who have been bought out or by the Big Time Multi-national players and said same players who are now starting to formulate more natural based products on their own. Then I factored in who in each group is really buddy buddy and are big supporters and contributors to The Environmental Working Group (EVG) and The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (CFSC) (web links purposely not included for these thugs). That was a hard one as the EWG money trail is slim pickings. I've been saying for 5 years "follow the money".

Then I factored in the EU companies who fit into all my listed categories as SCA 2010, in it's current draft legally also affects them with the same requirements. Then I added the importers from the rest of the world, ditto the same requirements. These last players, sadly also include the countries who have histories of having confiscated products, knock off/counterfeited products and deadly tainted products that run the gamut from prescription drugs, OTC drugs, cosmetics, food and even drywall. It gave me a huge headache. Thankfully, mainstream media reports on many of these things. And the Cosmetics Industry trade papers are a wonderful source of all cosmetic information, good, bad and ugly. Both the North American and EU versions also have sections which are devoted to developing markets in what's called BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India And China). The FTC and FDA notifications are also quite a read some days. Yes, the internet is my friend.

Next I started thinking about just who all would benefit from the extreme diminishment of the Handcrafted Cosmetics Industry. Actually, who all would benefit the most from it's almost complete demise? First, let's list who WON'T benefit from SCA 2010:

Besides the US Handcrafters, not my Canadian or other foreign Handcrafter Brethren who have US sales. They're not selling hundreds or thousand of bars or jars at a pop to US importers/distributors. (And if they have hundreds of stores world wide, they're not handcrafters, I don't care what they say. You know who I'm talking about, rhymes with slush. And while they'd have to follow the law too, they can afford to hire lots of bodies to keep up with this proposed idiocy). The average foreign Handcrafters are more or less in the same leaky and listing boat as US Handcrafters right now.

So just who would benefit from SCA 2010?

Let's start with foreign cosmetic manufacturers that already are or will be selling hundreds or thousands of bars or jars at a pop to US importers and distributors. Then there's that coming tidal wave of cheap, badly formulated, made with illegal ingredients crap that will come pouring in even more from Mexico, Asia, Africa and the middle east. THOSE will be the ones we have to worry about.   The FDA will not be able to keep up with the SCA 2010 paper and computer generated work to accurately keep track of the importers and their ingredients declarations. How will they be able to keep track of all the foreign importers? Will they create a monthly or quarterly "Allowed" list? And if they do, who will enforce this list and more importantly where and how will it be enforced?   Yep, another blog post for another day. So who enforces SCA 2010 on the import side? The FDA is stretched extremely thin and needs to step up it's game and keep track of, keep ahead of and catch the tainted food and drugs, both domestic and imported. And with regard to the imports, by it's own admission the FDA cannot and will never have enough people to inspect every shipment at every port of entry, land, air or sea. From their lips to God's ear. So I'm hazarding a guess the FDA will probably give the importers more leeway than they'll give the US cosmetic companies. That also includes Handcrafters.  I also think the FDA will just "trust" the importers to properly, promptly and accurately fill out the required forms and declarations on ingredients. Yeah, okay, riiiiight.

Can we say heparin, wheat gluten and toothpaste? Oh my! 3 products that go INTO your body. And that's just 3 bad imports that we know about. Or were told about. And on the US side don't get me started on the uber scary, mind boggling peanut products recall . The FDA can't keep up and no matter how much money is tossed at it, the world is now a fast moving, gotta get it now importing and exporting global economy and there aren't enough and never will be enough Inspectors, Agents or lab techs to check the imported and domestic food and drugs quickly. Operative word there is quickly. Now there are those who want to add cosmetics to an already over loaded ship? The Cosmetic Industry is not making products to harm their customers! Oh, and we all know any "fees" collected from cosmetic companies will be spread out amongst the whole agency, not just on the cosmetics arm.

So who on the US side would benefit from SCA 2010, our demise and taking away the customer's right of product choice?

Now before I continue, I must disclose that while I applaud many of the goals set by the below listed NGOs (non governmental organizations) regarding "Naturals" and "Organic" Certification, I am also suspect of these same organizations. Why? Sigh. It's just a feeling I have:

1. Most of the certification standards were set by a compilation of well known cosmetic companies that got together to make the standards and it's in essence having your competition "okay" you.

2. The cost of certifying is very high per sku (stock keeping unit). A company has to, no needs to have a certain level of income in order to afford them. So if you don't qualify on the money end, you aren't big or selling enough yet and won't be able to join/get certified if you are not able to afford their fees. You usually have to be seriously cranking out lots of product and selling them or have investors or some type of financing sitting in the bank to afford the cost of the certifications. So once again, as for the certification, most indies, micros and small cosmetics companies don't even think about putting their horse in that race. But looking at most of the founding members of these certification orgs. and even their current members companies, I think this list may be a very telling feature.

3. I truly believe who your parent company is (if there is one) should be factored in before getting a Natural or Certified Organic certification.

So, in order of vocalization and media attention regarding cosmetic "Natural" or "Organic" standards, whom all we haven't heard from regarding the SCA 2010?

Leadership from these Certifying Agencies:

The Natural Products Association
While I did read in a trade news article a quote from one of their members on how they thought SCA 2010 was throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as of this posting I have not found any official statement anywhere on the NPA's official site where they say either yea or nay on the proposed SCA 2010.

The Oasis Standard
As of this post I have not found any official statement anywhere on their website as to a yea or nea on SCA 2010.

NSF International , The Public Health and Safety Company
While they are truly a neutral certification organization, since they have set standards for certification, the should state their position.   As of this post I have not found any official statement anywhere on their website as to a yea or nea on SCA 2010.

And many of their members and the certified companies. Most of whom started out just like me. As Handcrafted Soap and Cosmetics Makers. Many of these certified companies will go bye-bye if SCA 2010 passes. They will have even heavier mountains of regulations, requirements and information gathering and submitting to carry than the load they already are.

Now if I am wrong about any of them, someone please politely (and if it's not polite it won't be published and the addy will be banned- I don't tolerate trolls!) correct me and point me to the links were they have publicly posted their official views. I would like to be wrong. I really, really would.

So who else would benefit from our demise and the taking away the customer's right of buying choice?

Oh yes, last but not least, some private companies who have the USDA "Certified Organic" seal (who shall remain nameless as they have deeper pockets than me and who ironically get a bit pissy when they get criticized). Some whom I would call bullies. While I applaud them on reaching for and attaining what some consider the holy grail of goals, they really do need to stop being such mean, nasty, arrogant bullies in the Cosmetic Industry. Thinking of one in particular, I think their daddy would roll in his grave if he knew how his heirs were behaving. He built his company with a quality product and by love of mankind, not by bullying. To them and others I say yes, some companies are not to your standards or even mine, and others do greenwash and "natural" the hell out of their products without it being in any significant quantities or any at all. But ultimately, the consumer will decide their fates. The petty mean spirited actions, holier-than-thou attitudes, the constant bully pulpits and continual lawsuits do not endear any of you to the industry as a whole and it might actually be causing you to lose current and potential customers. I know, because they are buying from Handcrafters.

For every bar of soap, jar of body scrub, tube of foot balm or bottle of lotion I'm selling, that means someone IS NOT BUYING YOURS . Multiply that the thousands of micro and small Handcrafted Soap and Cosmetic Makers and companies in the US. See us at the Farmers Markets, the local Fairs and Festivals. Their own retail stores, their ability to get into Natural Food stores large and small in their region. Look us up on esty, artfire , indiepublic and all the other handcrafted marketplaces on the web. Look us up on our industry networks.  The Handcrafted SoapMakers Guild has 4631 as of this post.  The IndieBeauty Network has 6000+ members. We created our niche. We've created our jobs . We make what the public wants to buy, and we make it honestly and ethically. Are we cutting into your profits? Maybe. Are we sorry if we are?  NO. There are thousands of Handcrafted Cosmetic Manufacturers, hundreds of their Suppliers and millions of a buying public. 308 million in the USA -and rising. 7 billion people on the planet -and rising. No few entities can sell to them all, no matter how hard they try. Though I guess a few of you can give it a really good try if you get rid of most of the small, localvore and internet competition.

Well, I've listed all the players and I can't pierce the veil. It's really thick and I think the answer is in this list of suspects. It's in there, somewhere.  But I haven't found it...yet. But perhaps with combined efforts my fellow Handcrafters, our suppliers and industry advocates can, armed with the knowledge that our potential demise is not an incidental or accidental casualty of war. It is a deliberate attack on our segment of the industry.

"...The EFFECT of this legistlation is not to put you out of business. The PURPOSE of this legislation is to put you out of business."

So all this really just boils down to just one question:

Who all is the Keyser Söze of The Safe Cosmetics Act 2010?

What's The Real Agenda And Who Benefits From It? Pt 1

Sandra — 2010-08-10T08:54:00Z

In the midst of this urgent issue of knocking back the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 (for brevity, I'll just refer to it as the SCA 2010), I've found that many don't realize this idiocy will not do one thing to make cosmetics "safer" for consumers. The Cosmetic Industry is not making products to harm their customers. Any who did that would go broke in under a year. What the SCA seems to be attempting is to be a combined American form or mirror of the EU's Cosmetic Directive and REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemical substances). Try reading those and keep your head from hurting. We should not subscribe to the EU governmental body's view of "The Precautionary Principle" regarding cosmetics. These materials have been tested. So much so that there is another whole social justice arm demanding that the raw materials and the finished cosmetics stop being tested on animals. So either they are tested or they aren't tested. Will the various protesting, ranting and chanting masses please make up your minds? And how many even know the EU banned animal testing?

So now the EU has the Precautionary principle. And there are those who want to shove that down America's throat. And to repeat myself, the US Cosmetic Industry is not making products to harm their customers. The EU governance, with it's massive complexity of many different nations with many different cultures and languages has nighmareish mazes of bureaucratic legislations, which in turn have severely stifled small business creation and much innovation in many industries and have nanny stated out much original thought and creativity. Why bother to create when it's already legislatively set, cut and dry as to what you need, don't need, can have or even told what you want, whether you want it or not. That may be a bit harsh, but it's how I and others view it. Americans don't want EU style laws and regulations. We want American inovations. We need to get back to that and fast. But I digress.

The SCA 2010 was written with what seems to be some major help from The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (CFSC), a quasi-to-bad-to-non-science backed, vocal, guerilla, scare tactic arm of The Environmental Working Group (EWG) (web links purposely not included for these thugs). The EWG/CFSC sponsors and their lobbyists claim it will make cosmetics "safer". What many of them refuse to acknowledge or maybe don't want to admit and many others don't seem to realize is that it's the small companies and micro indie Handcrafted Soap & Cosmetic Makers and our suppliers -we who may be legislated out of exsistance- are ALREADY making safe cosmetics. We and our suppliers were always at the forefront. The larger natural and organic concerns around now all started back in the day then just like the current crop of Handcrafters are doing now. We already use natural oils, natural based emulsifiers and thickeners, the highest quality natural fragrances -and synthetics fragrances too as customers want what they want- and mild but effective preservatives. We are small, yet that smallness means we can and do pay attention to the tiniest details.

We can customize a product on short notice for our customers. I did so just the other day. A regular soap buyer needed something, a special request. She told me her skin issues and asked if I would do a special request. Oh, I only had 5 days notice, but hey, I'm an indie, I knew what I had on hand, what I could do and knew that I could do it. It's. What. I. Do. I formulated, blended, bottled and delivered. She's happy, I was happy. I've got a happy customer who also knows she's valued.

But all that is in jeopardy with the SCA 2010. If the SCA 2010 passes, I don't know if I'd be able to formulate a special lotion for her or anything else for anyone else at the drop of a hat what with just 1 of the the many proposed new regulations I'd have to add into the mix: The new ingredients/formula change reporting I'd have to do every time I make a change for a special request. Let me elaborate: That's new ingredients reporting on top of the already legally required labeling I already happily do (I'm proud of what I make). Per FDA regs, I already list my ingredients in INCI format in descending order of predominance. And I do it in English AND Latin as I also have EU and Canada customers. I have software that can dupe my labels and I fill in the spots that needs changing, click and print and stick it on the container. I keep batch records of my products and batch records of every special request I make. What I and most other Handcrafted Cosmetics Makers do not have are the resources to hire 1, 2 or 3 bodies to just fill out paperwork every damn day and send it into the proposed FDA database (and/or any other state's or local governments too) every time we make something special for a customer, like even a lip balm in a special request flavor. I have core products and don't deviate too much, other than fragrances. But for my regulars I do special requests quite often. As do most Handcrafters. It's. What. We. Do.

We don't have cookie cutter, one size fits all formulas. We innovate, we create, we improve -constantly- on the main stream retail and natural cosmetic products. It's why I and many, if not most of us, started doing this. We or our families needed something better than what was out there, even from the natural and organic products. They are almost all the same with very few alterations for the various needs. Their concerns are almost the same as the main stream retail cosmetics: mainly on the sales bottom line: get it quickly made, get it in the most stores coast to coast and get it sold. Most Handcrafters do not churn it out that way. We're making it BY HAND. We have comparable equipment for the small scale, we can and do produce. But we try not to spread ourselves too thin so that the production, quality and price suffer. We don't waste time or energy trying to compete with the known brands. We're not publicly bi#ching, fighting, pissing and moaning about or suing other quasi-naturals, natural or organic cosmetic companies (there's been a lot of that in the last few years). Most of us don't want to put our horse in that race.

And all of that leads me to this: The other day I had a brief conversation with my BFF, someone very close to me, someone who's opinion I highly respect and value. I know they won't bull$hit me. They also don't want me to fail and when things become a rough ride -to use another horse metaphor- if I fall off the horse, they give me advise and thoroughly expect me to pick myself up and climb back on. My BFF also has an extensive professional work experience as a practising attorney in business, employment, financial and federal governmental law. They also have a unique yet similar to my way of looking at things to clear the fog and see under the surface. I call it "A view from the street". Our views are not always a completely jaded view of things when there is adversity on the horizon, like when someone gets busted for really breaking bad or just an out right showing of utter, complete stupidity. But when whatever comes to light, gets exposed and it all starts hitting the fan, we are usually not surprised. What does surprise us is when we are wrong. Which I'm sad to say, isn't very often.

That said, my BFF said something extremely telling to me when I was having a mini rant on how the effects of the SCA 2010 requirements might put me and the rest of the handcrafted cosmetics industry out of business. They said:

Wait for it...

"...your letter says it all, but I think you have to really get a handle on what is behind this. The EFFECT of this legislation is not to put you out of business. The PURPOSE of this legislation is to put you out of business. See the difference? As an independent local producer, you have control over a business, earning power and some independence, and the ability to hide income. Its not a business that requires huge start up costs or a PhD in some area or anything of a substantial investment, and by that I mean over one million. See what I'm talking about? And you are 1000 % correct, about the imports. The Chinese are not going to test anything, but their s#it will be in the stores, killing us all."

I'm going to let you all think about this for a bit and then I'll continue this either later today or tomorrow. But read this again, fellow micro and small indie Handcrafted Soap & Cosmetic Makers, Suppliers, Business Advocates and our wonderful and supportive customers:

"...The EFFECT of this legislation is not to put you out of business. The PURPOSE of this legislation is to put you out of business."

No, I can't. I don't think anyone can.

Sandra — 2010-08-05T08:28:00Z

Not even the BIG PLAYERS could keep up with this chaotic and idiotic Savings Clause.

Gawd, I admire Donna Maria. Attorney, Wife, Mother, Small Business Advisor and Advocate and Former Soap and Cosmetic Maker. Bonus Points for being a concise, to the point rebuttal expert.

I'll let her tell it to you:

While you're watching this, I'm off to go look up ALL of the who's who in the Legislative Land of MO and while I'm at it, the folks who run AgMissouri and the Missouri Farmers Market Bureau.

Sandra

A Great Critique On the Infantile "The Story of Cosmetics"

Sandra — 2010-07-29T06:29:00Z

Those who know me know I have issues with Google and their lack of respect for privacy regarding web usage. I'm also a tad pissed they caved in to some of PandaLand's internet demands. So you know I'm totally pissed about something when I end up subscribing to something else that normally pisses me off in order to help out and get the word out. I broke down and subscribed to Google/YouTube so as to post this entry. And to facilitate other possible or future needs that may entail YouTube. Seems no matter the issue, if you want to be heard around the world, put a clip about it on YouTube.

Why did I break down and subscribe? Because of this:

The Campain For Safe Cosmetics released a bs video the same day the Safe Cosmetics Act 2010 was announced. Their timing was on purpose as most in my industry know the CFSC and their parent org. The Environmental Working Group are the big pushers, sponsors and lobbyists behind this idiocy called Safe Cosmetics Act 2010.

Going around the indie, handcrafted cosmetics internets, interwebs, forums and groups is a wonderful rebuttal video of this infantile dribble put out by CFSC and Annie Lenard. The gentleman rebutting isn't a cosmetic formulator, but he is someone who is tired of small business being overregulated to death. And evidently he has done a little bit of cosmetic ingredient research or had someone sitting next to him who gave him quite a bit of information on the subject in question. He blogs for Competitive Enterprise Institute .

While I have never run into any one institution, organization or idealogy that fits all, most or even half of my views, thoughts and beliefs on life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, when I read someone or something that wants to or is going to bat for small business, I pay attention to it. I can sift through a lot of the flotsam and jetsam. No one anything has ever been able to speak for all. This organization is no different.

In the same vein, without going into a rant, the more I read on potential SCOTUS Judge Elena Kagan, the more uncomfortable I feel about her. I bumbed into this little titbit on the same site. And many more articles on regulations and over burdensome legislation that attacks and penalizes small business for being small and having the ingenuity to exist within their niche. This country was built with and exist because small businesses. Many grow large, many grow gigantic and when they do, they should not throw their weight around and buy influence to push out small inovative businesses that may be competition to them. (That post is coming later). All businesses started with 1 or 2 small products or ideas, in someone's kitchen, gargage or basement and 1 or 2 people selling it.

Lately, my eyebrow has been staying in a permanant state of Mr .Spock.

Until next time.

Opposition to The Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 (H.R. 5786)

Sandra — 2010-07-28T05:47:00Z

My Gentle, Wonderful Customers and Blog Readers, I have not posted in ages- Since the Farmers Market season began. I apologize to you, but I have been extremely busy. I've had no time for blogging, just making and selling soap and the upkeep of that end of the business. It takes time to compose, write and write coherently. I didn't and still don't have the time. I refuse to post crap post, guest posts (you still have to proof, review and edit), filler posts about nothing or badly written posts just to fill some web space. But I have to take time to bring this very important issue to your attention.

In a nutshell, if you want me and other handcrafted/handmade cosmetic manufacturers to keep making our quality and good for you products, take a look at this: Opposition to The Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 (H.R. 5786). If you agree with it, please sign it. Yes, these petitions do matter and help. We have defeated this issue twice before, but it has raised it's ugly, medusa like head yet again. The petition is sponsored by the head of The Indie Beauty Network, an Independent Business Network I associate with. Donna Maria, along with others like The Handcrafted Soapmakers Guild advocate on our behalf . Please pass along this information and petition to anyone and everyone you know who buys handmade/handcrafted soap, bath & body and cosmetics.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/oppose-hr-5786-safe-cosmetics-act-of-2010/

The Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 (H.R. 5786) is more or less a repeat of the bull$hit that Colorado tried to ram down peoples throat a few months ago and the FDA tried to ram down people and cosmetic manufacturers throats in 2008/2009. Contrary to extremely misguided belief, the Cosmetics Industry IS regulated. We are regulated by the FDA. There are fear mongers and misinformation specialists aplenty. And they are backing this bill. They are very vocal in all medias -print, internet and television. They are very good at lobbying. And they are very, very good at bad science. They are attempting to stifle something. We still don't know what all the agendas are, it's all very murky and even the money trail keeps blinking on and off the radar. But whatever the agenda is, it isn't anything for the good of the cosmetic consumer. This bill, as written is not based on credible or established scientific principles. And many parts of the proposed regulatory issues for cosmetics has would far exceed those of the other FDA regulated products: food or drugs. It's as though consumers are being told "Your pain killer may give you a heart attack, your blood thinner may be contaminated, your food might poison you, but we'll make sure your soaps, lotions and makeup is in better condition than all of those combined." I'm just saying.

What will The Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 (H.R. 5786) do?

Before I answer that question, let me tell you what it will not do: It will not make cosmetics safer for the consumer.

What it will do is force me and others like me out of business. Small and micro US cosmetic manufacturers like me ALREADY use the safest ingredients that have ALREADY been safety tested by the raw material manufacturers and even distributors. We are actually a small threat to the larger concerns because we are locally made, USA manufactured; 90% of us are locally sold and we are an actual person with an actual face and name to go with it. We have true accountability. You can find us. We are you neighbors, your friends, your family members. You talk to us and we LISTEN. We make for you, we answer to you.

What it will do is make me spend HOURS on paperwork and not on making good, safe products.

What it will do is make me spend THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS I do not have testing for trace elements that exist EVERYWHERE in EVERYTHING and CANNOT be avoided no matter what one does. The only way to avoid them is to stop breathing air, drinking water and eating food. In other words, stop being alive!

What it will do is have me create labels for my products that are going to be longer than a standard piece of notebook paper. Cosmetic manufacturers already have to disclose more on our labels than what food manufacturers have to. Yes, that's right, what you eat has LESS ingredient disclosure. Go figure.

What it will do is put me and almost all others like me -small, micro and independent cosmetic manufacturers- OUT OF BUSINESS. By the way, that means all the small or micro independent brands you like that are made here in the USA. It means your locally made mineral makeup will no longer be available. It means your handmade/handcrafted soap and bath & body care will no longer be available- including those small indie brands that are starting becoming well known. Including those indie brands you're buying at your local Gift Stores, the etsy and artfire shops, the local Soap and Candle shop, your Natural Foods Stores. Even those sold at your local Whole Foods Stores- they carry many local and regional brands that meet their ingredient criteria and specifications. It also means your cosmetologists, estheticians, hairdressers and the day spas you love so much will only be able to buy and use for you and can only sell to you what's being cranked out by the big players. It also means MORE imports of inferior and unchecked products because sadly, the FDA will never have the resources or means to test the imports- regardless of how much money is thrown at them. They don't have the resources and never will- they can't keep the food imports and drug imports in check. For every 1 bad imported cosmetic brand they might catch, 25 most likely get through. Just look at the drug and food recalls and illnesses in the last 3 years alone. The US cosmetics industry has a long history of safety.

What The Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 (H.R. 5786) will do is take away your right of choice! It means you will only have the choice of the mainstream large and mega large brands that use mainly synthetics and the large well known "natural" brands, some of who are actually owned by the aforementioned mainstream companies. If it's sold in your big box retailer or chain grocery store, if you can find it EVERYWHERE, in every city and town, rural and urban, in every mall's Bath & Body boutique, every natural food store and everyday drug store, THOSE will be your only choice. The big guys. They can afford to do what is required on this bill as written. They can afford to hire staff to just sit and fill out paper forms and computer forms on- line and research the newest legislative/FDA whatever that gets tossed on another list of more things to do or be aware of. They can afford to hire staff -more faceless people- to do what these burdensome new regulations will require, as written.

There was a reason you chose to buy from handmade/handcrafted cosmetics manufacturers. There is a reason people are buying, using and flocking in droves to small, handcrafted artisanal soap and cosmetic manufacturers. The reason is because of what we stand for: Safe and good products, open about our businesses, we are a locally manufactured product and we are an actual person with an actual face and name to go with it. We don't whitewash, green wash or hogwash our customers. Seeing us face to face guarantees that.

My sincerest thanks for your advocacy and continued business support,

Sandra

I won a great contest!

Sandra — 2010-04-01T20:06:00Z

I do so love product contests. *

http://www.myscratchofflabels.com/

Perfect timing for promos for the upcoming markets season. I was already thinking of buying some and then this. Thanks to Karen for having this contest. Hey soap pals and all others, go check out her site, I know this can benefit many a small business.

*(And in keeping with the new FCC rules regarding blogs and endorsements, well, I haven't bought, they haven't paid and I did win via normal entry channels through their website.)

A flame no longer burns

Sandra — 2010-03-31T06:44:44Z

On Sunday, March 28, 2010 The Handcrafted Soap and Cosmetics world lost a wonderful soul. Trina Wallace, founder of Snowdrift Farms, passed away from complications due to Ovarian Cancer.

Trina was a great soul, always freely giving professional advise and the sharing of ideas for those engaged in cosmetic formulation, whether for fun or profit. Trina, along with her husband Bill, were one of the pioneering companies in internet sales for small quantity sales for handcrafting cosmetic formulators. They were one of my first suppliers when I started formulating. Between the forums, advice, website and superior service, I credit with Trina for much inspiration.

My deepest sympathies go out to her family. There is an old Jewish saying "The only truly dead are those who have been forgotten." Trina will never be forgotten. Her candle may no longer burn, but her light will always shine for me.

On hold. It will get better.

Sandra — 2010-03-16T00:02:00Z

But I'm told it may get worse first.

I know I'm behind and that I need to post my next part on "You Really Do Want To Promote Your Business, Don't You?". However, last week I yanked something in my back -really bad- and it's been fubar'd the last 9 days. I can't write coherently while in pain and sitting at the computer was actually the LEAST comfortable spot. On Thursday the 11th, only because my spot was already paid for, I made it (barely) to exhibit at a local business expo...And woke up the next day with the oh so happy realization that someone's sickness cooties landed on me. It's been downhill ever since. Lightheaded, nausea, chills and fever and no appeitite. Those that know me know I DO NOT lose my appetite unless I am really sick.

Yes, I have THE FLU.

Been 5 yrs since I last had it.

Oh and yes, I had a flu shot. Damn good it seems to have done me.

The past weekend has been no fun. The back is a little bit better, but most of me is still for caca. I can't write coherently while in pain AND doing the flu thing. Sitting at the computer is still the LEAST comfortable spot. It took me 10 minutes to write this much.

So this soapmaker is sick and in pain and curled up in her soap pot, drinking chamomile, lavender and ginger tea, trying to just make it to the next day. I'll get to the next update as soon as I can. And I can tell you now it won't be for at least 5 days.