Aluminum salts in deodorants caused CANCER, and Switzerland may be the first nation in the world to BAN them

 Switzerland is slated to become the first country to ban deodorants that contain aluminum salts. This, following results of a 2016 study indicating that the toxic chemicals may play a role in breast cancer onset. The country’s National Councilvoted 126 to 58 in favor of approving a bill instructing the Federal Council to consider banning aluminum salts from being used in antiperspirant. The measure also urges that Federal Council to commission research that would prove a causal relationship between deodorant use and increased breast cancer risk.

Aluminum salts are the active ingredients used in the manufacturing of many antiperspirant and deodorant products in the market, which help prevent excessive sweating and stave off body odor. The toxic chemical works by dissolving in sweat and blocking the sweat gland. In turn, the chemical lessens the amount of moisture present in the skin. However, such an effect was also found to promote a build up in breast tissue. Most antiperspirant and deodorant products contain this cancer-causing chemical, researchers noted.

Breast cancer remains to be the most prevalent type of cancer among women worldwide, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported. According to WHO’s 2013 Global Health Estimates, more than 508,000 women all over the world died of breast cancer in 2011 alone. The organization also noted that while breast cancer was previously thought to be more prevalent in developed countries, nearly half of breast cancer cases and 58 percent of deaths occurred in less developed nations.

Details of the deodorant-breast cancer study

A study published in the International Journal of Cancer in September last year served as a primary catalyst for Switzerland’s latest move to ban the use of aluminum salts in deodorant production. As part of the study, a team of researchers from the University of Geneva examined the effects of the toxic chemicals on mice. The research team found that prolonged exposure to the hazardous chemical was associated with tumor growth in the animals’ breast tissue. This could also trigger cancer to metastasize to other parts of the body, the research team cautioned. A researcher warned that people, especially women, should avoid using products that contained aluminum salts. Likewise, he urged that the chemical be prohibited in the same manner as asbestos. (Related: Learn more about the different toxic chemicals found in personal care products at Toxins.news)

“I think we should avoid all deodorants containing aluminium salt. And it’s very difficult to be sure that the so-called ‘without aluminium’ brands really are without…Asbestos is cheap, has very attractive industrial potential, and it took 50 years to ban it. We hope it doesn’t take so long to ban aluminium salts,” study co-author André-Pascal Sappino was quoted in saying in TheLocal.ch.

However, an outside expert refuted the study’s claim, and pointed out a significant pitfall of the research: It being conducted in animal models. The expert also noted that the findings should not affect the use of deodorants and antiperspirants among women.

“This study looks specifically at mouse cells grown in the lab and in mice and we need to put its findings in the context of previous research looking at human breast cancer. Studies investigating antiperspirant or deodorant use in women have consistently shown no good evidence of a link to breast cancer. With the current evidence, there is no reason for women to be concerned about using them on account of their breast cancer risk. There are, however, established ways that all women can help reduce their risk of the disease, including cutting down on alcohol intake, maintaining a healthy weight and getting regular exercise,” Breast Cancer Now chief executive Baroness Delyth Morgan said in HuffingtonPost.co.uk.

Sources include:

DailyMail.co.uk

HippocraticPost.com

WHO.int

TheLocal.ch

HuffingtonPost.co.uk

Shocking investigation finds asbestos lurking in teen makeup

Girl’s clothing store, Justice, has stopped selling its “Just Shine Shimmer Powder” in response to a damaging report made by the Scientific Analytical Institute in Greensboro, North Carolina, that found that the make-up product contained dangerous levels of asbestos. The blush, targeted at pre-teen girls, could negatively affect the ladies’ health as they age. As warned by lab director of research and analytical services, Sean Fitzgerald, on WTVR.com, “in this powder designed for children, they could die an untimely death in their 30s or 40s because of the exposure to asbestos in this product. Children should not be allowed to breathe it. If a 10-year old inhaled this fiber today, when he’s 50 years old, it’s still there.”

Apart from asbestos, the shimmer powder was also found to contain four different heavy metals. Fitzgerald warned that the ill effects these materials could have on children’s health are not noticeable right away. He explained that fibers get inhaled and build up in the lungs over time. This, in turn, makes the tween more susceptible to disease as they age.

The report concluded that while Justice did not maliciously intend to harm children, there may have been an oversight on how their products were made and sourced. Fitzgerald noted that talc (a common mineral used in various make-up products) can become contaminated with asbestos during the extraction and refining process. Companies that do not source the mineral correctly can — inadvertently — be making items laden with toxins.

“The problem is, it’s not necessarily the manufacturer, there was no intent to put this in the talc, but they shouldn’t have been using that reserve, because they should’ve tested it and known that the talc source was contaminated with asbestos,” Fitzgerald said on ABC11.com.

Justice has started their own private investigation on the matter. In their official page on Facebook, the company wrote, “[we have] a long history of concern for the health and safety of our girls. We are deeply committed to the safety and integrity of our products. Upon receiving an inquiry about the Just Shine Shimmer Powder product (Item number 192307, or SKU number 19052777), we immediately began an investigation and, out of an abundance of caution, stopped the sale of this product in our stores and on our website.”

The same report tested other make-up products from the same brand, including the “Just Shine Baked Blush” and “Just Shine Shimmer Bronzing Powder” and found that neither product contained asbestos or any heavy metal.

Being beautiful should not cost you your life

Knowing what’s in your beauty products has become all the more important. Remember that we absorb more than half of all the things we slather on our skin. An infographicposted on MindBodyGreen.com lists some toxic chemicals to avoid.

• Avobenzone – This popular sunscreen ingredient has been linked with numerous health conditions including liver and kidney failure. There is even evidence that proves that the ingredient can negatively interact with chlorinated water (e.g. water found in swimming pools) and damage health. (Related: Science SHOCK: Chlorine in swimming pools transforms sunscreen into cancer-causing toxic chemical right on your skin.)
• Triclosan – A synthetic antibacterial ingredient, many acne products use triclosan. However, the EPA has registered it as a pesticide which has detrimental effects to the health of humans and crops.
• Phthalates – Studies have found that this toxin can cause birth defects, decrease sperm count, and incite early puberty among girls and boys.
• Parabens – These are preservatives that often come with the prefix methyl-, butyl-, ethyl-, or propyl- when listed on labels. Parabens are used in various skin care products, including deodorants. They can cause infertility in men and disrupt normal hormone production levels.
• Synthetic colors – These are added to increase the appeal products have, but can lead to skin allergies. Some health experts say that synthetic colors are possible carcinogens.

Going natural may be the best way to look and feel good. You can achieve that inner glow by eating the right food, exercising daily, and practicing mind-strengthening techniques such as meditation.

Sources include:

ABC11.com

WTVR.com

MindBodyGreen.com

Gulf of Mexico DEAD ZONE caused by agricultural runoff from U.S. farms

Every year, a hypoxic zone appears along the Gulf of Mexico. Otherwise known as a “dead zone,” it is an area of water that contains little to no oxygen. The significantly reduced levels essentially makes the body of water a biological desert. Hypoxic zones usually occur around summertime. But while these areas are considered to be a natural phenomenon, scientists fear that increased human activity may be contributing to the number of dead zones being observed worldwide. More disturbingly, human factors may also be causing the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico to grow. Scientists predict that for this year, the hypoxic zone in the area will cover 10,089 square miles. This is about the size of Vermont. Biologists declare that bold and new approaches need to be made now to prevent a biological crisis. They have expressed a desired target reduction of 59 percent in the amount of nitrogen runoffs in the area. This would shrink the hypoxic zone to the size of Delaware.

Approaches to achieve this end are identified in a new study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Researchers from the University of Michigan believe that this goal is achievable, though it would require the adjustment of large scale agricultural practices. The magnitude of the problem prompted an intergovernmental panel to extend the reduction program to 2035. This should give enough time, official spokespeople of the panel say, to achieve the goal of a hypoxic zone with a size of only 1,950 square miles.

What truly causes a hypoxic zone is yet to be fully determined, but scientists believe that the one in the Gulf of Mexico may be due to excessive farmland runoff containing fertilizer and livestock waste. These sources release significant amounts of nitrogen and phosphorous which further contribute to the reduction of oxygen in the water. Thankfully, this is a factor that can be easily addressed with proper management techniques.

Aquatic ecologist Dan Scavia, who was the lead author of the paper, says on Science Daily, “the bottom line is that we will never reach the action plan’s goal of 1,950 square miles until more serious actions are taken to reduce the loss of Midwest fertilizers into the Mississippi River system.”

Scavia noted that for the last 20 years, the average nitrate load dumped into the Gulf of Mexico has not changed, despite the numerous conservation projects made along the Mississippi Basin states. Supposedly, more than $28 billion has been spent in trying to reduce the amount of nitrogen levels. (Related: Ocean Dead Zones Now Top 400.)

“Clearly something more or something different is needed,” Scavia noted. “It matters little if the load-reduction target is 30 percent, 45 percent or 59 percent if insufficient resources are in place to make even modest reductions.”

Some of the proposed solutions are to alter fertilizer application rates, planting cover crops (fast-growing plants which would prevent soil erosion), using alternatives to biofuels, and improving overall nutrient management. What is important, according to the team, is that these solutions be applied methodically and in conjunction with one another. This would introduce an amplified effect, in which both nitrogen and phosphorous levels would be reduced together. This “dual-nutrient strategy” is crucial in achieving a significant nutrient-load reduction.

You can read more stories like this on Enviro.news.

Sources include:

ScienceDaily.com

OceanService.NOAA.gov

GCOOS.Tamu.edu

NPR.org

Clean eating now considered a “dangerous fad” by nutritionally illiterate doctors

Clean eating has become a way of life for many people around the world. This way of eating focuses on consuming whole foods that are not processed or refined; this can be anything that is as close to its natural form as possible, like fresh produce and raw nuts. This is an undeniably healthy way of eating – and there are plenty of studies that back this – so why are some doctors calling it a dangerous fad?

In a recent piece for the Daily Mail, Dr. Max Pemberton rakes clean eating over the coals. He talks about patients who are emaciated, describing them using frightening terms and explaining in great detail about how their bones are sticking out, their necks can’t support their heads, and their bodies are eating their own muscles. He talks about young girls whose reproductive systems have stopped working and who have developed osteoporosis, bleeding throats and lost teeth.

This is certainly an outcome that no one wants, but what he is describing here are people who have eating disorders, not people who focus on eating clean foods. The desire to eat healthy is not disordered eating, and lumping the two together is dangerous as it may give those who prefer to eat junk food an excuse to continue on their path to diabetes, obesity, and early death.

It’s particularly concerning when he writes: “The central tenet, the very nugget at the core of its belief system, is flawed. The very notion of ‘clean’ eating suggests that some food is dirty or bad — and this simply isn’t the case.”

Countless researchers would beg to differ. Some food really is bad, and it’s very irresponsible for a doctor to say that’s not the case. A trans fat-filled Burger King Triple Whopper, a sugar-laden venti Starbucks Frappuccino, and a can of corrosive Coca-Cola are just a few of the “bad” foods that come to mind.

He closed his piece with another gem: “But be under no illusion: ‘clean eating’ is ugly, malevolent and damaging. The whole irony of the clean eating fad is that, despite what it purports to be, it’s fundamentally toxic.”

No, Dr. Pemberton, what’s toxic is high fructose corn syrup, artificial sweeteners, boxed macaroni and cheese, and GM soy.

Eating disorders and clean eating are not one and the same

He’s right that social media is causing all sorts of eating problems for people, from constant images of bodies most normal people can never hope to attain to round-the-clock posts of the latest meals, healthy or otherwise, that everyone on your friends list is eating. But blogs about clean eating are not telling young women to head to the bathroom and vomit up their lunch if they slip up.

Of course, some people take it too far. People who are prone to eating disorders can – and often do – start out by eating healthy in an attempt to lose weight. If a person has underlying issues, there is no doubt that this could well lead to obsessions over healthy food and body weight and end up becoming a full-fledged eating disorder.

But there are also countless people who have committed to giving up processed foods in the interest of being healthy, and most of them can enjoy a piece of cake on their birthday without feeling compelled to stick their fingers down their throat afterward. Most clean eaters do not have any sort of eating disorder or mental illness and will never develop one. They are simply eating a healthy diet, which is something that more responsible doctors encourage their patients to do.

It’s true that some people who have eating disorders might hide behind an interest in only consuming healthy foods so family and friends won’t interfere with their habits. Having an eating disorder is a very serious problem that absolutely needs to be addressed, but suggesting that clean eating and bulimia are one and the same and that there is no such thing as “bad” food is incredibly irresponsible.

Sources include: 

DailyMail.co.uk

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

10 DEADLY chemicals cigarette manufacturers don’t want you to know about

We all know smoking is bad for us, yet millions of people still smoke. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), nearly 15 percent of Americans, or more than 40 million people, still light up a cigarette everyday. Compared to the 42 percent of the population that smoked in 1965, it seems like we are making some progress.

Despite all the efforts being made, smoking remains the number one cause of preventable death in the United States, killing some 443,000 Americans every year. As stated by the CDC, smoking kills more people than obesity, drug abuse, infectious disease, firearms, and traffic accidents.

But what exactly is it that makes cigarettes so bad for our health? While we all know about the addictive effects of nicotine, not many people realize that cigarettes contain more than 4000 other chemicals. Of these chemicals, at least 40 are known carcinogens, and 400 are proven to be toxic to some degree.

Are you a smoker? Let’s look at ten of the most toxic substances found in cigarettes. Hopefully, this article will make you think twice before lighting up your next cigarette.

1.      Benzene

In humans, benzene has been linked to leukemia or blood cancer, anemia, genetic damage, and excessive bleeding. It is one of the most basic chemicals used in the petrochemical industry and present in crude oil, gasoline, and pesticides. Cigarette smoke accounts for about half of the benzene exposure in the United States.

2.      Formaldehyde

Used to preserve dead bodies and kill microbes, formaldehyde can cause eye irritation and coughing, among other health-related issues for both smokers and passive (second hand) smokers.

3.      Tar

Tar, the black sticky compound added to road-making materials is also produced when tobacco is burned. It has been linked to cancer and turns your teeth yellow.

4.      Arsenic

Another dangerous, cancer-causing chemical found in cigarettes is arsenic. Arsenic can accumulate in the body over time. Since it can interfere with the body’s ability to repair DNA, it may also boost the effect of other health-damaging chemicals.

5.      Cadmium

Cadmium, also used in the production of batteries, is a toxic metal found in cigarettes. Not only has it been linked to cancer, but exposure to this chemical can also damage the kidneys and the linings of arteries.

6.      Chromium

You may know chromium from dyes, paints, and metallic alloys. When inhaled, this chemical acts as the glue between carcinogens and DNA, resulting in total DNA damage which may cause cancer or other health related issues.

7.      Hydrogen cyanide

Hydrogen cyanide is a known carcinogen that damages the cilia in the lungs. These hair-like structures line the airways and help clear toxins from the body. When these cilia get destroyed, toxins can enter the bloodstream more quickly via the lungs.

8.      Carbon monoxide

Carbon monoxide, or CO, is a colorless, odorless, and tasteless gas released whenever fuel or cigarettes are burned. Tobacco smoke contains 3 to 5 percent CO. CO affects the whole body by binding to red blood cells, which results in less oxygen being transported throughout the body.

9.      Nitrogen oxide

Nitrogen oxide is a common air pollutant also found in cigarette smoke. It causes lung inflammation and heavy breathing in regular smokers.

10.  Ammonia

Ammonia, commonly found in many households to clean toilet bowls, is also found in cigarettes. In fact, ammonia is the chemical in cigarettes that enhances the addictive effect of nicotine.

These chemicals are only the tip of the iceberg. If we convinced you to quit this unhealthy habit, find more information and help at StopSmoking.news.

Sources include:

MensXP.com

Edition.CNN.com

American Airlines pilots being sickened by toxic chemicals in uniforms

Here we go again. Late last year, thousands of American Airlines employees said that the carrier’s new uniform caused a series of allergic reactions including eye swelling, rashes, skin blistering, and even vertigo. American repeatedly assured their employees that their new uniforms were safe and have since then distributed the uniforms to around 70,000 frontline employees. Now, 100 pilots are saying that their uniforms are making them ill. In an article on Bloomberg.com, American says they will survey these affected pilots and release an official statement soon.

These new reports have angered various unions who say that American is not taking these health concerns seriously. Bob Ross, President of the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, filed an official grievance against the company. In it, Ross requested the company to recall all uniforms, grant sick leaves to affected flight attendants, reimburse them for the costs these allergic reactions have incurred, and establish a $2 million fund to really find out what the issue with these new outfits is. “These uniforms continue to put our members at risk, forcing them to use sick leave and affecting their overall health,” Ross wrote, as reported on DallasNews.com. A spokesperson for the Allied Pilots Association declared that, “[Pilots] have to be fit for duty. If the uniform is making them not fit for duty, then something has to change.”

“Commercial garments are very frequently treated with extremely hazardous, neurotoxic chemicals,” warns Mike Adams, the “Health Ranger” and lab science director of CWC Labs, which tests for toxic chemicals using mass spec instrumentation. “If a pilot wants to send us a sample of the garment, we could easily identify the toxic chemical in question. Many garment chemicals are released from sweat, after which they are absorbed through the skin and into the blood stream,” Adams adds.

American’s response

The survey will advise the company on their next steps. “Whatever they find in their survey, we’re happy to meet and discuss it with them,” said Ron Defeo, an American Airlines spokesperson. “We’ve shown we’re willing to work and find solutions. We’d do the same with pilots.” Defeo added the carrier is working closely with Twin Hill, a unit of Tailored Brands, Inc., who supplied the new uniforms. So far, neither American or Twin Hill have found any safety issues with their new uniform. “We are confident our uniforms are safe, and we continue to encourage any of our team members who suspect a reaction to the uniform to contact their manager.”

In its first major uniform change in 30 years, American intended the new look to signify their relevance and reintroduction to the modern airline industry. The new uniforms, now slate gray instead of old navy blue, could be mixed and matched with cobalt blue cardigans or gray jackets and Cole Haan ties and scarves that were red and blue. American and Twin Hill designed the outfits to be comfortable and durable. In announcing the new uniform in September, Tailored Brands said in their press release that “the attire offers great style and design, high-quality performance and functionality that can take the rigors of the job.” Immediately after its release though, hundreds of American Airline flight attendants began complaining of allergic reactions. 

This isn’t the first time Twin Hill has been suspected of questionable quality. The company was issued a class action lawsuit several years ago on behalf of several Alaska Airlines flight attendants who fell ill because of their uniforms. Even though a judge ruled in favor of Twin Hill, Alaska decided to replace the uniforms. Still, representatives of Twin Hill insist there is nothing wrong with the American Airlines uniforms. “The safety and comfort of our uniforms has, and will always be, our highest priority. Extensive testing conducted by independent labs on the American Airlines uniforms has raised no safety concerns,” the company told NBCNews.com.

In the meantime, American has given their employees the option to wear their old uniforms, replace the uniform pieces that were bothering them, or use their alternate supplier, Aramark. The company says they have no plans to recall their uniforms.

Hazards can be found everywhere. From the food you eat to the clothes you wear. Be more informed when you visit Toxins.news.

Sources include:

Bloomberg.com

DailyMail.co.uk

DallasNews.com

NBCNews.com

Skin care expert reveals the 20 most toxic chemical ingredients in beauty products… are you poisoning yourself?

Renowned skin care expert Dr. Trevor Cates lists 20 of the most toxic chemicals found in personal care products. “What we put on our skin should be as clean as what we eat. But for most people, it’s not. Even in tiny amounts, many of the chemicals commonly found in our cosmetics can have a tremendous health and hormonal impact, and we are only beginning to understand the consequences,” Dr. Cates writes in DailyMail.co.uk.

1. Fragrances – According to Dr. Cates, fragrance mixtures may contain hundreds of individual chemicals that may trigger allergies and disrupt certain hormones. He suggests avoiding fragrances unless in their natural form such as pure essential oils.
2. Formaldehyde – Nearly one in five personal care products contain this chemical. This toxic chemical can be found in hair care products, adhesives and nail products. According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), formaldehyde is a carcinogenic chemical associated with the onset of various forms of cancer.
3. Ethanolamines – According to the skin care expert, impurities in these chemicals may trigger the onset of certain types of cancer.
4. Mineral oils – These oils, along with petroleum, are key ingredients in cosmetic products such as foundation, moisturizers and cleansers. However, these chemicals contain dioxane. According to Dr. Cates, dioxane is found to be carcinogenic in various animal studies.
5. Oxybenzone – This harmful chemical is commonly found in lip balms, sunscreens, and other products that contain SPF. Oxybenzone is found to be easily absorbed in the bloodstream, and is associated with the onset of early puberty in girls.
6. Parabens – Parabens are commonly used preservatives in various beauty products. The chemical is linked to breast cancer cell growth in women and lower testosterone levels and sperm count in men.
7. Hydroquinone – According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), hydroquinones may cause ochronosis, a skin disease characterized by disfiguring and irreversible lesions on the skin. Hydroquinones are also found to be carcinogenic.
8. Coal tar – Coal tar is a known carcinogenic. The chemical can be found in dandruff shampoos, creams, soap, and ointments.
9. Toluene – According to Dr. Cates, toluene is a potent neurotoxic chemical and may trigger impaired breathing and nausea. Toluene is commonly found in nail care products.
10. Butylated hydroxyanisole – BHA is a waxy compound that is used in various cosmetics and personal care products such as eye shadow and lipstick. The U.S. National Toxicology Program has identified BHA as a potential carcinogen, while the European Union (EU) classified the chemical as an endocrine disruptor.
11. Triclosan and triclocarban – These chemicals are commonly used as antibacterial agents in personal care products. Both chemicals are known endocrine disruptors.
12. Mica, silica, talc, and nanoparticled titanium dioxide – According to Dr. Cates, these minute particles may lead to lung disease when they accumulated in the body over time.
13. Heavy metals – Heavy metals — such as mercury, lead, arsenic and aluminum —  can cause brain and nervous system impairment and hormone disruption. These heavy metals are also known carcinogens.
14. Carbon black – Carbon black is a commonly used pigment in make up and nail polish. This chemical is known to cause cancers.
15. P-phenylenediamine – This chemical is commonly found in hair dyes. Exposure to this chemical may lead to organ toxicity, adverse skin reactions, and cancer.

Other toxic chemicals commonly found in personal care products include resorcinol, methylisothiazolinone and teflon as well as phenoxyethanol and acrylamide.

“The personal care products industry is inundated with extremely toxic, cancer-causing chemicals,” explains the Health Ranger, founder of the Health Ranger Store which formulates and retails hundreds of non-toxic personal care products. “The average consumer poisons themselves with over 300 synthetic chemicals before they even leave the house each morning, and these chemicals are deliberately added to personal care products by manufacturers that care more about profit than consumer safety,” he adds.

Personal care products — such as cosmetics, body washes and hair and skin care products — have been subject to scrutiny for years due to potentially hazardous chemicals that most of them contain. These chemicals, when in contact with human body, may cause adverse health effects. In fact, a study by Herb Research Foundation reveals that the skin may absorb up to 60 percent of toxic chemicals found in personal care products.

Sources include:

DailyMail.co.uk

OSHA.gov