Year in Review

It's that time of year, when everyone does some reflecting about the year that's passed. I know it's been quite a year for me personally -- completing a journey through cancer treatment that ultimately led me to the creation and launch of SMACK! (which has been a whole other journey of its own).

So here's what we've learned along the way:

 -- Blogging during NHL Playoffs is not easy. Next year I'll have to step up my game with a new level of focus and discipline. Or go on hiatus. 

 -- There is no consistency -- NONE -- among brands and the products they make. Read your labels!

 -- Lipton is stupid.

 -- Revlon doesn't really care.

 -- Real change happens only at the benefit of the retailer or the manufacturer; consumers need to relearn the subtle art of speaking with their wallets as well as with their voices.

 -- Nicholas Kristof at the New York Times is one of my heroes.

 -- Reducing your chemical load -- even by the smallest amounts -- isn't difficult, as long as you're willing to put in the time and effort behind learning what's in the products you use.

As always, I am totally indebted to all of you SMACK! readers. THANK YOU for making our first year really great. I can't wait to see what 2014 has in store! I hope you all have a BLAST tonight (being safe, of course), and we'll see you next year!

Cheers,
Jazzy

Dirty laundry

My washing machine went on permanent strike last week. It didn't come as a surprise, since I don't remember the last time a load spun properly. But of course I had just changed all the beds in the house to get ready for Christmas so the mountain of laundry was immediately taller than I am (and growing exponentially every day since). All kinds of awesome.

Buying a new washer has been something of an education. Not only about how the new fancy machines work, but also about detergent. I don't mind, what with all this free time I have not doing laundry, and it's a natural topic for SMACK! Let's dive in.

GoodGuide rates laundry soap here. Method takes home top scores in the health category for all their laundry detergents as does Ecos Free & Clear Laundry Detergent and a few sets from Caldrea and Ecover Laundry Powder. ALL scrapes the bottom of the barrel with a health score of '0' on 15 of the 22 worst-rated products. Ouch.

EWG uses letter grades instead of numerical rankings for household cleaners. Their list of laundry products is here, with only 70 products out of 678 -- barely 10% -- receiving an 'A' or 'B' grade. EWG awards top marks to Ecover, Seventh Generation and Dr. Bronner's. Products from Green Shield, Nature Clean and Whole Foods round out the head of the class, all with 'A' grades.

A surprising entry to EWG's worst rated products was Green Works, which is made by the Clorox Company. It's a great example of 'greenwashing' -- that thing where marketing and labeling take advantage of terms like 'naturally derived' to convince consumers of a product's safety. Most of the popular store brands (Tide, ALL, Wisk, Arm & Hammer) have products with failing grades. It's a grim outlook on the market.

The higher-end front loading washing machines feature the very trendy steam cleaning and sanitizing. You're kind of boiling your clothes. Electrolux claims that its steam sanitizing cycle kills 99.9% of bacteria. If that's true, it means a very safe alternative to using bleach. Love it.

How does your detergent clean up? Me, I'll be looking for a new HE product to go with the new space age washer/dryer set we're buying. OF COURSE I'll share an in-depth review, because I love to try new things!

Yours in week-old sweats,
-- Jazzy

Blogging schedule

Just a quickie to let you know that I am posting this week, but it's still going to be sporadic. Another week of vacation to usher in the new year, and then back to routine and structure (and more regular blogging).

I expect another relatively quiet week on the news front, so we'll look at a new category of household products later today and try to get in a look back at the year [almost] behind us.

Thanks always for visiting (especially when schedules are crazy, yours and mine), reading, sharing!

Happy Monday,

Jazzy

SMACK! Review: Zoya nail lacquer (part 2)

I'm nearly a week out from my pedicure with Zoya nail polish in the 'Sarah' shade. The original post with the first half of the review is here.

So how's it hanging? Pretty good if you ask me! The polish still looks glossy and fresh. I was really happy with how it's been wearing, so I decided to give myself a little Christmas mani with the lighter 'Erikka' shade. And what did I learn?

That I should leave the manicuring to the professionals. Really.

About the polish, the 'Erikka' shade is a shimmery pink with a touch of gold for warmth. Not as sheer as the jar color would have you think, though. So two coats -- albeit by my unsteady and unskilled hand -- look a bit like cotton candy that's just been sprayed with pixie dust. Not a bad color, just not really what I normally go for in the ballet pink color family.

It's also really dull. Like, not shiny. Not matte, but not glossy. Now granted, I used neither a base coat or top coat (see what I mean about leaving the nail painting to the professionals? I'm a hack). But still, doesn't non-matte nail lacquer always have that glossy fresh finish?

It could be the fact that Zoya is five-free. It could be the shade. It could be that I'm a loser who skips base coat and top coat and then complains about her nail polish looking crappy. Smooth move, Jazzy.

At the end of the day, my fingernails are jacked but my toenails still look great. My next assignment will be to try it with the right clear coat and also try another brand of five-free polish to see how they compare. In the meantime, don't take me up on any offers to paint your nails. You'll get what you pay for.

Best,
Jazzy

PS -- The Erikka shade isn't listed on the Zoya website...old color??

Christmas magic

Merry Christmas! Quickie post today, just to let you know that we're still kicking around here at SMACK!, even during the holiday. Come and visit if you need a break from all that gorging.

My washing machine broke two days ago. Santa, little help? At first I was really annoyed but then I realized that it meant I don't have to do laundry! Bonus. And I can't buy a new washer without devoting a post to laundry detergent. I'll try to pull that together in the next couple days.

And, since I know you're all curious, the Zoya nail polish on my piggies still looks great. Yay for five-free! I did also try a different shade on my hands. That, er, didn't go so well. I'll be sure to cover it all in Part 2 of my review.

Enjoy your day! My wish for you is that today -- whether you celebrate or not -- is peaceful and full of good cheer.

Best wishes,

Jazzy

SMACK! Review: Zoya nail lacquer (part 1)

Finally got to take my new Zoya nail color for a test drive the other day. I'm breaking this review up into two parts to cover not just how the nail polish goes on, but also how it stays on. So expect an update in a couple weeks to see how it's wearing. 

Here's how it went down. I decided to get a pedicure and grabbed the bright glittery red 'Sarah' shade to jazz up my piggies.

The stylist at my local nail salon didn't so much as bat an eyelash at the fact that I had brought my own. In fact, as I cozied into the massage chair and thought about it, it increases the margins ever so slightly for customers to provide their own supplies. So if the nasty chemicals in salon brand polishes (OPI, Essie, etc) aren't enough reason for you to BYO three- or five-free colors, think about supporting the small business owners and low-wage workers who have to touch all manner of weird feet things, ew.

Back to the Zoya. I love the color. It's a bright, warm, pinky red with gold shimmer and glitter. Perfect for holiday, or your inner 5-year-old who loves sparkly things. Of your real 5-year-old, since Zoya doesn't have any of the 'Toxic Five' in its formula: formaldehyde, formaldehyde resin, toluene, dibutyl phthalate, and camphor.

The Zoya brush is a wee small, at least compared to my giant big toenail, but the stylist was plenty skilled to make sure the polish went on smoothly and evenly. Two coats looked great, so under the dryer I went.


Now I wasn't smart enough, when I bought the nail polish, to think about the fact that the top coat and base coat at the salon have just the same junk in them as everything else. I have read or heard somewhere something about 'shrinkage' when you use a five-free lacquer with other high-chemical polishes, so we'll see what happens over the next couple weeks of showers, slippers, the occasional workout and other general wear and tear.

Stay tuned for Part 2 of the review!

-- Jazzy

No rhyme or reason

Just a quick scheduling note to let you know that I will be posting during the next 10 days, but not with any sort of regularity. If it happens, it happens, and if it doesn't, well, check back often to see if there's anything new. I expect it to be a slow news period, which means we'll get to have some fun with more product reviews and About Face features.

Best,
Jazzy

Holiday blogging

This post actually has nothing to do with chemicals, or cosmetics, or anything... 

This commercial wrecks me every time. I especially love how disheveled everyone is, puffy-eyed, tear-streaked faces, bed head, all of it.

So whatever you celebrate, however you do it, with whomever your loved ones are, enjoy it to the fullest. 

With hope and peace and love and trust, happy, Happy Holidays to everyone!
-- Jazzy

Smell ya lata, Triclosan

Big news this week...that sleeping giant the FDA is finally lumbering closer to a decision that would reduce the use of triclosan -- which most commonly appears in hand soap and some toothpaste but also in many products carrying the Microban label. 

Tons of coverage from all the major news outlets, because there's just so much great drama to be had here. Chemical danger lurking in your bathroom! Industry shakeups! The FDA's official announcement is here; NBCnews.com's story here, the New York Times' coverage is here, and even Forbes weighed in here.

Echoing the growing sentiment among scientists, physicians and environmentalists that triclosan does more harm than good, the FDA on Monday proposed a new rule that gives manufacturers the burden of proof to show that triclosan and its antibacterial cousins are safe and effective.

It's an interesting plan. Instead of saying one way or another whether or not antibacterial chemicals should be appearing in the vast majority of everyday household products, the government is instead taking the stance of being a big pain in the a$$ to manufacturers. If the rule passes -- some time in 2016 -- the FDA still will not actually be regulating the chemical. Companies which cannot over the course of the next year provide data proving safety and effectiveness of antibacterials will have to stop using the chemicals in their products.

Nothing comes off store shelves. No bans. Just a bunch of big, big corporations with their feathers ruffled because somebody's asked them to make safer products. By comparison, Canada has declared triclosan outright toxic. 'Nuff said.

The link for submitting public comments on the proposed rule is here. Note how difficult and convoluted they make for consumers to get involved. It may very well take all 180 days for me to figure out how to submit an actual comment.

I urge you to look through the news coverage, read up on the issue, and raise your voice. It's taken the FDA too many decades to act, but consumers can do what they do best -- make some noise -- every day.

Yours in cleaner living,
Jazzy

Happy Friday!

It's Friday! Holiday crunch time. I'm working on a couple product reviews, but they're taking a while because I want proper before/after photos and I'm a loser who can't manage to carve out the time I need to do it right.

In the meantime, I leave you with this look at the toxics lurking in your holiday decorations. Read it first, THEN decide how much you hate me. And for the record, it's not easy, being this much of a Scrooge. But I do it with love.

Happy weekend,
Jazzy

Thank you, universe

Sometimes the universe brings you gifts that are just too good, you know?

Gisele Bundchen showed up in my FB news feed twice yesterday. This photo was one of them:

Post by Gisele Bündchen.

Where to begin...there's a lot to hate on here, since the whole thing reeks of privilege and narcissism. I'm not going to help matters, but what I'm concerned with has nothing to do with Gisele's perfect hair, flawless beauty or impossible figure.

It has to do with the baby.

If memory serves, that's baby Vivian. How old is she now? It looks like she might be nursing, but we don't know for sure. Doesn't matter. What does matter is that this baby has been caught in the middle of a very, very toxic publicity stunt, literally at the hands of her mother.

Maybe the aesthetician isn't really painting Gisele's nails. Maybe the hair stylists had already done Gisele's hair, and the whole thing is just a staged look at how the mega rich multitask (the lighting is what's tipping me off, plus the fact that there just happened to be a photographer hanging around with the beauty squad). But the message behind the imagery doesn't change, does it? 

Mrs. Brady got a lot of praise and support in the comments attached to the photo. I didn't read all 3,000+ comments, but for the sake of the argument let's guess that the point of this photo is to show how hands-on she is as a parent, how she doesn't let her globe trotting life/career interfere with parenting. Ok. But you want me to believe that someone with the resources to have a 'beauty squad' doesn't also have the resources to know what the chemicals in nail polish and hair products are doing to her infant?

Did we not just yesterday visit a pretty thorough piece about the effects of common household chemicals on the neurodevelopment of children? Click here to see it again.

Whether you agree or not, a photo like this has far-reaching implications. Just skim through the comments to see for yourself. Many, many women thanking Gisele for being not just a model, but a role model. Folks would be singing a very different tune (and bearing torches and pitchforks) if there was a cigarette somewhere in that scene. But no one seems to mind that little Viv has no choice but to breath in all the nasty fumes from the nail and hair products that the beauty squad is yielding. Last time I checked, that wasn't good parenting.

-- Jazzy 

Going straight to your head

Who remembers this one?

I've totally dated myself there, haven't I? No matter. It was a compelling public service announcement back then (poor grammar aside), and it still is today.

This is drugs.
This is your brain on drugs.
Any questions?

But this post isn't about drugs. Or maybe it is? Over the weekend Mother Jones ran this piece, originally published before Thanksgiving at OnEarth, that explores the link between environmental pollutants, toxins and the such and pediatric neurological development. 

The short of it is that a physician at Columbia and her team of researchers have found higher levels of neuro disabilities in children with higher exposures to a number of commonly-used chemicals. These range from pesticides, flame retardants, the chemicals in exhaust fumes, and more.

Dr. Federica Perera has been spearheading the 'Mothers and Children Study' which has followed the lives and health of hundreds of women and their children since 1998. The prospective study provides an invaluable amount of hard data regarding how chemicals cross the placenta, once thought to be nearly impenetrable, and what they then do to fetal development.

I'm not going to comb through every finer point of the article; you can read it yourself to see how researchers are seeing correlations between exposures and developmental problems like lower IQ scores, behavior issues and what the author calls neurodevelopment disabilities (ADHD, etc).

What I like about the piece is the growing momentum for the science behind the ideas. Industry is doing their best to refute studies and research claims, but at some point consumers will see it for what it is: smoke and mirrors. Who do you trust, the pediatrician who treats your child or the company that puts profit ahead of public health?

Look, I'm not trying to ruin your Tuesday. But this sh*t is real.

"Although levels of PBDEs (flame retardants) are now dropping in pregnant women, Americans still have the highest levels tested anywhere in the world. Flammability standards enacted in California in the 1970s resulted in the addition of PBDEs to everything from electronics to home furnishings nationwide. Unfortunately, the molecules easily migrate, accumulating in blood and breast milk and persisting for years."

Read the article. Think about what your brain, your kids brains, look like from just everyday living. Maybe they're not getting fried, but is a slow poaching any better? The end result is the same, no? 

I know what I'm NOT having for lunch.
-- Jazzy

Sales Flash

Not to be confused with 'flash sale', that thing where retailers have a sale that lasts just a few hours, driving demand by limiting customers' opportunity for a discount.

No, this is just a good old fashioned promotion, but a good one that I had to share. Last month I wrote a post about nail polish, and through my subsequent research read a lot about Zoya. The brand is quickly becoming one of the best-known "Five Free" lines, along with SpaRitual, meaning the lacquers do not contain the uber toxic ingredients of formaldehyde, formaldehyde resin, toluene, dibutyl phthalate, and camphor.

So lucky us; Ulta is running a Buy-2-get-1-free promotion on Zoya and SpaRitual polish. Fist pump!

My local Ulta had a great selection on colors, including the current holiday shades. I picked up three bottles of Zoya polish: Erikka, a light shimmery pink; Sarah, a glittery cranberry red; and Payton, a deep glittery purple. I can't wait to try one (or all) of these out, and you know that means a product review won't be far behind!

I've always loved the clever and witty names that OPI gives its colors, but now that I know about all those chemicals I'm so breaking up with salon brands. You can, too, if you get butt over to your nearest Ulta. Grab up some colors to go with all those great holiday outfits you'll be rocking in the next few weeks, or give them out as stocking stuffers.

-- Jazzy

Nasopharyngitis

The common cold. There's irony in the street name of a virus that changes every time it infects a new host, but it's 4 am and I'm too congested/tired to form any type of witty quip about it.

In any event, that's what kept me away from SMACK! last week. Hardly an excuse, but the last time I was sick I ended up with pneumonia and a cancer diagnosis. Yikes. You are all champs for understanding that sometimes there's just not enough left after dragging yourself through the day.

So this is me acknowledging my deadbeat stature, thanking you (again) for being patient and awesome, and trying to get back into the swing of things. Posts might be spotty this week, but at least you'll hear from me! And who knows, maybe I'll actually get the upper hand on this thing and get a decent night's sleep...

In sickness and -- hopefully, soon -- health,

Jazzy

Back to it

How was your Thanksgiving holiday? We had a really nice day, great company, delicious food. I avoided retail as best I could, running out only for toilet paper and a last-minute gift for the in-laws. 

It was a slow weekend. Did you watch Toxic Hot Seat? Let me know your thoughts. Me, I'm squashing the urge to ditch all the toxic comforts of modern living. Seriously, if I could find a cave somewhere that had wi-fi, I'd be all over it.

I did find this great piece over at HuffPo Canada, dispelling some of the shadier claims about 'natural' bath and personal care products marketed to babies and children. My favorite are the ones that boast "98% natural ingredients." Great, really. But it's the other 2% that I'm concerned about. The ingredients that AREN'T naturally derived (and even the ones that are can be suspect). 

Read the piece, share it on your Twitter or FB feed, spread the word to your friends that they need to PAY ATTENTION to labels, marketing claims and ingredients. It's basically meaningless to call something 'natural' or even 'organic' since many natural compounds can be harmful in their own ways. And, to quote the esteemed Alistair Moody, "Stay vigilant!"

Happy Monday,
-- Jazzy

Pass the egg nog

...with extra rum...

Yeah, so, holiday stress is getting the better of me and it's just not happening to get any posts done and up. And now I feel guilty about not dedicating an entire post about all the things for which I'm thankful, like, I don't know, not having nausea-inducing chemo during a holiday that's devoted to eating?

How about some weekend blogging instead? Because I don't know about you, but I won't be going anywhere near a mall during Black Friday-thru-Sunday, even if they were giving the stuff away. I like that plan. We can all stay in our PJs, bonus.

In the meantime, have a totally awesome Thanksgiving!! Enjoy your holiday libations, your crazy relatives and of course all the food. And a special, huge thanks to everyone who visits SMACK! because I am so grateful for the chance to have anything worth reading!

-- Jazzy

Pass the popcorn

It's Thanksgiving week! Also Hanukkah. At the same time! I've read that the two holidays won't fall together again for something like another 70,000 years. I won't lie, I am a super dork who thinks that that's really cool, for many reasons that have nothing to do with today's post.

I had big plans for this week's posts. Light, entertaining, easy breezy to go with your turkey and all the fixins. And I'm trying, really, to keep the sanctimonious lecturing at a minimum. I'm trying, I swear.

But I just...can't...help...it...

Last week the HBO documentary "Toxic Hot Seat" premiered at DOC NYC 2013, following a group of Chicago Tribune reporters as they try to uncover the truth behind the questionable safety of fire retardants that are used in furniture and clothing. Nicholas Kristof at the New York Times wrote this excellent op-ed piece in support of the movie, which makes its broadcast premiere tonight on HBO (9:00 EST).

Here's the trailer:

Now I know some of you have HBO, because if we're honest about anything it's that all we're really doing here is biding time until Game of Thrones Season 4. How stinking easy is it to program your DVR or add the movie to your playlist on HBO Go, huh? 

We ALL need to see this film. Not just parents, or hippies, or liberals. Everyone. Because EVERYONE -- regardless of religion, race, political affiliation, socio-economic whatever -- sits on the same furniture that is treated with useless, toxic chemicals.

I know it doesn't seem like the kind of subject matter that jives with the 'warm fuzzies' of the holiday season, but maybe that's the point. To make us a little uncomfortable. To make us wonder. To make us realize that our complacency comes at a price.

Surely you'll need a break from Uncle Joe's bad jokes or Aunt Glinda's relationship advice at some point during Thanksgiving weekend. Watch "Toxic Hot Seat." I know I am.

-- Jazzy  

Early release

I think I have to peace out a little early this week. There's just way too much on my schedule and to-do list before Turkey Day next week. Turkey Day next week!!!! Now I'm really stressed out.

My hope is to pre-write some posts for next week so that it's not totally devoid of anything (because, let's be honest, that need for even the briefest distraction is so strong during any family gathering). I'm also working on an About Face feature which should be fun.

Talk soon!

Jazzy

Early delivery

There was some pretty good news activity this week regarding a possible link between phthalate levels in pregnant women and premature birth rates. JAMA Pediatrics published a study to its website Monday that identified higher levels of phthalates -- the chemicals that make plastics flexible -- in women who delivered their babies before 37 weeks. 

Reuters Health picked up the story later Monday, and then HuffPo and NBC News followed suit, both running coverage from LiveScience. CBS News did some original reporting Monday evening, going so far as to write "The Food and Drug Administration states that the effect of phthalates on health remain not well-defined."

Isn't that interesting! The FDA can't tell us if a pervasively-used chemical is safe or not!

Here's what the medical expert CBS News talked to had to say:

"Dr. Stephen E. Welty, the chief of the neonatology service at Texas Children's Hospital in Houston, told CBSNews.com that he considered the association between preterm birth and phthalate exposure to be strong. 

He admitted it would be impossible to avoid phthalates completely, but said there are some things people can do to reduce their exposure. He suggested not eating or storing food in plastic containers, because phthalates are known to leech into food items. Welty also said to be careful to use cosmetics that have even low levels of phthalates."

I added the bold type there for emphasis. Because, please tell me, where does one find food NOT packaged in plastic? Everything in the grocery store comes in a bag. Or some other type of flexible plastic something. So even if I use nothing but glass and ceramic food storage at home, my food spends its journey to my kitchen in nothing but plastic. 

It's worth the read, even if you're not big on learning about things like phthalates. Which I totally get, because it's not the most uplifting news. But if you know someone with child, this may help her and that little bean inside her have a better, lower-phthalate chance at a healthy, full term delivery.

-- Jazzy

Tomato, tomahto

See if you can spot the difference between these two products from Organix:

one of these things is not like the other...
photo credit: Center for Environmental Health

Besides the obvious: color, shampoo/conditioner, etc. Down at the very bottom. The product label. The shampoo on the left says 'organic' while the conditioner on the right says 'ogx.'

This slight but significant change has come about after months of the company Organix coming under fire for its product labeling, specifically the misuse of the term 'organic'. Huh. You mean that a product sold under the brand name 'Organix' isn't full of organic ingredients? How can that be?

It's a little like how champagne is champagne only if it's from the Champagne region of France. 

Turns out, under California law, a company can claim its product is organic only if 70 percent of the ingredients are organic. The Center for Environmental Health sued the company for its misleading product labeling. Because guess what -- its products have hardly any organic ingredients.

A court found in favor of CEH, and ordered Organix to pay a settlement of $6.5 million. Furthermore, the company has been made to change its packaging for items sold in California, as of June 2013. But not in other states. So the false claims that are illegal in one state are A-OK in the other 49. 

I like that Organix/Ogx/whatever is being held accountable. I like that folks are drawing the connection (or, in most cases, the disconnection) between labeling and formulations. But I don't like how states' laws on retail marketing benefit companies more than they benefit consumers. It's time to turn up the heat, folks.

Check out how EWG rates Organix products here, and GoodGuide's ratings here. You can see original coverage of the lawsuit at WSJ.com, Upstart Business Journal, and CosmeticsDesign.com. And then think about what you can tell your elected officials about making the retail marketplace more consumer-friendly.

Yours in cleaner living,
Jazzy

Hair today, gone in 2 weeks

Movember is in full swing. Do you know anyone who's growing out a 'stache for prostate and testicular cancer awareness? This post is less about the 'staches and more about getting rid of them. Unless you're Tom Selleck, for sure your better half is counting the days until that sh*t gets shaved off.

The timing works out, because we've not covered hair removal here at SMACK! So I thought a roundup of related products would be a good help to those of you who don't want to celebrate your man's commitment to cancer awareness by putting toxic chemicals on his handsome face.

And I ran out of shaving cream. So this post helps me figure out what to buy the next time I'm at the store. Win win.

Here's how GoodGuide sees it: Dr. Bronner's and Aubrey Organics take nearly all the top spots (overall score), with drugstore favorite Skintimate filling out the listing of worst-rated products ('0' for health score. yikes.). That didn't really surprise me. I should also add that Skintimate had a few versions of its products with a much better '6' for health score. I WAS quite surprised to see products from Kiss My Face with the same health score.

Philosophy also had a bunch of products with a great health score from GoodGuide, but there weren't really any mainstream brands in the top scoring products.

EWG's SkinDeep database ranks 63 different products with the key words "shaving cream." It also ranks 93 hair removal waxes. Barbasol and Gillette each have a couple products in the middle of the ranks (so not bad but not great). But the field gets ugly pretty quickly, with only 7 products (out of 63) earning a green rating -- the healthiest -- from EWG.

The take-aways here: not all products are created equally. As with many categories, products within a brand family don't have consistent rankings for toxicity. That makes your job as a consumer so much harder. Which, really, shaving off a mustache shouldn't take so much thought.

Also, there's a subtle, underlying message that irks me. The healthier products are lesser-known brands, harder to find and usually more expensive than what your favorite supermarket or Target will stock on their shelves. So what are the choices for consumers who don't have the extra seven or eight dollars to spend on shaving cream? Too many people don't have the option of spending more to get a healthier product, but they are no less deserving of lower toxicity than anyone else. When can we move beyond the socio-economics and just make/market/sell healthier consumer products because it's the right thing to do?

Happy Tuesday!
Jazzy

Finally!

Better late than never! It's here -- the long-anticipated, only-two-months-overdue Skin Deep app...hooray!!

Click here for the Apple version, and here for the Android version. 

I got the email from Ken Cook at EWG on Saturday. Downloaded it immediately. And then promptly ordered my dinner companions to do the same. Here are some screen shots:

 

What do you think? Here are my thoughts:

I like the barcode scan feature. I also like the familiarity to the Web-based Skin Deep database. Job well done, translating the database to a mobile, small-screen interface.

There are also some things I don't like. The app is...simple. By that, I don't mean easy to use (though it is, which is good). I mean that it really only does one thing. By comparison, the GoodGuide and Think Dirty apps are much more dynamic, whether by providing links to purchase the products you've searched or by recommending comparable products or by letting you submit products that aren't included in their databases. Those apps are much more interactive, making the consumer/app user a true contributor to the process.

Maybe I'm just an impatient clam who has too high expectations. I have to remember the app is new and they're still working out the kinks. I have to be patient as I continue to navigate the app and get to know its functionality better. And the best way for that to happen is with continued use.

What makes me SO glad is that consumers can finally feel prepared to make the informed, safer purchases they want to make. That's a great way to start the week.

-- Jazzy

Avon's trying

I just read about a grant that Avon awarded last May to researchers at Tufts University in Boston (original news brief here). Drs. Ana Soto and Carlos Sonnenschein received a grant of $450,000 towards their breast cancer research, which focuses on the role of natural hormones and environmental chemicals in the development of the disease.

Here's the twist: Soto and Sonnenschein were the first to shine a spotlight on the estrogen-mimicking compounds in household plastics. Back in the 1980s. Fast forward 30 years, and now the team studies how sex hormones regulate cell proliferations and how environmental contaminants may screw up the process.

So I like that the Avon Foundation is supporting research that may ultimately impact Avon's own product development. The grant was almost a quarter of the nearly $2 million that the foundation awarded to nine Boston-area research organizations following the city's annual Avon Walk for Breast Cancer. That's good. 

What's not so good is that in the THREE DECADES since Soto and Sonnenschein first noticed a link between the chemicals leaching from plastic and cell growth, not a whole lot has changed. Plastics manufacturers have been slow to remove questionable chemicals from the material and consumers have been slower to respond to this blatant complacency.

It took the US less than a decade to plan and execute a successful mission to the moon. But there is no urgency to finding the solutions to preventing environmental cancers. According to the Silent Spring Institute, rates of breast cancer rose 40 percent in the last quarter of the 20th century. When will we, as a nation, put brain power towards halting the incidence of the disease?

-- Jazzy

WSJ covers the fray

I just found this article over at WSJ about the stalled efforts between the FDA and the Personal Care Products Council to tighten regulation over cosmetics and their ingredients. The article's a few weeks old, but I'm going to brush off any feelings of being late to the party so that we can talk about why it's still important.

For starters, it's the Wall Street Journal. THE standard for business journalism. They don't cover fluff or bullish*t. To me, this article signifies a well-deserved legitimacy to the argument that chemicals have no place in our cosmetics and personal products. Street cred, if you will. These aren't a bunch of hippy, tree-hugging liberal moms with too much time on their hands. They are real organizations, involving the government in the matter of protecting American consumers.

If you have a few minutes, read the article. It's great context for the larger battle to give the FDA the oversight it's been lacking and to give cosmetics manufacturers the warning call they need to clean up their formulations.

Also, a shout-out to New Jersey, whose state reps Frank Pallone Jr (D) and Leonard Lance (R) crossed party lines to get cosmetics legislation passed through Congress. What are your elected officials doing for you?

Yours in troublemaking,
Jazzy

SMACK! Reviews: PaperStone & Epicurean cutting boards

I'm trying to reduce the amount of plastic in my life. Some of it's non-negotiable, like my appliances and my vehicle, and some of it I can't control, like nearly all the packaging of everything, but some of it I can kick to the curb.

The kitchen's a great place to start. About a month ago I wrote this post about my cutlery and the Boos Block maple cutting board that I decided was a good investment. Since then I've been on the prowl for new cutting boards, checking out what looks good to replace my cheap plastic ones.

This is by no means a new pursuit; Beth Terry over at My Plastic Free Life wrote about this very thing back in 2007. And you know what? Not a whole lot has changed in 6 years. 

My local HomeGoods had a decent selection of boards from Epicurean and PaperStone boards. I hadn't yet read Beth's post, so I bought into the idea of a dishwasher-safe product that was made from recycled paper and decided to give each one a try. 

(Remember that we don't grade things anymore here at SMACK! but I will stay true to my opinionated, judgmental roots to give you the dish. Here we go.)

Epicurean has been around for about 10 years, making cutting boards and other food prep tools for residential and commercial kitchens. They market their home kitchen items as sustainably sourced, made in the USA. Here's some other language from the website:

"Our signature materials is made with multiple layers of Forest stewardship Council (FSC) certified wood fibers, compressed with a food-safe resign. We also have introduced a line of Eco Plastic products that utilize 100% post-consumer recycled milk jugs. All of our products are made in the USA."

I like that the company has found a use for old milk jugs, but the fact that they've added plastic cutting boards to their product lineup feels like selling out to me. I thought the whole point was to make professional-grade tools for the home cook using natural materials?

Anyway, I picked up a non-slip board in natural with removable silicone corners. I'm thinking it's an older version, since I didn't see the exact one on the website, but no matter. The size and heft of the board are nice; easy to lift and move around the kitchen, whether for food transfer or during cleanup. The board is smooth and does seemingly well under a sharp knife. The board will take scratches (my knives are freshly sharpened) but they aren't super noticeable, perhaps because it's a solid material (as opposed to veneers). 

The same more or less goes for the PaperStone Yellowstone Gripper board that I picked out, this one a smaller size (like a cheese board) in a darker "Pine Cone" brown. Instead of silicone corners, PaperStone uses rubberized feet. The board would be reversible, for use on both sides, if not for the really annoying sticker that won't come off! 

Seriously, it's going to take a lot of elbow grease to get this thing off. Again, I'm thinking it's because the board has probably been sitting in a warehouse somewhere for years upon years, giving the adhesive time to really set. I can't believe PaperStone would purposefully label a product that renders half of it useless. (Perhaps not. Apparently there are a slew of complaints on Amazon about the sticker.)

PaperStone markets its boards similarly to Epicurean: recycled materials, FSC certified, petroleum-free. I thought the petro-free was a good choice, until I read some of the more informative comments in Beth Terry's post. In super fine print, PaperStone divulges that the boards are made with engineered phenolic resins. A quick Google or Wikipedia search will point you to the fact that phenolic resins are actually formaldehyde-based. Yuk.

All in all, I like my wood-fiber cutting boards. I like the idea of them, I like how they work, I like the low maintenance. But the presence of formaldehyde is disconcerting. My search for chemical-free prep surface clearly isn't over.

Back to the drawing board,
Jazzy

Back to life, back to reality

Who remembers that song? Talk about a throwback. I was out of state through the weekend and the holiday for a funeral and, as such, am just getting back to the swing of things. Like cleaning out the dishwasher and blogging. Anyone miss me? 

Funerals are one of those things that make me think adulthood pretty well blows. Sure, I love driving a car and using a credit card and drinking (never all together) and all other grown-up things, but I miss that time in my life when death and loss weren't so...regular. It's hard, you know?

So it's a short week here at SMACK! I'm trying to make up for the lost time, making sure the posts are written and uploaded on time. I'm keeping an eye on industry news so that we can cover whatever breaks this week, like maybe some more legal drama with Revlon?

And I've just realized that each paragraph ends with a question mark. Clearly I'm rusty from my days away from the blogosphere. C'mon Jazzy, get with it! We have sh*t to talk about!

Missed you too,
Jazzy

Life happens

And when Life Happens, other things don't. I had a product review planned for today's post, and then I learned of the sudden, heartbreakingly unexpected death of my dear friend's father. I may or may not get around to finishing the review and getting it posted, but wanted to let you know either way.

Life happens. Hug your kids, call your parents, snuggle your cat. Count your blessings. No, don't count them; just see them and appreciate them.

Peace,

Jazzy

Revlon in the hot seat

Revlon, oh Revlon. What a fine mess you've gotten yourself into.

Two weeks ago SMACK! shared an action alert from the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and the Breast Cancer Fund, urging consumers to put pressure on the powers-that-be at Revlon to reduce the toxic chemicals in their products (see original post here). It's a team effort with the group Ultraviolet, which created its own petition for Revlon. Apparently the ensuing negative attention is kinda frosting Revlon's a$$ a little.

Here's a timeline of events to get you up to speed:

Oct 2:   Revlon announces that David Kennedy has been named interim CEO, replacing Alan Ennis in the corner office
Oct 25:  The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and Ultraviolet announce their joint efforts to campaign against toxic chemicals in Revlon cosmetics
Oct 31:  Revlon names Lorenzo Delpani President and CEO
Nov 1:   CSC and Ultraviolet issue a press release about receiving the threat of legal action from Revlon

I love this for many, many reasons. First, I find PR debacles of this magnitude very, very entertaining. Not the ones where people or cute animals get hurt, but these, when you can watch the suits make the dumbest possible decisions again and again. 

Interesting to note Revlon's pretty quick response time. They were obviously feeling defensive when they took that swipe back at the Campaign, the Breast Cancer Fund, and Ultraviolet, in the form of this letter. I mean, a week is nothing in corporate time. I swear big companies run on the same clock as the NFL, where 5 minutes lasts about an hour and a half. And this pestilant little problem is hardly how Delpani wants to start his tenure.

But still, Revlon, dude, tell me you didn't really just go after the little guy. The feminist group. The cancer group. The day after breast cancer awareness month ended (that is no coincidence). Does the story of David and Goliath ring a bell at all? You do know how that ended, right? And you do know how the Internet loves an underdog, no? 

**facepalm**

So, er, Revlon, really the only choice here was to eat your sh*t and tell folks you would review your product ingredients to ensure the high quality standards that helped make Revlon a global leader in the cosmetics industry. See how easy that was?

But that's not what Revlon opted to do. Instead, they tried to use their might, wrapped up in lots of legal and scientific terms and other big, intimidating language. Defamatory. Misleading. Irresponsible. Maybe they were hoping everyone would go off quietly into the night, taking everything off the Internet with them.

They were wrong.

Revlon forgot the first rule of all things that go viral on the Internet: that sh*t spreads like wildfire. The leaders behind this campaign, upon receiving Revlon's sternly-worded letter, made the bold decision to share it. While still controlling the message and maintaining the upper hand. So now everyone who's following this story knows that Revlon is acting like a jerk. And sure, plenty of you will tell me that the company has to protect its interests which, yeah, it does. But not by trying to strong-arm organizations that tap into your customer base. How is alienating current and potential customers ever a good strategy?

So far no major news outlets will touch this story. If the folks at Ultraviolet, CSC and the Breast Cancer Fund have their way, though, this thing will very soon blow wide open. They issued another joint press release telling Revlon to stop bullying them and then put together this graphic for the interwebs:

And here we are, talking about how Revlon can't get out of its own way to take care of a problem of its own making. Well played, activists, well played.

-- Jazzy

merci beaucoup

Have I mentioned that you guys are freaking awesome? October was a huge, huge month for SMACK! and I owe it all to the readers who take time out of their busy days to visit. Thank you, thank you!

November is off to a rockin' start already, and my hope is that it's just as great as last month. Keep sending in your comments, ideas for product reviews or About Face features and anything else you'd like to see more of here!

As for the rest of the week, we have a product review planned, this time in the category of housewares, and we'll finish off by talking about -- what else? -- my hair.

Peace,
Jazzy

Nails on a chalkboard

I did a 5k road race over the weekend. Note that I didn't use the word "run" there, because I didn't run. It was more this sorry attempt at walk/jog, and it wasn't pretty. But it didn't matter, not one bit. I did it and I finished strong, mindful the whole time of the same event last year which I missed because I literally couldn't get out of bed from chemo. So yeah, just being able to do it felt pretty awesome. The endorphin high was real sweet, too.

Surprisingly my legs aren't super sore, but I think I've earned myself a pedicure. Sinking into the massage chair, the hot stones, it's too much. Must. Go. Now!

Except for the fact that nail polish is easily one of the most toxic beauty products out there. OPI's "Sweet Heart" gets a big goose egg for health from GoodGuide. Drugstore favorites Sally Hansen, Revlon and Rimmel all come under fire over at the Skin Deep Database, rounding out the worst-scoring products, and Think Dirty has no love whatsoever for Essie. Eeesh.

That's the thing here. Girl loves her mani/pedis. No, literally. According to this article at Time.com, 2012 was a record year for the U.S. nail polish industry, topping $760 million. Hell, even dudes can hit up Hammer & Nails in LA, celebrating its grand opening this week, for their very own "just for guys" MANicure.

What I didn't like reading was a statistic from market intel company Mintel estimating that as many as 92% of teen and tween girls are using nail polish and other nail products, starting as young as 9 years old. The company estimates that nearly 97% of 12-14 year old girls use nail polish.

Start 'em young! It's a bit problematic, if you think about it. Culturally, hitting the nail bar is such a natural mother/daughter bonding activity. You can even have birthday parties there! And if you're a bride, puh-lease. That pre-wedding manicure is practically a religious experience. 

But girls' bodies undergo so many changes during adolescence, and the presence of super toxic chemicals -- like those in nail polish -- can't be without consequences.

The "5" as they're called -- formaldehyde, formaldehyde resin, toluene, dibutyl phthalate, and camphor -- are considered so hazardous that there are entire organizations devoted to protecting the rights and health of nail salon workers. 


My advice? BYO. It's one of the latest trends in the category, going "5-free". Well-Good NYC has a great listing of twelve 5-free brands that cover the spectrum of price and prestige, from Chanel to Mineral Fusion (at Whole Foods) and SpaRitual (at Ulta).

Notably missing from that list is Zoya, which staged a fun nail polish exchange for Earth Day 2013. I hope they do it again next year! Chick and Silky Polish also claim to be free of these toxins.

The point here? There are options. You don't have to settle for the stinky, head-ache inducing crap that's poisoning who knows how many nail workers. Check out a few of these brands and all their shades, and invest in a few bottles of lower-chemical polish, so that the next time you're in the mood for a mani/pedi, you know you can use something that is better for you, better for the person scrubbing your feet, and better for the environment.

-- Jazzy