Weekend blogging

So what was once irregular is becoming more of a thing, it would seem. Friday my family received some sh*tty horrible news, and I just didn't have my wits about me to get anything posted. Though I did have a post planned! Cute and light-hearted, concerning of all things shoes and shopping, but nonetheless my heart was too weighed down.

I tell you not as an excuse but because I know we all have lives outside of the sites of the Internet we visit. Whether we're seeking information, entertainment, escape or some other form of fulfillment, we take real time from our real lives to be online, and I am hating myself for the thought of any readers wasting so much as a minute looking for new content here and coming up empty-handed.

My thanks again for your patience and continued support! I am still/again/always floored to see SMACK!'s readership values grow and climb. Seriously, this has been our best month yet. I love you guys for visiting, reading, sharing. Keep it up!

With tons of gratitude,
Jazzy

What's for dinner?

Back during the holidays (I know, that was like, a lifetime ago), this awesome spoof on the Williams-Sonoma holiday catalog made its rounds on the interwebs. Check it out, especially if you need a good laugh to break up your Thursday. It's still really, really entertaining. Go ahead, I'll wait for you.

Hilarious, no?

Puts my need for a new griddle pan in perspective. Yup, I just said 'my need for a new griddle pan'. So now in addition to sounding super middle-aged, I sound super pretentious. Hey! It's not like I said 'a need for a new designer handbag' or 'a need to attend a Botox party'...

My griddle pan harkens back from the early 2000's. It's from Calphalon, non-stick, and I have made many, many batches of pancakes and quesadillas on it. Lately, though, it's losing some of its non-stick, signaling what I think is the retirement of this pan.

Now that I put a little more thought into what touches my body -- including what touches the food that goes into my body -- I want to do some research about cookware to see if there's a safe(r) version of non-stick anything.

The best-known version of non-stick -- DuPont's Teflon -- both revolutionized the category and then gave it something of a bad rep, what with more than a few pretty sketchy toxic chemicals found in the cookware coating. The main culprit is perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), which the EPA describes as: 

"Companies use PFOA to make fluoropolymers, substances with special properties that have thousands of important manufacturing and industrial applications. PFOA can also be produced by the breakdown of some fluorinated telomers, substances that are used in surface treatment products to impart soil, stain, grease, and water resistance. PFOA is very persistent in the environment and has been found at very low levels both in the environment and in the blood of the general U.S. population. Studies indicate that PFOA can cause developmental and other adverse effects in laboratory animals."

I added the bold for emphasis, to point out that PFOA isn't just found in cookware, but in a huge variety of stain- and water-resistant products. That's greeaaaaaat. So I'm opening another Pandora's box here. The more I know, the less I want to. If you want to know more, check out this great Mother Jones piece back in 2007.

That new griddle pan won't be happening anytime soon. At least not until I have a better idea of which cookware companies use which chemicals. Is there even such a thing as a non non-stick griddle? I have a feeling this is going to take a higher-than-usual dose of skepticism. Stay tuned. 

Yours,
Jazzy

No more tears

Last week Johnson & Johnson announced that it had met a previously set goal of removing two questionable chemicals from its products. The New York Times covered the news here. It's an excellent article, and I encourage everyone who hasn't done so already to read it. I know week-old news is even older in the Internet Age, but its importance doesn't diminish with passing time.

What's encouraging is that consumers are using their voices -- individual and collective -- to steer corporate decisions and market movement. IT WORKS. It takes time, and effort, but it does work.

For whatever reason, the NYT is the only mainstream news outlet covering the story. Did J&J go to them for an exclusive, effectively 'selling' the news in return for a gentler, less critical take in the final piece? Perhaps. I keep an eye out for more coverage, for I find it hard to believe that a story big enough for the Times isn't big enough for anyone else. Let me know what you've seen or heard about it, and together we'll get a sense for who's covering the very type of change we all want to see in the products we use. 

Yours,
Jazzy

Because toxins don't discriminate

I came across a new (to me) blog last week, and wanted to share it. Organic Beauty Vixen is run by Sherrell Dorsey, who hails from Seattle to represent women of color in the fight to clean up cosmetics and personal products. I really love Sherrell's 'Blaq List' -- a really good rundown of chemicals to avoid in your daily beauty routine. 

Now I don't really know what the demographic breakdown of SMACK!'s readership is, nor do I need to, in order to recommend this blog. The point here is that we ALL need as much information as we can get to be smarter consumers (wasn't that one of our New Year's resolutions?). Do you think endocrine disruptors, formaldehyde releasers, hormone mimickers and the such care what we look like?

I for one have a lot of learn from women like Sherrell, and have added OBV to my reading list. Check it out for yourself and see what you think!

Yours,
Jazzy

Dr. King's Day

It's a holiday, so no real posting today. I'll try to make up for the short week, in return for the steady support that SMACK! readers have shown the site for 2014. Not even three weeks into the month and we're already ahead of December in readership values. You guys are awesome!!!

So what's in store for this week? We've got some news to catch up on, and some other things to check out on the Interwebs. Tuesday will be my Monday, so a very, VERY productive day. Make sure to check the site often!

Yours,
Jazzy

Fabrics 101

Or, Part Deux of "The Dog Ate My Post"...

Got something of an education today about fabrics and textiles, specifically viscose, the fiber from which Trader Joe's Super Amazing Reusable Kitchen Cloths are made. Here's a quick rundown of what I learned from the website of a Swiss company, SwicoFil AG:

• Viscose is another name for Rayon. Sometimes the names are used together, other times not. Seems like the use of the fiber determines what it's called on the label.
• Viscose rayon is a man-made fiber, but NOT a synthetic fiber. It is made from wood pulp and therefore behaves more like its natural cousins cotton and linen than its synthetic cousins polyester and nylon (the official industry terms are cellulosic and thermoplastic, respectively).
• Viscose rayon is used in apparel, household textiles, and even in industrial applications as reinforcement to such things are tires, hoses and belts.

Ok, Jazzy, we're asleep now. Can you just get to part where you tell us whether or not viscose makes a good cleaning cloth?

I think so? That's not very helpful, is it. Here's what I'm thinking. Viscose is made from a natural resource, but so is polyester (since oil is, technically, a natural resource). Without more insight into the processes by which viscose is made, or how it interacts with the environment, there's not a whole lotta judgment I can apply here. The same goes for nearly any fabric, since how much do any of use really know about how the fabrics of our homes and wardrobes are made?

Seems to me like we're about to go down a rabbit hole here to learn about textiles and their different environmental footprints. Right now it looks like a foggy, confusing landscape, and I'm sure as we learn more there will be surprises and disappointments just as we find in cosmetics and other personal products. But we can't unlearn anything, can we? 

Happy weekend,
Jazzy

The dog ate my post

No, seriously. Things like that really do happen. My dogs, who, throughout their 6-year lifespan, have eaten items too numerous and varied to believe, ate the topic of yesterday's post. This is why dogshaming.com is one of my favorite websites.

My dogs think viscose is yummy

So, literally, they ate yesterday's post. (It is not lost on me that in the UK this statement would read to mean the dogs ate my mail. I think that's the one thing they haven't ever done. Yet.) I had bought a package of Trader Joe's "Super Amazing Reusable Kitchen Cloths" and made the mistake of leaving them on the kitchen table. My plan had been to take some cute photos for the blog, but before I could do that, the dogs absconded with them to tear and chew up in the living room.  #!*%!#*!!!

Thankfully, most of the mess was the shredded packaging. The cloths themselves were still nearly whole and still very useable. Ok. Now that my frustration with them has subsided (it took a full 36 hours, and many, many Vanilla Bean Joe-Joes cookies), we can try to cobble together what's left of a post about this product.

I first have to cop to using paper towels. A lot of paper towels. But they have their limits when it comes to cleaning. And they can get kind of expensive, even if you belong to the warehouse club and use your coupons and all that. And that whole tree-killing thing that causes an uptick in my stomach acid. So this product meets a lot of needs. Or least uses all the right buzz words. 

TJ's calls the cloths 'super amazing' because they are absorbent but also release water quickly and easily. Not unlike those little towels that Olympic divers use. And that is a function of the fabric content -- in this case, viscose.

I don't know anything about viscose. Do you? Some reconnaissance is needed here, and I'm thinking that will take the form of a 'Part Deux' to this post. Double post day, aren't you lucky! I'll do some research and let you know what I find. In the meantime, it's Friday!

Later,
Jazzy

New Year's Resolutions, Take 2

I saw this list that the Breast Cancer Fund put out last week, of New Year's Resolutions that contribute to a cleaner, less toxic and less chemical life. Take a minute and check it out, and then come back for some discussion. Go ahead, I'll wait.

Back? Great. What'd you think? Me, I never lack for a strong opinion, and a couple of these items are of no exception.

I do like resolutions for the 'shoes-off' policy and avoiding flame-resistant sleepwear for kids. Those both make a lot of sense, with the bonus of being relatively easy to implement with a real and immediate benefit.

A couple others, though, with which I have issue. Replacing plastic containers, for instance (which is relevant to the next one about not using plastic in the microwave). I do totally agree with the notion of having less plastic in our lives. But the problem isn't with household use of plastic. Because I could never use another Tupperware container again, and my food would still be packaged in some form of plastic at the farm, factory and/or store. And there's nothing I can do about it.

Does that mean I give up on reducing the plastic in my home? No. In fact, I just replaced a junky old plastic colander that we'd used for fruit and veggies with a stainless steel one. But it's worth acknowledging that consumer use of plastic is just a small portion of how our food comes into contact with plastic on its way from the field to our tables. Plastic is cheap and easy, and that's why corporations like to use it. Getting that to change is the larger, more complex issue.

I also have a slight problem with the last two, kicking the can and breaking up with non-stick cookware. At my local grocery store, the pricing goes something like this: generic can of black beans, 99 cents (or I can get Goya's warehouse pack of six cans at BJs for $4.99)...BPA-free organic black beans, $2.99. 

Again, my issue is not with reducing the presence of BPA. My issue is with the fact that the average American simply cannot afford to do so. The price of even the most basic recipes will at least double by replacing the ingredients with foods that we *think* are processed with fewer chemicals. I don't like the message it sends -- similarly to how organic foods are that much more expensive -- that only those consumers who have the means deserve the healthier options.

Same goes with replacing your non-stick cookware. Who has the money to go out and drop a several hundred dollars on an all-stainless or copper set? 

I applaud BCF for creating a list that is meaningful and relevant to today's consumers. But it's too easy to tell folks to just ditch what they have and spend, spend, spend to get a safer, healthier alternative. More challenging -- but more informative and effective -- is to dig a little deeper into the reasons WHY plastic is so pervasive. WHY non-stick cookware appears in every American kitchen. WHY food is priced in such a way to uphold socio-economic discrepancies between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots'. WHY our biggest problem with enacting change is not the laws or the industry or the media (though they are all implicated), but with ourselves and the apathy and complacency we are all too happy to lie back upon.

Sanctimoniously yours,
Jazzy

From the tap

Both Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert had a field day last night with the drinking water contamination in West Virginia. If you missed their opening bits, enjoy them here:






Huh. We're not doing any gloating here, though, not with 300,000 people in and around Charleston going without clean drinking water. Because Freedom Industries built their chemical storage tanks upstream from a major water treatment plant. And then decided that regular inspections weren't really worthwhile. What were you doing in 1991? That's the last time these tanks were inspected. TWENTY THREE years ago. Jesus I'm old.

CNN has a pretty decent piece about the whole fiasco here. My favorite parts? This line: "Two U.S. congressmen say the spill exposes regulatory gaps in the country's chemical control laws." Ya think? But thank you, Representatives Henry Waxman (D-Calif) and Paul Tonko (D-NY) for pointing it out anyway. Because sometimes, recognizing what's terribly obvious can be the hardest thing of all.

And the bit where the head of WV Department of Environmental Protection (hahahahahaha) Randy Huffman says, "The materials they were storing there is not a hazardous material." Pathetic grammatical errors aside, I think the residents of the Charleston area who are puking and sh*tting their guts out would disagree.

I'm going to watch the fallout of this disaster. We'll see what change comes of it, since there are chemical AND energy companies with interests here. If nothing else, John Grisham's next novel just wrote itself.

Yours,
Jazzy

Fifty Shades of Orange

So last night's Golden Globes saw a real epidemic of something I'm calling Middle Aged Man Tan. McConaughey, Leo, Cooper, Robb Lowe and a few others really over did it at the tanning salon. I mean, they do know we all have HDTVs, right? Not that spray tan ever looks good anywhere, but it looks especially cheese in hi-def.

It got me thinking about self tanners. What are the chemicals in self-tanners and spray tanners? How do they work? That's what we need to know. So I'm going to do some reconnaissance to see if there's a good way to have sun-kissed skin that doesn't look, oh, you know, orange. 

Can you tell that I am just looking for any way to get through the rest of winter? No, no, really, it'll be good come Spring time -- and then finally Summer! -- to have an alternative to skin damaging sun exposure.

Have you ever used a self tanner? Or hit the spray tan salon? Let me know your experience  and help steer the, eh, research. And keep us looking like creepy middle-aged movie actors  desperately grasping for any piece of youth.

Yours,
Jazzy

Late start

Just a heads-up to let everyone know that it'll be a late post today...I am suffering from a Golden Globes hangover, more regrettable for the fact that the show, while it had many highlights, wasn't really all that good. 

Anyway, today's post will piggyback off of a phrase that popped into my head again and again and again during last night's telecast...spray tan.

Talk soon!
Jazzy

Brand Visit: Nivea

Soooo, when I said to come back later for SMACK's first Brand Visit, I hadn't originally meant this much later. But here we are, spending a lovely Friday night together.

Without the benefit of any consistency through brands or product lines, how do we as consumers know who's doing a good job making and selling safe products? It turns out that hardly any of the brands have a full lineup of safe offerings. So with each Brand Visit we'll try to sort through the noise and marketing to see what's worth trying and what you should avoid.

First up is Nivea, who dropped some serious cash to put its name all over Times Square for the heavily televised New Year's Eve celebration. Something about winter dry lips and kissing.

Bonus history lesson: Nivea is owned by Beiersdorf, the German company which also owns Eucerin and LaPrairie. The company itself was founded in 1882 by pharmacist Paul Beiersdorf, and leans heavily still today on positioning its brands as dermatologically developed, implying the inherent trust that consumers will give nearly anything with a medical slant. That's what marketing does, create associations for the benefit of the manufacturer, not the consumer. 

Ok, Nivea, let's see how you look under the lens of scrutiny. EWG rates 198 of the company's products, while GoodGuide includes 181 products in its rankings. We're not looking at every single one. Let's instead check out the better- and worse-rated items and see where the rating guides agree -- and disagree -- with how different products and ingredients are ranked.

(All this helps us be more informed consumers, as we touched on in our New Year's resolutions. You're welcome.)

We'll start by pointing out that EWG gives none of the Nivea products it ranks -- NONE -- a rating lower than '3'. Over at GoodGuide, just one Nivea product -- Silhouette Redefining Gel Cream -- receives a health rating higher than a 6. (Remember that both the Skin Deep and GoodGuide databases rank products on a 1-10 scale, using opposite extremes. GoodGuide reserves 10 as the best score, while for EWG it's a 0.)

Let's dig a little deeper into the ratings. EWG and GoodGuide seem in agreement about Nivea's Original Moisture Daily Lotion, each giving it a 'not bad, but not great' rating. And when we look at the individual ingredients, we see why. Both ratings guides call out the use of METHYLISOTHIAZOLINONE (MI or MIT), a common preservative in cosmetics. GoodGuide notes that Canada has restricted the use of the chemical. Did you know that last month the EU decided to ban MI altogether? Here's the news article from the Daily Mail. 

Errrr, aaawwwkward. I mean, that's one of the better-rated Nivea products.

The worst ones? At the Skin Deep database, they are a few Nivea for Men products and a handful of shower gels. GoodGuide fills nearly all its bottom-of-the-barrel slots with Nivea for Men.

This is getting long. The take-aways here are that if you're shopping for shower gel or men's skin care, Nivea's not your brand. If you do use any Nivea products, watch the ingredients, especially for that pesky MI. And also know that petroleum is one of the brand's cornerstone ingredients.

So Happy New Year, Nivea. Thanks for keeping our lips kissably soft.

Yours,
Jazzy

Friday love

It's Friday, and I am in a GREAT mood...thanks to all of you awesome readers, January is on pace to blow Dec '13 out of the water. Wow. I mean, really, it's humbling and amazing and just all-around freaking sweet to see SMACK!'s readership grow. You guys are the best.

I have gotten the question as to why I don't advertise yet. It's an understandable question, since that's what 99.99999% of blogs do. It definitely lends a bit of street cred to have banner ads and the such all over your site, but it got me thinking about how Google, AdSense, et al make that work. I mean, the ads are supposed to based on content, and well, given the inconsistency of safe products in the industry, I figure it's only a matter of time until an ad pops up for a product that SMACK! has spotlighted for being full of toxic junk.

See the problem? Seriously, I would look like the biggest a$$hole. Or worse, the ads make it look like I'm playing favorites. For me, right now, I can't put the pennies I'd make on advertising ahead of the message of the site. In other words, I'm not doing this for the money.

Come back later today for SMACK's very first Brand Visit. Nivea wanted to own the New Year, so that's where we're going first. And you know what? If you don't want attention -- good and bad -- don't go around asking for it.

Happy Friday,
Jazzy 

Healthy nails

Last month (last year!) I tried out nail color from Zoya, bringing it to my local nail salon for a spa pedi. You can read my review here. It still looks great! But my hands, they are in sh*t shape from the last gel manicure I had. The polish came off easily enough, but my nails are breaking and snagging super easily, no matter how short I keep them. Coincidence?

I bring it up because of this article in the San Francisco Chronicle, about the health of Bay area nail salons (and their workers and patrons). Once again California is showing up the other 49 with a program that encourages nail salons to use different products and practices that benefit the health of workers and customers alike. 

The Healthy Nail Salon Recognition Program, launched last year through Alameda County's Dept. of Environmental Health, gives the county's some 350 nail salons -- and about 1,000 manicurists employed by them -- a program for eliminating the toxic chemicals found in [too] many nail products.

If you're in that area, hit up Leann's Nails in Alameda. The salon was featured in the article and was publicly recognized by county officials for its participation in the program. Business owner Lan-Anh Truong gets it, too. She told the Chronicle, "Being in a healthy nail salon is good for my staff, good for my customers, good for my environment."

See? Win-win for everyone.

Now, remember that New Year's resolution about using your voice? Here's a great way to do it! Take this idea to your local officials. Use this article to show them that IT WORKS. Make the case that all the salon workers (go through the phone book and tally up the number of nail salons in your area, if you have to) and customers shouldn't be exposed to the 'Five' toxic chemicals found in traditional nail polish. That's real change.

Your favorite rabble-rouser,
Jazzy

Hump Day

I promise I won't use that title again for a long time...it's just, you know, the mid-week lull over here, so it seemed apropos. I am working on SMACK!'s first Brand Visit feature and also trying to get a product review in the queue.

How's 2014 treating you so far? Me, I'm pretty pumped with how things have started. January is shaping up to be a kick-ass month for the site, and I have all you readers to thank for it. So thank you! Keep reading, keep visiting, keep sharing. We're all better for it.

I picked up a pair of the BEST skinny cords the other day. On clearance, too! The fit is great, with just the right amount of stretch to move comfortably and not feel constricted. I love the color, too, a really great winter white...that is, until I realized that my teeth are pretty much the same color. What the wha??

Gross, right? I mean, I don't drink a ton of coffee or wine, and I have NEVER smoked, so why do my teeth look more yellow than white?

Something needs to be done about this, pronto. It seems like a really hazardous thing, to bleach one's teeth, so it was a really nice surprise to see Crest 3D White Whitestrips with a '2' rating over at the Skin Deep database.

In fact, EWG rates the ingredient hydrogen peroxide as a '5' -- so not totally benign but not completely toxic, either. I think it's a big reason why lighter shade hair colors (using hydrogen peroxide to process or bleach hair) have a lower rating than the darker shades that use other chemicals.

Other options for teeth whitening? The CVS 5 Minute Whitening Kit, as well as products from Go Smile and Dr. Collins' Bleaching System all scored low ratings too. I'm totally picking up some type of whitening thing the next time I'm at the store. I'd really like my pearly whites to be less pearly and more white, you know?

Yours,
Jazzy

Red Tuesday

Late posting today. I swear, I think my creative writing skills are frozen, it's so effing cold out!

Yesterday was 'Blue Monday' -- what is supposedly the most depressing day of the year, because it's not just any Monday (those are bad enough all on their own). It's the first Monday after the Bacchanalia of the holidays, that first day when you reflect on not only how much you overindulged but also how much winter is left (thank you, polar vortex, for that subtle, sub-arctic reminder). Yup, life is the sh*ts.

The new Crate & Barrel catalog doesn't help matters. About half the catalog is spent pushing all manner of cleaning things. Brooms, dusters, fancy buckets, blah blah blah. Even cleaning supplies -- like, actual sprays and scrubs and what-have-you -- from the 'Better Life' brand that Crate started selling last year.

You ate too much! Spring is a lifetime away! Your house is filthy! Happy Blue Monday!

That's not the only rub: do any of these products actually improve your life? That imported hardwood scrub brush doesn't change the fact that someone still has to do the scrubbing. The $20 wash tub (with built-in drain!) doesn't mean I don't have to wash dishes. All it means is that I STILL have to wash dishes, but with my wallet $20 lighter -- money that I could have used to save up for a cleaning service.

And you know what else? Those expensive Better Life products that Crate is schilling aren't all that better. EWG wasn't impressed. Sure, like every other brand, Better Life has a few products that rate well, a few that rate horribly, and the rest that flounder somewhere in the middle (or closer to the bottom).

Maybe I was a little touched by Blue Monday yesterday. I flipped through the catalog and wasn't inspired; I was annoyed. I saved myself a lot of money by tossing that catalog right into the recycle bin. Then I fell asleep on the couch watching TV.

Happy hibernating,
Jazzy

Too good to be true

Are counterfeit vendors still a thing in New York? I don't recall seeing many when we were there last spring, but there was a lot of the city we didn't get to. I've always gotten a kick out of the knock-offs they would sell, and how they would sell them. All about the flattery, super entertaining. About 15 years ago I bought my dad a fake Gucci watch, and he wears it to this day!

Less entertaining are counterfeit cosmetics and fragrances. You think you're getting a deal on some high-end product (isn't that always the hook?) but according to this consumer alert from the FBI, you're getting a lot more than you bargained for. 

It's straight out of a Bourne movie. Foreign importers, shady operations, the unwitting consumer. Hazardous chemicals hidden in popular cosmetic items, moved through back alley dealers. I'm going home. This sh*t writes itself.

Just kidding. It's not writing itself, because, according to the FBI, the larger, more dramatic story is that knock-off cosmetics and fragrances aren't just ripping off big corporations. They can also be highly toxic.

Interesting. Makes a lot of sense that these totally unregulated products are being manufactured in a way that eschews consumer safety for a quick profit. Oh wait, am I referring to the knock-off items or the genuine, brand-name products they're hacking?

I find it a bit curious that this alert comes from the FBI, which obviously has been tasked with taking on the counterfeiting business with its 'partner' the National Intellectual Property Rights Center. There is nothing -- not so much as a whisper -- about this over at the FDA.

Is it unreasonable of me to think that two government agencies could/should/would work together to maximize effectiveness? Hahahahahahahaha

Counterfeit cosmetics are a real issue. Toxic ingredients in counterfeit AND authentic cosmetics are a real issue. Who's protecting consumers here? Call me crazy, but I don't want the FBI involved in cosmetics watch any more than I want the FDA keeping tabs on bank robberies.

That being said, it's a good alert. Watch what you buy. If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.

Yours,
Jazzy

Resolutions

Do you make New Year's resolutions? I like to do it, though I don't get around to it every year. I think it taps into my quirks as a chronic lister, appeals to my need to organize and compartmentalize.

Anyway, in the spirit of the new year, I wanted to come up with a few resolutions that we could all use on our way to cleaning up the toxins from our daily lives. Remember, these aren't rules or strict directions, but ideas meant to inspire with all their potential. If they work for you, great. If they don't, find some iteration that does work and run with it. That's great, too.

1) Be more informed. By that I don't mean just reading labels (but that's a great start). Use the Internet to find credible sources for information on chemicals and their effects on the human body. Get acquainted with the FDA and EPA. Watch a documentary. Be a smarter consumer.

2) Use your voice. It's more than complaint letters to corporations, which feel like they go nowhere. Talk to the managers of your favorite local stores, even the big box chains, and let them know you want to see safer, healthier products on their shelves. Did you know that most grocery stores will order nearly any product in the categories they stock? So if you want something specific, ask for it. Sure, we can all order things from Amazon, but we lose that key connection with retailers who really, really want our money. Tell them what you want to buy and let them earn your business.

3) Use products that meet YOUR needs (instead of what their marketing says you need). According to all the major cosmetics lines, women of my age group should be aggressively utilizing a whole battery of products to combat the signs of aging. Do some folks legitimately need a good exfoliant or a really moisturizing eye cream or a boost of retinol? Absolutely. But please, don't tell me what I need. I can decide that very well for myself, thank you. Marketing is used really effectively to tap into our fears and anxieties and insecurities. Most of it's bunk. 

That's a good start for the new year. I'll revisit this post from time to time. In the meantime, any small thing you can do to reduce the toxic chemicals in your life is GREAT. Keep up the good work!

-- Jazzy

SMACK! Review: Big Blink Mascara by Pur Minerals

Our first product review of 2014!

I love mascara. My ophthalmologist hates that I love mascara. Something about eye infections, which, now that I think about it, might explain all those times I had pink eye back in undergrad. 

For most of my 20s I absolutely loved Max Factor's 2000 Calorie mascara, in a great Deep Auburn shade, and also a briefly-available Dark Navy that was really subtle but super awesome when someone would catch the color in just the right light and stop me to ask if I was really wearing blue mascara? True story.

Fast forward many years, many tubes of mascara, and for sh*ts and giggles we'll throw in eight rounds of chemo. No hair = no eyelashes. That was difficult. I mean, anyone can make do with a wig but falsies don't really work when there's nothing keeping them from sliding off your eyelids. Eyeliner. Lots of eyeliner.

I recently came across this Big Blink mascara by Pur Minerals at the suggestion of the sales consultant at my local Ulta. GoodGuide doesn't have it in any product rankings, but it gets a relatively benign '2' rating from EWG. I use the term loosely because the rating is based on limited data, even though the EWG report lists all the ingredients provided on the product label. 

Ulta sells both the full size product ($20) and a smaller trial size for $10, which I thought was a good way to try it out without being stuck with something I don't really like. It also seemed like a good way to actually use up most of the mascara before it turns rank (which, even though I wear mascara nearly every day, happens to nearly every tube. Total conspiracy.)

Ok, let's do this. The mascara is marketed heavily for its use of Argan oil. Am I the only one who doesn't care about that? Sounds like a gimmick to me. But the brush/wand thingy was a real selling point for me. It's a cool-looking silicon thing with really short bristles. Very different from the classic mascara wand most of us grew up watching our mothers and big sisters using.

So I apply one coat and it's really smooth. Maybe that Argan oil isn't such a gimmick. Goes on evenly but lightly, not clumpy or heavy-feeling. And when I'm done, what do I see? Long, sweeping lashes. Separated, slightly curled, ready for major eye-batting.

Big Blink also has going for it the fact that it's not tested on animals, but this mascara is NOT waterproof. Me, I like that because it's easy to remove. Some of you may not like that, because the slightest bit of moisture will mean streaking, 80s style. 

I love it. I've used it nearly every day since buying it for just the right amount of lash definition and accentuation -- without looking like a Kardashian. So if you're looking for a new mascara and have the chance to pick up some Big Blink, go for it. You won't be disappointed.

-- Jazzy

Friday side note

I'm heading into a busy weekend, but still trying to churn out some content, which we don't normally do on Saturdays and Sundays. Make sure you visit often over the next couple days!

Also, for those of you who are keeping track, I'm nearly two weeks into a pedicure with Zoya nail lacquer. It still looks GREAT. Too bad it's so cold that I have to keep my feet in slippers and two pairs of socks...

Happy Friday!
-- Jazzy

Hello, 2014

Happy New Year! I don't know about you, but late nights just aren't so easy to shake off anymore. Whatever. I'm not really complaining. In fact, I'm pretty damn psyched (as much as I can be without my first gallon of coffee of the year) because SMACK! really ended things on a high note for 2013. 

You guys made December the best month yet here at SMACK! which is really freaking cool. Even with a totally jacked holiday blogging schedule, we had more pageviews than ever. THANK YOU!

So what's 2014 bringing our way? You can expect more of what you love: razor-sharp news analysis; highly opinionated if not downright judgmental product reviews; and the most entertaining industry commentary you'll get on the topic of toxic chemicals in consumer products.

You'll also see a new feature we're rolling out soon, called Brand Visit. Without any type of consistency in labeling or marketing among the different product categories, and the brands that fill them, it's still pretty difficult to make sense of what's on store shelves. So I thought it'd be helpful to check out specific brands, to see who's making healthy, safe products and who's schilling poison (hint: pretty much everyone's doing both).

See something you don't like? Don't see enough of something you do? Want to yell at me about what I said about your favorite shampoo? Great, let's hear it! Email me at smackcleanliving@gmail.com and let me know what we can do to make this thing we call a blog better.

Happy January,
Jazzy