...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
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
Monday, November 25, 2013
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
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
Thursday, November 21, 2013
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:
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
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
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Tomato, tomahto
See if you can spot the difference between these two products from Organix:
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
 |
| 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
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
Monday, November 18, 2013
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)