Face creams such as anti-wrinkle cream and sunscreens are made with nanoparticles in order to make them lighter, stronger, cleaner, and less expensive but many experts are worried about the possible long term damages it has on the body, Which? said. The consumer watchdog’s report, Small wonder? Nanotechnology and Cosmetics, was published on Wednesday.
Some of the leading cosmetic companies, including The Body Shop, Avon, L'Oréal, Boots, Nivea, and Unilever are using nanoparticles - particles 80, 000 times smaller than the width of a human hair - in sunscreens to block ultraviolet radiation
define, to contain vitamins in face creams and in other moisturizers to kill bacteria.
The European experts say that the minute size of the particles means it can easily penetrate much deeper into skin and these nanoparticles can be more easily absorbed by biological membranes, cells, tissues and organs that larger sized particles can't and once the nanoparticles enter the body, they can be easily transported around it. Hence Which? has asked beauty companies to stop using the technology unless it is proved to be safe.
The consumer watchdog mailed 67 beauty companies in total, both small and large firms, asking them about their use of nanotechnology, what benefits they thought it brought and how they ensured product safety. Till now, 17 companies have replied back and among them 8 are willing to provide the necessary information.
Which? says many cosmetic companies are using nanosilver (which has anti-bacterial properties) in products such as toothpaste, soap, toothbrush and the watchdog fears that it may be toxic. Nanosilver is used to kill the harmful bacteria in food storage containers, shoe liners, washing machines and bandages. The particles of nanosilver and other nanomaterials are as small as one-millionth the size of a pinhead.
Sue Davies, of Which?, said, “The cosmetics industry needs to stop burying its head in the sand and come clean about how it is using nanotechnology.”
Adding further Davis said, “The Government must introduce a compulsory reporting scheme for manufactured nanomaterials so we are all aware - and only those that are independently assessed as safe should be allowed to be used in cosmetics.”
In year 2004, the Royal Society, United Kingdom’s independent science academy, had recommended that as the possible toxicity of “nanoparticles” cannot be based on equivalent larger sized particles, they should be labeled as new chemicals and must undergo a full safety assessment. But as of yet, no such assessment has been carried out.
Professor Dame Ann Dowling, chairman of the Royal Society working group on nanotechnologies, blamed the beauty companies for not being able to provide information on safety testing and use of the controversial ingredients. However, the people on the side of nanotechnology say the particles could herald many benefits, for example, delivering medicines and vitamins more effectively.
Prof. Dowling said, “Nanoparticles of a chemical can have different properties to the same chemical in its larger form. And this is why nanoparticles are so exciting.” However, when cosmetics companies are seeking to exploit these novel qualities in their products, they must ensure that their safety testing methods take account of these qualities,” he said.
The so called “nano technology” has increasingly made its way into the beauty industry and the effect of the use of nanoparticles in cosmetic products that we apply on our skin such as wrinkle cream and sunscreens is creating concerns related to both human health as well as environmental issues.
Post new comment