toxicity in common makeup, silent killings for profit · toxicity in common makeup, silent killings...

Jay Harper, Red Apple Lipstick, Inc. V. 1.2 [email protected] www.redapplelipstick.com

Toxicity In Common Makeup,

Silent Killings For Profit By Jay Harper, Red Apple Lipstick

ou are what “big box cosmo” refers to as

“Betty.” The term is basically used as the

equivalent to the word “target.” It is synonymous

with “purse,” “debit card” and “herded

customer.”

I learned this by having a totally happenstance

conversation with a rep from a major makeup

company that you have heard of. It doesn’t matter

which company it was.

I met Julie totally by accident, and she was steadily

drinking one neat little glass of scotch, and she had

no idea who I was. She slung back drinks like we

Y

$19

Jay Adam Harper, Red Apple Lipstick, Inc.

[email protected] www.redapplelipstick.com

2

were in the desert, and her mouth ran fast and

hard, with a thick New York accent.

I didn’t dare tell her who I was, but I did tell her

that I was a “salesman”. This status compelled her

to tell me everything she knew about sales.

She explained her whole process, stating that it

started off in their cushy offices looking for a "herd

of Betty's".

"A Herd? ...Betty?" I asked, and she said. "Yeah…

you know, a group of hungry sheep."

"Explain please." I asked.

"Listen, I thought you said you were a salesMAN,

then you should already know that people are sheep

and they believe anything you tell them. A 'herd of

Betty’s' is a group of sheeply women that have a



3

problem that needs Fix-Ing”

I prodded for a deeper answer, this was getting

juicy and valuable! Acting like an ignorant man, I

asked about what in the world could be such a

problem to girls!

She used 'long lasting lipstick' as her example. She

told me that they had identified that a lot of women

had a problem keeping their lipstick on. She used

some pretty derogatory language about your

intelligence with regard to the matter, something

along the lines that stupid people just don't know

how to wear it [lipstick].

She said "So when we figure there's a big enough

herd of Betty’s, we find some company in China that

makes something to fit the bill, or we just put an

existing product in a new box, run some

commercials with a celebrity, and my job is to get



4

the stores to buy it, and I train them to parrot to move

it."

"Define Parrot." I inquired.

She went on "Well the only way I keep my nice

business card (and she slid one to me, and it was

nice) is if I convince enough stores to pick up the

makeup. We make the STORE think the product will

fly off the shelf, showing them the profit to be made

when their people S-E-L-L it to Betty, and then I train

the managers on the best T-A-C-T-I-C-S to use on

Betty when she comes in the store. I teach them to

repeat exactly what makes the product sell, so they

'parrot' us. They will regurgitate anything we tell

them to….[paused]… and Betty trusts the store."

"So the customer herself, Mrs. X, or Betty as you

say, is not ACTUALLY your customer"? I asked



5

"That's RIGHT, I knew you were smart" She retorted

and continued "But the more frustrated Betty is, the

more she will buy."

Now it was time for me to have some real fun. I

began asking some questions that were a little

harder to answer.

"What about Paraben? Are you guys ever worried

about it's link to breast cancer?" I asked.

"Oh....well.... the good thing there is the FDA can't

weigh in on the issue. And in the business, the FDA's

word is what the people think is king, so if a

company can control the lobby, you can control

which issues get attended to.”

"Soooo you train the stores to just simply say that

the FDA has no findings on Paraben, and that

anything negative about it you read on the Internet



6

is just basically horse malarky...?"

"That's right."

"What about gluten? I hear there are a lot of folks

allergic to gluten." I asked next.

Her face contorted, and her voice got louder just

after a big gulp and a puff from a cigarette, "Gluten,

Schmuten! I am so tired of hearing about this stupid

gluten. It makes me laugh! You have yourself whole

hoard of fat women, who can't control their eating,

and then they see Kim Kardashian go on a Gluten

Diet and all of a sudden, every body wants it! It's a

myth, bulls**t."

"Really?" I asked

"Oh by god yes, it's one of the stupidest things I have

ever heard of!"



7

"So what do the stores 'parrot' in that case???" I

asked with an inquisitive cantor.

"I train to them to laugh, give a quick, friendly

giggle, and tell Betty that she's not going to lose any

body fat from gluten free anything!"

Big Box Cosmetics is certainly… an industry - a 33

billion dollar per year industry, to be exact. There

are a lot of things the “industry” doesn’t want Betty

talking about, worried about, concerned about,

discussing, asking questions about; especially

when it comes to ingredients that are toxic, which

could cause harm to the human body.

Big Box Cosmo wants you discussing toxic

ingredients no more than Big Tobacco wants you



8

discussing stomach cancer, lung cancer and

second hand smoke. No more than the plastics

industry wants you discussing BPA. No more than

the food industry wants you discussing saturated

fats, and genetically modified foods.

Big Tobacco spent untold sums of money to

manipulate the mind of the public and legislators

for decades. Dupont just spent an amazing sum of

dollars (something like 45 million) fighting a bill in

California that would have required genetically

modified foods to be labelled as such on product

packaging.

Dupont won... the bill didn’t pass. And why does

Dupont care anyway??

Big Tobacco and Saturated Fats are easy targets to

talk about. The Internet is a-fluff with rants about

these subjects. Not so much on Big Cosmo, they



9

have flown under the radar for a solid 45 years, but

that tide is starting to change.

Chemical manufacturers have made 100’s of

billions of dollars from the vanity market; all the

while poisoning their own customers and using

“the system” to systematically keep it covered up.

Big Tobacco did not begin to see an outcry for

change until the 1950’s. It took another 50 years for

the character “Joe Camel” to be stricken from

picture ads in magazines read by teenagers, by

law.

It was not until the early 1970’s that Big Cosmo had

the science to begin producing preservatives that

allowed makeup to “keep” long enough to have it

mass-produced in another country, cheaper than

ever before.



10

From 1970 until now, the rate of growth in breast

cancer incidences is staggering. A simple google

search will reveal the staggering numbers over the

past 4 decades.

The 1980’s introduced us all to cable television and

the dawn of mass advertising. The 1980’s also

brought us amazing rags such as “The National

Enquirer,” whose amazing tabloid success has led

us to huge magazine conglomerates, like In-Style

and O.

Ahhh, the dawn of “glam advertising,” 100%

engineered to play on our insecurities as humans,

keeping us distracted, and buying products.

During the 1990’s and 2000’s, science began to

uncover the toxicity in both plastics and personal

care products. All of it was promptly squashed in

this country, trading dollars for favour in congress -



11

the body that decides how the FDA is operated.

33 billion dollars per year can buy you a lot of

leeway. To put this staggering dollar amount into

perspective, in 2012, Obama and Romney

collectively spent about 2 billion dollars on their

presidential campaigns.

The 2000’s not only saw the rise of scientists

proving toxicity, but also the rise of the Internet.

Never before has any medium had such

persuasive, and cheap voices.

Once upon a time, the only persuasive medium

was newspapers. Local Yocal Reporters reported

to you, all of the “uncovered truths” and people

believed them. It is perfectly normal to trust those

close to you, and what was closer to you and your

community than you local newspaper? It is an

inherent trust. This is precisely why Big Tobacco



12

“bought” the newspapers, using cold hard cash to

talk them into printing what they wanted, articles

attempting to debunk science, and keep the bed

bugs away for a bit longer; decades of deceit and

actions that cost millions of lives.

Big Tobacco had a playbook that included

publishing articles as if the newspaper had written

it, criticizing “junk” science, and even so far as

paying scientists to deliver doubt about the

dangers of smoking.

They also lobbied congress with massive

resources to stifle government action and weaken

legislation; anything to not damage sales. No

telling how many lives could have been saved if in

1954 they had just come clean and made some

changes. 3 million perhaps? Maybe 5 million.

Maybe 7 million?



13

On the Internet, the debunking concept works

equally as well, but on a massive scale, and for less

money.

The Internet, combined with some serious savvy

and dollars, can be used to drown an honest

opinion so fast your head spins.

With the explosion of bloggers, something in the

neighbourhood of 75 million of them, it is very easy

to use them to sway public opinion. Human

psychology states that people, in general, desire to

believe what they read and hear, when what they

are reading is from what they view as, a reliable

source.

This is how and why political campaigns are so full

of lies, yet they totally get away with it; and the

sheer amount of information, lies or not, repeated

over and over, works to reinforce what you have



14

read into believable truth.

A prime example is the study produced by Dr.

Darbre, a breast cancer researcher in the UK.

This woman uncovered the secret of how a single

class of cosmetic grade preservatives has played a

role in the growth rate of breast cancer. She also

uncovered all of the old documents from the 1970’s

until now that support her position, yet you have

likely never heard of her.

Her opinion, and studies have been squashed. On

Dr. Darbre’s side, there are 3 major reports

published in the UK, and an entire college of

researchers, with lifelong histories of studying

cancer. Only a single US-based website carries the

study entirely.

On the side of the makers of the preservative, and



15

those who use it in their products, they have a

leading government organization: the FDA, which

is ultimately controlled by politicians, the

blogosphere, the CIR (independent Cosmetic

Ingredient Review board) and all manners of

publishing at their disposal, thousands of bloggers

“parroting”… not to mention 33 billion dollars, and

Julie training stores that it’s all bumpk-iss.

Little does the majority of the public know, the FDA

has been stripped of its power to make any

decision on ingredients in cosmetics or personal

care products, unless the product contains a drug.

This was put into writing and law by congress in

the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act.

The FDA is forced to pull opinion from the CIR

when pressured by the public, which is a private

entity, not a government agency. And even then,

the FDA website only postulates on a handful of



16

ingredients… those where enough public requests

warranted them creating a web page for it.

In these web pages, the FDA basically says, “they

don’t know, here’s what the CIR says, have a nice

day.”

This leaves the entire cosmetics industry “self

regulated.” There is no approval process, and no

requirements for clinical trials or lab testing of

cosmetic products before they come to market.

Very little is known about the CIR, but they sort of

remind me of the Motion Picture Association of

America, which is a privately held firm that decides

what rating a moving should have. You know, G,

PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17.

It is pretty well known that if the MPAA doesn’t like

you, or your movie, or your motives, a rating of



17

NC-17 will stop your movie from being distributed.

This is why independent films rarely make it to

movie houses. Large studios hate independents,

and they use the MPAA to control what movies

make it, and what movies don’t. It’s sad, sick and

totally true. They control what you see.

I wonder how the CIR makes money.

T is relatively simple to keep Betty from talking

about toxic ingredients. Tactics are used against

you to distract you, persuade you, and keep your

mind off things that go bump in the night.

Tactic number one used against you... is you. Ask

any psychologist (or mature marketer), and they

will agree to the following statement. “Hardly

anyone will pay a pound for prevention.”

I



18

You see this vividly in our society with the example

of cigarette sales. You know, and I know, and

everybody knows that smoking cigarettes will

eventually lead to some pretty serious health

problems; yet people smoke.

I am not totally convinced that cancer is the only

concern. Cigarettes constrict blood vessels, raise

blood pressure, smoke gets inside your stomach

and a long list of just... issues... can and will

eventually arise, yet more people smoke today

than ever before.

A smoker might be hard pressed to spend so much

as 75 dollars for acupuncture to help them stop

smoking, but on the other hand, they will pay their

entire life savings if lung cancer develops.

Now listen, I am not picking on smokers. I myself,



19

smoked for many years, so I clearly understand it.

I am only using it to illustrate a point so that when I

tell you about an ingredient in makeup known to

contribute to breast cancer, we will be on the same

page.

Back in the 1940’s, when researchers began to

show that cigarettes were unsafe, big tobacco

fought back with an onslaught of articles, writings,

and advertisements to oppose these thoughts.

They employed a multitude of dirty tricks ranging

from paying newspapers all over the country to run

articles debunking science

(http://www.yaleruddcenter.org/resources/upload

/docs/what/industry/Foodtobacco.pdf) to, ahem,

“encouraging” legislators to ignore law making or

introduce weaker versions of laws that might

otherwise negatively impact them.



20

Even today, big tobacco uses local pawns to fight

local anti-smoking laws, and they wrote the

playbook on this kind of deceit.

They go so far as to hire people to go to legislators,

convince them that the local governments are not

doing a good job, and convince them that if they

pass anti-smoking laws for bars and restaurants,

the slowdown in business will create economic

turmoil.

This led to many pre-emptive laws that stripped

local governments of their decision-making power.

Therefore, the local governments wasted years of

time and money to fight for their own power back.

It is insane and true! (http://www.no-

smoke.org/getthefacts.php?id=16)

It took all the way up to 1998 for Big Tobacco to be

forced into changing all kinds of ads and



21

techniques, like retiring characters such as “Joe

Camel.”

This is where HUGE BUCKS can get a company.

With so much money, Big Tobacco could pretty

much do as they pleased.

These types of tactics are still in use today by other

industries. You just witnessed Dupont spend 45

million dollars in California to combat a law that

would force the maker of genetically modified

foods to say so, on the label.

45 MILLION!!!! That would have fed a lot of

homeless people, yet it was wasted to further a

stupid, hidden agenda.

Caught in the crosshairs currently is the food

industry. Local public initiatives are fighting for

items on menus at restaurants to be labelled with



22

categories such as: high cholesterol, high sodium,

high fat, etc. Not to take them off the menu – just to

label them. The food industry is reacting with

heavy ammunition.

The restaurant industry has sued the New York City

government, used its political might to weaken

legislation in California, and successfully

encouraged federal legislators to introduce weak

national legislation that would pre-empt states and

cities from acting more aggressively… in your

favour.

All of this to fight warning the public to the dangers

of fatty, sodium ridden foods that cause obesity,

diabetes, high blood pressure, cholesterol, and all

that jazz; which might cost the some net sales.

This is the undercurrent happening in YOUR LIFE,

right now, as I write. Industry Profits VS. You, and



23

your health, and you are the one who provided

them with the profits.

obacco has a huge spotlight. The food

industry has a pretty big spot light. The

makeup industry? A handheld gas lantern is all

that illuminates the under-current here.

I am going to expose the truth behind some pretty

nasty ingredients, and the tactics used to cover

them up in the world of big cosmetics.

You must ask yourself, “What am I going to do

about it?”

T



24

ere is something you probably did not know.

When the government and economists

measure how well the economy is doing, they

look at the number of sales of specific industries

and products.

A huge measure is steel. If steel sales and

production are up, the country is doing “better.”

When steel sales fall, the country is “receding.”

Another big measure is pornography, believe it or

not. And in 2001, it came to light that the “Lipstick

Index” was also used as a measure of the economy.

I mention this because I want to you understand

just how much money is in big-box cosmetics.

Think “BILLIONS” in the USA alone.

You must consider this carefully. Any industry

making BILLIONS will protect billions like a honey

badger protecting baby honey badgers.

H



25

hat’s the FDA got to do with it? Nothing,

except govern the labelling laws. You

might not believe this, but the Food, Drug

and Cosmetic Act specifically strips the FDA of the

right to approve or disapprove ingredients that go

into cosmetics.

So whose hands are the legal responsibilities for

safety of cosmetics left in? You guessed it, the

manufacturer. Imagine what would have happened

if you left cigarette safety in the hands of cigarette

manufacturers. You would see cigarette ads on the

back of cereal boxes.

The cosmetics industry is basically a self-regulated

industry. The laws only tell us about specific raw

ingredients we cannot import (as a raw ingredient,

W



26

not a finished product), what colour additives have

been outlawed, and the manner in which we must

label a product (the size of the label, placement of

the label, and names of ingredients).

Another point to consider; the Food, Drug and

Cosmetic Act requires that a product (and the devil

is in the details here) “must be safe for consumers

under labelled or customary conditions for use.”

Think of it like this. Lipstick, for example, is

intended for use on the OUTSIDE of your body. So

if a lipstick has an ingredient that is toxic when

ingested, all is well provided the label says “For

External Use Only” or “Do Not Eat” and/or “Keep

Away From Children.”

You still with me? Ok, good.

You and I both know you “accidentally” ingest



27

almost all of your lipstick, lip balm, and lip-gloss.

Since the purpose of these items is not to be

ingested, a manufacturer can darn near get away

with anything, after all, they warned you!

The FDA is the “Food” and “Drug” administration.

It is a misnomer to think they have much to do with

cosmetics and personal care products which you

do not eat and does not contain a “drug.”

An example of a product that does contain a drug

might be dandruff shampoo; anything that says

“Active Ingredient.” In these cases, the FDA will

mandate its use, and how much of the drug may be

used, but what about the rest of the formula?

On a side note, this is why I can never tell anyone

that my Rallye Balm™ (lip balm) “cures” chapped

lips. The word “cure” indicates a health condition

for which a drug is used to fix the problem. It’s a



28

little silly, but that’s ok.

So who regulates the Food, Drug and Cosmetics

Act? Uhhh, congress. What does congress do?

Vote on things. What do congressmen and women

do to keep their j-o-b (and state given health

insurance)? Run for office via campaigns. What is

required to run and win a campaign? Money. Who

has lots of money? Big industry (i.e. big cosmetic

companies). Who does big industry use to speak

their cause to congressmen and women?

Lobbyists. Who helps organize fundraisers and all

that for those running campaigns? “Friendly”

Lobbyists. Who wrote legislation saying those

running for office no longer have to disclose how

much money and from whom money was raised for

a campaign? Congress.

You still with me? Great!



29

Here is a link to the entire FDC Act if you are

curious.

http://www.house.gov/legcoun/Comps/FDA_CMD

.pdf

ime to talk about some toxic ingredients, and

the battles held to keep these notions out of

your mind!

TOXIC INGREDIENT NUMERO UNO – PARABEN

Paraben. Actually it is more like paraben(S).

WHAT IS IT?

Parabens are a chemical preservative.

Listed on the ingredient label as: methylparaben,

propylparaben, butylparaben, isobutylparaben,

isopropylparaben and benzylparaben.

T



30

WHY ARE THEY USED?

Parabens allow cosmetics and skin care products

to last longer before they begin to grow mold or

rot, go rancid, gross, smelly and disgusting.

WHY ARE THEY DANGEROUS?

The chemical has heavy links to breast cancer.

THE IMPORTANT PARTS

Paraben is my number one most toxic ingredient.

The reason is four-fold. 1) It is in darn near

everything. 2) The destruction it does to your body

is awful. 3) It is pretty much un-regulated. 4) No

one seems to care.

This all makes it that much more dangerous. Let’s

dig in.

Pay attention, this is important.



31

A breast cancer researcher in the UK was studying

breast tumors one day, to see what they consisted

of. Her name was Dr. Darbre.

Ok, so this lifelong cancer research lady uses a

new technique called thin layer chromatography to

checkout some tumors that were removed from

human breasts.

She stumbles upon concentrations of a chemical.

She isolates the chemical and discovers it to be p-

hydroxybenzoic acid (paraben).

She thinks this is pretty weird, right? Because, how

in the world does a chemical from a topical

personal care product end up INSIDE a breast

tumor?

So she decides to dig into this a little deeper. She



32

gathers up 20 breast tumors (apparently, there are

a lot of them out there... and THAT is part of the

problem, k?).

She tests all 20 specifically looking for levels of

paraben. She uses a more detailed technique

called high-pressure liquid chromatography, and

then follows this up with a round of tandem mass

spectrometry.

This revealed that all 20 tumors showed

concentrations of not 1, not 2, not 3... you ready for

this... 6 different variations of parabens; with

methyl-paraben in the highest concentration.

Ok look, this is weird right? I mean why in the

world would that chemical be there... in a breast

tumor?

She gets together with the Edinburgh Breast Unit

Research Group, and does some more studyin’.



33

She next discovers that parabens have an inherent

oestrogenic property. We are talking about

increased progesterone receptor gene expression

here.

In laymen’s terms, the paraben binds to the

estrogen receptors in your body and could

mediate unwanted cellular growth of the estrogen

production. In more simple terms, your body

could increase production of malformed estrogen.

Oestrogen controls all of your lady parts and

oestrogen is a major aetiological factor in the

growth, and development of the majority of human

breast tumors. This is bad.

Parabens were introduced into the market place

around 1970. The chemical itself was tested on rats

in 1971, and a researcher wrote a whole paper



34

about how the rats injected with methyl-paraben

grew tumors in their little mouse breasts.

I couldn’t make this stuff up folks. That doctor’s

name was Mason.

Consequently, when did the explosion of breast

cancer rates begin? You guessed it, early 1970’s,

with giant leaps in rate every decade.

During the 2000’s, deeper research proves that the

chemical is absorbed whole, directly through

intact skin, and that when mixed with certain other

chemicals, can actually get through your skin

FASTER.

The human body does nothing to break the

chemical down. Some of it might come out through

urine. But what is left in the body has been proven

to do some ugly stuff, like disrupting cellular



35

function through inhibiting secretion of lysosomal

enzymes (Bairati et al, 1994), causing

mitochondrial dysfunction (Nakagawa & Maldeus,

1998), binding to estrogen receptors (Routledge et

al. 1998), including the uterus (Routledge again,

1998, Blair in 2000 and a third doctor named Fang

in 2001).

Parabens have been shown to regulate oestrogen-

responsive reporter gene expression in yeast cells,

and in.. wait for it.. wait for it.. Human Breast

Cancer Cells, by more than one researcher (Byford

AND Darbre).

Ok, the research goes back to the 1970’s. It’s been

studied over and over and over and all kinds of

nastiness has been documented about the

chemical.

I could list over 100 researcher names and reports



36

for you to look over if you wanted to, but yet, the

chemical is still in unbelievably wide use in the

United States.

You are going to find parabens in almost every

personal care product you own: lotion, shampoo,

deoderant, hair gel, and makeup.

Even scarier is baby products. You will find most

baby shampoos and skin care products contain

parabens.

When you consider life long exposure starting

from before birth, when pregnant mama lathers

her body from head to toe in the stuff, it gets

freaky, fast!

The stuff is also bad for men. Increasing estrogen

production in men, particularly from a young age,

can create some pretty serious issues in their



37

reproductive bits.

So why is it so widely used? The sad truth is that

without parabens, many of the products you buy

today might not be possible. Let’s remember that

paraben is a preservative. Lotions are a great

example. Most lotions are water based; they would

rot inside 5 days without being refrigerated.

Makeup however, is not the same. Let’s take

lipstick for example. Lipstick with paraben can last

5-10 years on a store shelf, gross. When you

remove paraben from the formula, the shelf life

shortens to a paltry 1.5 years.

Terrible right? sarcasm

Most people that I tell this fact to say, “Oh, that’s

not bad! Why would anyone use it then?” Good

question! I have single-handedly proven that great



38

cosmetics can be made without them; just make

them in smaller batches. It cuts into profits, but I

don’t care, I don’t want breast cancer on my

shoulders when I go to bed at night.

You must understand the lifecycle of a big-box

manufacturer’s product. It starts in another country

usually. In order to suck as much profit as possible

from a cosmetic, you must make it “cheaper.” In

today’s global environment, it is all too easy to use

the amazingly cheap labor in countries like China,

Taiwan, Japan and India. Moving production to

another country can turn billions in extra profit.

There’s a snag here though. When you do this, the

life cycle gets longer.

First and foremost, you must wonder about the

cleanliness of production in another country. The

FDA ain’t checkin’ them factories, are they? No



39

one is.

Second, they are making huge batches, which can

equate to super sloppy tolerances in an effort to

meet demanding schedules.

From there, the finished product sits in a

warehouse, waiting to be picked up. A truck takes

them to a shipping dock where, after some time

they are loaded into a container, and eventually

onto a freight ship.

This is the proverbial “slow boat from China,” it

really exists!

Well, once that container reaches the United States,

it is unloaded, and sits there, and waits for customs

to give the ok. Once customs says all is cool, the

container is unloaded onto trucks. Trucks drive the

goods to Manufacturer-X’s warehouse. From there,



40

Manufacturer-X begins to divvy up the goods, and

trucks take smaller loads from warehouse-x, to

drug store warehouse-y. From there, drug store

warehouse-y moves the makeup to individual

storerooms, and eventually, the store shelf.

The makeup you just bought at the drug store

could be 1 to 2 years old before you bought it! How

many times have you purchased cheap makeup,

and right out of the box, it smelled funny?

Ok, so this cheaply made makeup has been all

over the world, in un-refrigerated boats, docks,

trucks and warehouses, and without paraben, it

would be shot, right along with some greedy

profits.

What a shame THAT would be! sarcasm

Let me describe for you a better process. What if:



41

- You made all of your products in the United

States, and

- You made them in small batches, and

- You shipped them directly to your customers, and

- You kept other companies from mishandling

them, and

- You were man enough to toss them out if they sat

too long and went bad?

Well, that is the way Red Apple Lipstick makes

cosmetics, and it works just fine for us.

I would imagine that any company that uses

paraben, or sells paraben as a raw ingredient,

would truly love it if the ingredient was not toxic,

but it just isn’t so.

With so much money at stake, this country will be

hard pressed to see research in the US go any

further. You might have noticed that all of the



42

researchers names are foreign.

The FDA postulates no position on the ingredient,

and cites the fact they have no right to. They

instead refer you to the CIR, or the Cosmetic

Ingredient Review board. The CIR, as we

discussed, is a private company, not a government

agency. Very little can be discovered about who

they are, and how they get they paid.

The CIR report on Paraben is pretty weak, and it

attempts to persuade you into believing that

parabens just aren’t strong enough to harm you....

…then why are they strong enough to make their

way into breast tumors, and why are they strong

enough to have one science paper after another

written about them?

Dr. Darbre did a second round of testing on 160



43

breast tumors. Can you guess the results?

Who am I to believe? The faceless, nameless CIR,

or a top-notch team of Breast Cancer researchers

with over 30 years of cancer research under their

belts?

Ultimately girls, your health MUST be taken into

your own hands; as well, that of your family and

children. No one, or agency will do it for you. At

some point, you must decide between convenience

and health.

In my household, nothing with paraben makes it

through the door, and we make our hand lotion at

home. It must be refrigerated, but we are ok with

that.

Covering up paraben is pretty simple if you have

big box billions. As big box, you combine:



44

controlling the governing body opinion, you

produce your own “studies” that debunks science

to give to the governing body, use bloggers to

postulate further that people like me are nutty, and

the Brits have bad teeth, and you keep scientists

away from the research. You further ramp up

opinion by supporting breast cancer runs, keeping

the general public thinking you are Susie Helpy

Helperton, and then for good measure, you

showcase makeup on someone everyone loves,

like Ellen.

TOXIC INGREDIENT NUMERO DOS - GLUTEN

luten in cosmetics is not exactly an

“ingredient.” No one ever hollers, “Hey, G



45

let’s toss some gluten in that formula there!”

Gluten is a silent killer of epic proportions in this

country, and medical science is just now getting

around to telling you about it.

Specifically, gluten is a protein found in wheat,

barley, and rye. In my upcoming book, The

Ultimate Guide To Gluten, I discuss how gluten is

actually a composite of gliadin and glutenin. It is

conjoined in starch within the endosperm of grass-

grains, the seeds.

Today, the number of people diagnosed to be

affected by gluten with serious autoimmune

responses is higher than those diagnosed with

Alzheimer’s and Aids combined.

Science uses some pretty good math to further say

that only 3% of the population affected have been



46

diagnosed. This equates to over a 3rd of the

population. Divide 300 million people by 3.

Gluten causes an autoimmune response. Your

body makes a few autoantibodies. If you recall

from biology class, that antibodies are the little

boogers that fight invaders in your body, like the

flu. But an AUTO-antibody, unfortunately, attacks

some part of your own body.

All types of antibodies are “killer” cells. They

seek and kill their intended target.

In the case of a gluten reaction, the autoantibodies

reap havoc on the Villi in your small intestine. The

Villi are the small, finger like coverings of the

lining of your small intestine, and they are

responsible for snagging nutrients from the food

you eat, and passing it directly to your blood

stream. Without them, you’re in deep trouble life-



47

long.

The autoantibody literally attacks the Villi when

gluten is present in your body, and the Villi begin

to atrophy, and eventually are killed.

Aside from serious vitamin deficiencies, there are

emerging links to other serious issues such as

osteoporosis (brittle bones), Type 1 Diabetes,

Hashimoto’s Disease, Autism, Thyroiditis, and

other glandular issues.

The only cure is to remove gluten from your life,

and that can be difficult. Your doctor can perform

a simple blood test, and let you know how badly

you are affected.

Sadly, a lot of the medical community still doesn’t

take this serious, especially when stupid celebs

like Kim Kardashian advertise gluten free “diet



48

fads” to sell weight loss drinks.

I would imagine that the food industry is sinking

some effort into worldwide bloggers to shoot down

the notion that gluten is bad for you. Trust me, it is.

Sometimes, gluten intolerance has little to no

outward symptoms, but in most cases, it does.

The symptoms are strikingly woman-like. When

was the last time you complained about bloating?

Acne? Swelling? Stomach Cramps? Skin Rashes?

Dry, flaky skin? Fatigue?

To a man, these sound strikingly like “women

problems,” but seriously, damage could be

accruing in your body. Please work to eliminate

gluten from your life, and especially the life of your

children.



49

Smart folks ask, “Well haven’t humans been eating

gluten through all of history?”

No, we haven’t. We didn’t even learn agriculture

until the neo-lithic period. That’s two million years

after humans show up, but only seven thousand

years ago.

For the preceding two million years, humans ate

what they could gather or hunt. So… nuts, berries,

fruit, meat. They didn’t have flour tortillas and

frosted flakes, k? And it’s a good diet actually.

Paleo diet, Google it.

Almost all makeup contains gluten. It is a great

binding agent and it sneaks its way into the

makeup through about 500 different ingredients.

Almost no major manufacturers take this seriously

or care for that matter. A hand-full of small



50

manufacturers work directly in this field, but most

have no idea if their products are, or are not, truly

gluten free. Because of the faddish nature of the

word, a lot of companies have attached the word to

their products without really knowing, an attempt

to “get rich.”

The only way to truly know is to test everything in a

lab.

It starts by selecting the highest quality gluten free

raw ingredients from highly respected

manufacturers. Cross contamination can occur at

the ingredient level. Imagine naturally gluten-free

oats growing in a field next to wheat…enter cross-

contamination.

Next, you must control every aspect of the

manufacturing process, and test the final formulas

in a lab.



51

Next, you must control product handling after

manufacturing, including packaging and storage.

You must keep gluten away at every stage.

Big Box is never going to go through the trouble

and the expense.

A large and growing percentage of those

diagnosed with Celiac Disease or gluten

intolerance know that even a smidgen of gluten can

get them in a lot of trouble, and quickly.

Deciding whom to trust as a manufacturer can be

super-dicey when there is money on the line.

Here at Red Apple Lipstick, gluten free and

paraben free are two of our “big claims to fame,”

and I can personally assure you of both.



52

Our procedures are like Fort Knox, and

consequently, they are more expensive to make,

cutting into our profit margins pretty deep.

To that effect, we don’t have a massive, fancy office

on Madison Avenue, and quite frankly, I don’t care.

We know that we are doing the right thing, and our

customers give us plenty of business to support

ourselves, and we are plenty fine with that.

TOXIC INGREDIENT NUMERO TRES

PHTHALATES

Phthalates describes an entire class of Plasticizers,

a chemical to make things more plasticky, or

sticky.



53

n cosmetics, you will generally see them listed

as dibutylphthalate (DBP), dimethylphthalate

(DMP), and diethylphthalate (DEP). They are

going to be in perfumes big time, it’s what allows

the perfume to “stick” to your body. You will also

find them in nail polish, hair spray and other hair

products. You will also find them in cheap eye

shadows, lip balms, lip glosses, lip sticks and

rouge. You won’t see it on the ingredient label…

sort of interesting… somehow… legislation has

mandated a law about “proprietary formulas.” So

when you mix a phthalate with a fragrance, you

don’t have to disclose it on the label, it’s now a

“trade secret,” protected under the FD&C Act...

nifty.

You will find them in the “long-lasting” formulas.

Please trust me, no lipstick should last 24 hours!

I



54

Even the FDA states they really don’t know how

toxic it is, and the CIR hasn’t even done any serious

study since 1985.

In the 2000’s, they admit to opening the file, and

staring at it for a few seconds, but that’s about it.

Independent study finds phthalates being excreted

through sweat and urine, intact and whole.

For me, the biggest risk connection is the link to

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Even Wikipedia lists it

on a page called “Endocrine disruptor.” The stuff

throws your hormones out of control, to put it

simply.

Research also implicates a rise in birth defects.

Pretty scary.

And then of course, I am going to have to beat that



55

Breast Cancer Drum again, sorry, but it’s true.

According to in vivo and observational studies by

Davis et al. (1994) and Lopez-Carillo et al. (2010),

there is an association between phthalate exposure

and endocrine disruption leading to development

of breast cancer. Furthermore, it has been well

documented that endocrine disruptors such as

phthalates can be additive, so even very small

amounts can interact with other chemicals to have

cumulative, adverse “cocktail effects.”

Quite recently, the CDC performed a study of 20

random women, and all had phthalate in their

system - 5% of them with levels 45 times more than

hypothesized.

The EU (European Union) began directive bans of

phthalates in cosmetics in 2003, but the US and

Canada (surprisingly) have sat on their hands



56

despite growing evidence of potential harm.

The FDA did step in to enforce already in place

labelling laws for items not tested by the FDA, but

that’s about it for now.

Believe it or not, there is actually a Phthalate

Information Center group, who of course says the

stuff has never caused a problem in a human “from

its ‘intended’ use”…umm ok, way to cherry pick

your words! What is another intended use?? To

make your car’s dashboard with…

ltimately, it is all in your hands. Making these

types of changes in your life can be somewhat

taxing. Finding lotions, makeup, shampoo and

baby care products that do not contain parabens

can be tricky, but WELL WORTH the effort!!

U



57

Changing all of your Tupperware and dinner ware

from plastic to glass, or at the very least, BPA Free

plastic, also critical, but takes some effort on your

part.

Always remember, women are the keepers of the

world. Without you, the world would not function.

It’s up to you to make these sorts of decisions for

your family and loved ones.

Is life today worth the overall convenience in

exchange for our health, our children’s health?

Every generation that passes by, the more and

more trust that is blindly misplaced into the hands

of huge corporate money machines, and faith is

illogically placed in our government.

I sincerely hope that you discover more about how

to read ingredient labels, teach your children the



58

same, and support the portion of our community

that supports you and your health.

toxicity in common makeup, silent killings for profit · toxicity in common makeup, silent killings...

Documents