The New York Times Editorial Board wrote an article entitled, “Do You Know What’s In Your Cosmetics?” (Feb. 9, 2019) The article’s caption states: “Thousands of chemicals, in billions of dollars worth of products, are being governed by regulations that haven’t been updated in decades.” The New York Times is making people aware of something PHYTO5 has known all along:
“the cosmetics regulatory system in the U. S. operates in complete contrast to a number of substantial rounds of regulations imposed on cosmetics manufacturers in the European Union (E. U.) in the last 15 years.”
Fortunately, the Swiss government supervises Swiss-based manufacturing facilities. Combined with European regulation and supervision, Swiss manufacturing oversight provides a double layer of protection for the American consumer who buys authentic Swiss skincare like PHYTO5.
The New York Times articles articulates the lack of U. S. governmental action to ensure consumer safety.
In a 1988 hearing, Congress took the cosmetics industry to task for a rash of health and safety problems. Cosmetologists were reporting serious respiratory and nervous system damage. And according to government data, nearly 1,000 toxic chemicals were lurking in countless other personal care products. Cosmetics companies were not doing enough to ensure that these products were safe, and the Food and Drug Administration did not have enough power to adequately police them… Legislative reform was clearly needed. That was 30 years ago. To date, no such reforms have been passed.
Partake of the mystique of quantum energetic formulated plant-based skincare for your exalted natural beauty and well-being. Subscribe for a discount promo code, plus get truly unique beauty tips and offers.
The article further explains the laws governing the role of the Food and Drug Administration’s Office of Cosmetics and Colors are just two pages long. They haven’t been updated since 1938 when they were first enacted.
That office with an annual budget of just $8 million and 27 staff members is now facing a seventy billion dollar a year American cosmetics industry.
The article concludes that:
such meager tools leave federal officials nearly powerless to regulate the makeup, lotions, toothpastes, deodorants and other elixirs that often are applied to the most intimate parts of the human body.
The FDA requires next to no oversight or documentation.
The FDA doesn’t require companies to submit safety data before they market a product. In the European Union a product could never be put on the market without this basic documentation.
FDA doesn’t monitor adherence to basic manufacturing standards. But the Swiss government makes it its business to do so.
In the U. S., manufacturing companies aren’t required to report problems attributed to products. The E. U. has a central data bank responsible for distilling and coordinating all product documentation including skin and toxicity tests as well as any adverse events attributed to products.
Although the article states the FDA doesn’t ensure the safety of imported cosmetics which have doubled in volume in the past decade, it fails to state that Swiss- and E. U.-made products also marketed in Europe meet stringent regulations that already exceed whatever American consumer groups advocate.
There are still many products manufactured overseas which aren’t subject to rules like those in the European Union.
The FDA inspects less than one percent of the three million or so cosmetics shipments that come in to the states every year. Among those that it does test, roughly 15% of products manufactured outside the E. U. are found contaminated or containing harmful ingredients.
Most consumers abhor the idea of testing products on animals.
PHYTO5 has never and will never test our skincare products or ingredients on animals. E. U. regulations make animal testing completely unnecessary. This is because all products must pass independent toxicity tests to ensure no harm, irritation or toxicity to human skin.
There are no U. S. regulations even in the works to ensure consumer safety.
Both the state of California and federal government have been considering tighter measures to regulate the production and distribution of skincare products made in the U. S. But the proposals are receiving substantial pushback from the beauty industry.
Depending on the administration, varying levels of reluctance directly or indirectly impose regulations on businesses. So any federal bill is likely to be defeated. If Congress passed a bill it would probably be very diluted.
So it remains that products made in Europe represent a far greater level of consumer safety.
And while the skincare industry booms, a recent industry survey finds 71% of consumers say their skincare needs aren’t being met.(1)
Keeping in mind that the skin absorbs what we put on it and what comes into its vicinity and
Since the U. S. is largely unwilling to ensure that our skincare products are actually and totally safe for our health
it makes complete sense to buy 100% Swiss skincare like PHYTO5.
Swiss and European regulation and supervision subject PHYTO5 skincare to a unique double layer of protection.
Beware of companies using the Swiss flag in their branding or catch phrases and titles using the word Swiss. In many cases, these products are either only Swiss-inspired or a tiny percentage of the product was actually produced in Switzerland.
Rest assured that PHYTO5 Swiss skincare is 100% made in Switzerland.
Combine this with our natural, holistic and vital energy concept and you’ll enjoy Swiss skincare capable of delivering results and benefits most other skincare lines could never claim.
…
Sources:
(1) This is just one insight contained in an extensive 3-part report from Denise Herich of The Benchmarking Company, running consecutively in the March, April and May 2019 issues of Global Cosmetic Industry.(2)
To gauge consumer’s thoughts and feelings on skin care, The Benchmarking Company surveyed more than 4,600 female beauty consumers about all things skin care.
Part 1: March 2019: Consumer attitudes, generational concerns, unmet needs, what she’s using now and products she’d like to try.
Part 2: April 2019: What they’re willing to spend, on what and where; key purchase influencers; consumer-approved trends; retail category picks.
Part 3: May 2019: Generic skin care and skin care kits; the continued appeal of luxury and mass skin care; social media and beauty loyalty programs; natural and organic skin care product and brand appeal.
(2) Gleason-Allured, Jeb. “New Skin Care Report Series: What 4,600 Consumers Think.” Global Cosmetic Industry, www.gcimagazine.com/marketstrends/segments/skincare/New-Skin-Care-Report-Series-What-4600-Consumers-Say-505218081.html.
The Editorial Board. “Cosmetics Safety Needs a Makeover.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 9 Feb. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/02/09/opinion/cosmetics-safety-makeup.html.
Lipton, Eric. "F.D.A. Has 6 Inspectors for 3 Million Shipments of Cosmetics." The New York Times. The New York Times, 02 Aug. 2017. Web. 16 Feb. 2019.