The United States may not be a member of the European Union, but Rep. Dianne Primavera, D-Broomfield, wanted the state of Colorado to take its queues from the E.U. in regulating personal-care products–such as cosmetics, shampoos, and lotions–over their alleged links to cancer and other maladies. Her proposal, however, was killed in the House Judiciary Committee today after testimony that there is no scientific data pointing to such risks.
House Bill 1248 would have banned the manufacture of personal-care products in Colorado that contain, in any amount, any ingredient that has been shown to cause cancer or harm to an unborn child. The European Cosmetics Directive under the E.U. maintains a list of banned substances in Europe that are believed to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. Under the measure, Colorado would have relied to a large degree on that list in determining which products could be banned; 1,100 chemicals are on the list according to Primavera.
At least one Colorado business owner and personal-care products supplier took umbrage at the thought of passing a law that relies on decisions made for Europeans about the relative safety of personal care products.
“I find it highly offensive that we have to look to the EU for direction,” said Jerell Klaver, who sells Salus bath and body care products that contain cocoa butter, a potentially banned substance due to trace amounts of cancer-causing agents inherent in cocoa butter.
Science and politics crossed paths as lawmakers struggled to understand what was at stake.
“I don’t feel qualified to determine which ingredients are safe or not. Why is this a political decision and not a Public Health Department decision?” asked Rep. Sal Pace, D-Pueblo.
Whether or not the products are potentially harmful should be a decision that at a minimum is made here in the United States, said Rep. Bob Gardner, R-Colorado Springs.
“This EU thing is interesting to me. (This bill) would give the EU the ‘yay’ or ‘nay’ on what is a permissible product in Colorado,” said Gardner. “We don’t have representation on the EU and they would have veto power over what’s sold.”
Committee chair Claire Levy, D-Boulder, disagreed with Gardner.
“I don’t think it’s a bad thing to do what the EU is doing,” Levy said. “We can look to other countries for ideas.”
Dr. Richard Adamson, a cancer causation expert and a cancer survivor himself, said that he and his family members use personal care products that under the measure may be banned. Adamson said he just doesn’t see the risk involved.
“I know of no study that has shown that a personal care product has shown any type of cancer,” said Adamson.
Rep. Steve King, R-Grand Junction queried Adamson on the validity of the European findings.
“Is the EU directive the ‘gold standard’ for this sort of thing?” asked King.
“No,” Adamson responded.
Representing the Women’s Lobby of Colorado, Susan Roll spoke to the panel in favor of the bill and spoke highly of the European approach.
“I’ve been involved in this David vs Goliath fight for a long time. When the EU came up with the directive we thought it would be beneficial to us, with American products conforming to the standards, but it was not the case,” said Roll.
Roll acknowledged science has not evolved to the point where definitive claims can be made pointing to cause and effect, but she urged lawmakers to err on the side of caution following the European lead.
“We don’t have the smoking gun, but in Europe they are moving forward anyway,” said Roll.
Sarah Johnson, who started her own line of organic personal-care products after experiencing harmful side effects from products that she had been using, implored the panel to pass the bill in a show of proactive, forward-thinking action.
“The EU is doing it, California is doing it. We ought to be doing this,” said Johnson.
Primavera said she’ll try again next year.
Yet, science was the defining factor for Rep. Lois Court, D-Denver, who voted against the bill.
“My father was a scientist, and I just didn’t hear enough science to support this bill,” said Court.
Primavera said the $50 billion-a-year personal-care products industry is not likely to self-regulate enough to satisfy her concerns.
“It’s really the fox guarding the hen house when it comes to personal-care products,” she said.
I wish this question would have asked of the proponents…
Why don’t you open up an EU products store and work within the free market?
The truth of the matter is there a store, that in my opinion, is a EU approved store because of it London roots. The store that I am speaking of is Lush, which actually might fall into Chairman Levy’s 13th District…Hmm…
Lush has a wonderful smell and will pull you in off the street…only to be crushed by their prices…which is why there are only 2 stores in Colorado, Aspen and Boulder. This is where it gets good. A tin of Lip Balm is only going to cost you $6.96 (Lush only sells tins…don’t you just love sticking your fingers into your Lip Balm after shaking people’s hands and opening up public doors
). For the same product at your local Vitamin cottage, $3. A bar of soap is only going to cost you $7.95 for 3.5 ounces at Lush. Where as a bar of soap from Salus or the Rocky Mountain Body Works & Co is going to run you $5.50 for a 4.5 to 5 ounce bar and lets not forget that these ARE Colorado Companies. Could you image if ALL your body product doubled because of a group of people who couldn’t prove harm by science but was will to agree with it anyway. Wasn’t this just in the news…Yes I believe they called it Global Warming
The good folks of Broomfield should be disappointment in their Representative, Dianne Primavera, because she was going to give Colorado markets over to the EU. And she didn’t think twice about. I would like to see if the Women’s Lobby or the Environmental Working Group have made large donations to her campaign…
One thing that needs to be mentioned is that there were over 20 people who came to testify against the bill and only 4 people originally signed up in support. The “Defender of Rights” : / aka Chairman Levy gave both sides 40 minutes to speak which meant that only 6 or so people spoke against the bill leaving the other 18 or so people to sit and wonder why they couldn’t be heard…thought I will say that the 40 minutes of support was some of the funniest testimony I have ever been witness to. Sarah Johnson admitted that she knows her products contain natural chemicals and stated that people won’t come after small business…only the big ones.
Even funnier was the Surprised look on the Proponents faces when the bill got shut down for good…Thank god for the 7 reasonable Representatives who voted to put HB 1248 to rest.
Sarah Johnson told Rep Gardner that she does NOT use water when he queried her on her product formulations. She stated she uses Aloe Vera Juice. Well, Aloe Vera Juice is mostly water, and highly perishable. Further questions to Ms Johnson would be :
Do you produce safe cosmetics Ms. Johnson? Your website creates emulsions to treat and cure eczema for babies, with formulations that include Aloe Vera Juice, oils, butters, and emulsifying wax (since oil and water does not mix, and Aloe vera is a water based ingredient). This product, using unrefined butters (which can and do harbor domant bacteria, molds, and fungi from their third world origins) is then offered UN PRESERVED. For BABIES.
I DO believe the public has the right to purchase safe personal care products. But unpreserved creams for babies on the pretext of treating an infants skin disease is ludicious. What is this Sarah Johnson’s testing to support this claim? What is this Sarah Johnson’s testing data to show this product remains safe after repeated hand dipping back into the jar?
The level of ignorance displayed by the sponsor and proponents of this bill was shocking!