Vivelle Dop shielded hair styling gel, sun spray for children, L’Oréal Men eyeball, Mavill lip treatment … The UFC-Que Choisir association announced on Wednesday, June 7, having spotted 23 cosmetic products put on sale that incorporate in their formulas substances “strictly forbidden”. The association claims the “immediate withdrawal” of these products “out of the law” according to it. One of these products, a foundation in the form of mineral powder, contains isobutylparaben, “a proven endocrine disruptor, yet banned for more than 2 years “in the European Union, indignant the UFC.
Other “rinsed” products, for their part, contain methylisothiazolinone (MIT), or methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCIT), its close relative, both banned since July 2016. “The case is particularly common in products intended for curly hair or frizzy, “notes the organization. These products are sold in specialty stores, but also in pharmacies, pharmacies or in supermarkets, according to the organization, which quotes Carrefour, Monoprix, or Tati.
UFC-Que Choisir regrets that products that rinse but have a long exposure time were not affected by this ban. “The clay masks of Petit Olivier and, worse, the antipoux and nits of Item can still do damage legally,” says the site.
“Detonating Cocktails” found in several products
In this study, the consumer association further asserts that 1,000 products are now classified as “undesirable” substances. The association now also identifies twelve “worrying” compounds (endocrine disruptors, allergens, irritants, etc.), compared with eleven previously.
The UFC-Que Choisir particularly denounces the “explosive cocktails” found in several products, which combine several endocrine disruptors. “Children, teens and pregnant women must flee,” advises the body, citing including “Le Petit Marseillais sublimating dry oil, Sanex Natur Protect deodorant, Sanogyl whitening Global toothpaste, Esthederm Sculpt System milk , the Klorane pomegranate hair day cream, the Peggy Sage BB cream or the Deborah Milano lipstick, which has no less than four endocrine disruptors “.
Mitosyl severely criticized
The association is particularly cautious against Mitosyl, yet marketed for infants to treat diaper rash. This ointment indeed contains an endocrine disruptor “among the most worrying,” notes the body: the BHA. “According to the High Health Authority, the use of Mitosyl exposes a particular risk of eczema due to the presence of BHA and lanolin,” he says.
The UFC-Que Choisir also deplores the presence of products containing allergens and yet display mentions praising their “soothing” or “hypoallergenic” character. In the radius of the shower gels, we find a gel for Intima’s intimate hygiene, an “extra soft” By U soap, a “dermatologically tested” washing cream by Leader Price, a shower cream that “washes in sweetness “of Monoprix, a bubble bath” dermo-protector “of Manava. on the side of the shampoo, the UFC-Que Choose pin the Kertyol of Ducray which “makes it possible to soothe the redness and the itching”, a dermo-soothing antidandruff of Dessange, a version for “sensitive scalp” of L Occitane, or an “extra soft” of Dermactive Capillaries.
Again, the UFC-Que Choisir recalls that, in addition, some products intended for children also contain MIT and / or MCIT. This is particularly the case of the Tahiti Kids shower gel, the Miss de Phytospecific shampoo, the Dettol grapefruit soap, or the shampoo for “frequent use, from 3 years” of Manava.
“Complexity” of production chains
Asked by the Agence France Presse, the president of the French Federation of Beauty Companies (Febea), Patrick O’Quin, called on distributors to “immediately withdraw from the market, in accordance with regulations”.
The “complexity” of some distribution chains could explain why some rinsed products containing MIT are still sold, although it has been banned for four months, according to Febea, judging by the “inexcusable” the presence in other products of endocrine disruptors banned since 2015.
In its statement, the association urges the European Commission to “finally publish an ambitious definition of endocrine disruptors”, including also the ingredients that are suspected to be. A year ago, the European Commission proposed definitional criteria, more than two years after the promised date, suggesting that an endocrine disruptor be defined as a substance that has adverse effects on human health and affects the system. hormonal, with a proven link between the two.
However, this definition was considered too narrow by some Member States, including France. So far, all attempts to reach a vote of the European Union states on the issue have failed. At the end of May, the vote was postponed again.