Lead, in Small Doses, is Still Bad for You

When the news came out a month ago that there were dangerous levels of lead in lipstick, everyone freaked out. Some thought it was a hoax. A few articles came out to fill the need for objective information on the issue.

Though not 100% objective, the best source of information I found is from the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics. They put out a comprehensive report on the problem, with a Q&A section for the truly curious -- I mean, concerned. They write, "Lead is a potent neurotoxin and linked to numerous other health and reproductive problems—and it doesn't belong in lipstick." I hear that.

Their studies show that one-third of the 33 red lipsticks examined by an independent lab contained a level of lead exceeding 0.1 parts per million (ppm). This level, incidentally, is the FDA's limit for lead in candy. As a candy-lover myself, this makes me nervous. Sure, I consume Red Vines at a much faster rate than I ingest -accidentally, of course- Dior Addict "Positive Red" or say, L'Oréal Colour Riche "Classic Wine". But the fact that it is present in both is somewhat unnerving. And what is even scarier is that none of the 'offending' companies listed lead as an ingredient in the product.

John Bailey, the executive vice president of the Cosmetics, Toiletry, and Fragrance trade association, had this to say (via the AP):

The average amount of lead a woman would be exposed to when using cosmetics is 1,000 times less than the amount she would get from eating, breathing and drinking water that meets Environmental Protection Agency drinking-water standards.

I guess, for ultimate safety, we should just stop consuming anything.

It's okay, though, because now we've got some politicians going after them. Mediapost tells us that United States Senators John Kerry, Diane Feinstein, and Barbara Boxer are hot on the FDA's tail, getting them to look into the matter.

Oh, and to actually do something about it.