Jessica Alba's Honest Company is in front of the consumer firing squad yet again; she and her company are facing a proposed class action law suit rooted in false and deceptive advertising. The suit alleges that Honest deceptively marketed cleaning products, dish soap and laundry detergent--stating that these products are honestly free of the additive sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), when in fact the products in question have been found to contain SLS in significant concentrations. This is not the first time Honest Company has been hit with a class action claiming deceptive and misleading labels and marketing, however. In September of 2015, a $5 million suit was filed against the company; on this occasion the customer claimed that compounds including but not limited to SLS were found in several household products labeled to be honestly free; claims of Honest's sunscreen being wholly ineffective were included in this suit along with claims that the materials from which the company's line of infant diapers are produced, contain a petrochemical-derived additive.
In February 2016, a Wall Street Journal investigation into the Honest Company and its claims, employed two independent labs to test for the presence of sodium lauryl sulfate in the company's laundry detergent. SLS was found in the detergent at each lab. Of course, Honest vehemently protests such investigations into the composition of its product catalogue and vilifies the efforts of any researcher involved in the endeavor. The company which produces Honest Company laundry detergent has, as of last year, removed its claim of SLS-free products from its web-site. Honest's claims of SLS-free products, however, continue.
Why is the Honest Company and its proclivity for attracting class action lawsuits and deceptive marketing even relevant? Simply stated, each of us is exposed,often unknowingly, to a toxic combination of environmental and household chemicals--many in products purchased because of claims to the contrary--every single day. Americans spray glyphosate on their lawns; put permethrins on their pets, DEET on their children, dump oils and degreasers down storm drains, support fracking--and then become indignant when a company puts SLS in the laundry soap. Aren't we all guilty of this sort of chemical-consumption hypocrisy? Because if we, as consumers, felt genuine affront at the actions of the Honest Company, the chemical and its contaminants would be the story rather than the tabloid crucifixion of Jessica Alba, company co-founder and, I suspect, caring and conscientious mother.
This is why the story matters: Women on average apply over 200 chemicals to their skin daily; more than 60 percent of which are absorbed directly into the bloodstream. Among these 200 is SLS, sodium lauryl sulfate. SLS has two common contaminants, 1,4-dioxane and ethylene dioxide.
Let's start with SLS.
SLS is derived from ethoxylated lauryl alcohol and used as a surfactant-cleansing agent, as well as a surfactant-emulsifying agent. As a surfactant, SLS breaks-up surface tension and separates molecules to allow a more complete interaction between, for example, shampoo and hair. This interaction creates a lather which increases the efficacy of SLS as a cleaning agent. Due to its low cost and overall effectiveness, SLS is used in a wide range of products, including laundry detergent, shampoo, toothpaste, engine degreaser and industrial strength cleaners.
During the process which produces SLS, 1,4-dioxane is commonly formed as an unwanted contaminant. An unwanted contaminant that is seldom removed--as it is found in more than 46 pecent of all personal care products. This is incredibly unfortunate for consumers due in large part to 1,4-dioxane being a known human carcinogen. In 2001, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) detected 1, 4-dioxane at levels up to 1410 parts per million (ppm) in cosmetic raw materials and at 279 ppm in personal care products. It was also found at levels in excess of 85 ppm in various brands of children's shampoo. To provide context and significance to the aforementioned figures please consider that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) insists that exposure to 1,4-dioxane even as a trace contaminant (at levels much lower than 85 ppm) is cause for concern.
In addition, ethylene dioxide is also formed during the SLS production process. Ethylene dioxide is a known human carcinogen with developmental and reproductive toxicity. It is a common impurity in SLS, polysorbate-20, ceteareth-20, laureth-20, PEG-40 hydrogenated castor oil and polysorbate-80. One would be hard pressed to find a common commercial household product that does not contain either ethylene dioxide or 1,4-dioxane, with SLS as the carrier chemical.
Unless the Honest Company is selling laundry detergent with a companion warranty the onus of responsibility lies with the consumer. One must realize that chemicals in the products which define our daily routines almost always carry chemical contaminants, most of which are recognized carcinogens. Isn't it time that the US starts becoming a more product-savvy society? Assigning blame for one's ignorance is never an acceptable excuse, irrespective of the realm of common consumption within which are defined daily beauty routines, bathing routines, etcetera. If we allow fracking water to be dumped into our drinking water, where do we think it goes? If we apply permethrin to our pets what happens to the chemicals when we touch, brush, play with our pets? If we purchase shampoo for our children and choose not to read the label, looking for known carcinogens' chemical names and their synonyms, whose fault is it should our children fall ill or experience neurotoxicity?
The goal must be to limit harmful chemical exposure through informed purchases for ourselves and our families. This means reading labels with some self-education. If the health of one's family does not provide enough impetus to initiate these small changes then mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.
Please reference: SLSfree.net, cfsan.fda.gov, epa.gov, ewg.gov, abcnews.go.com
