Makeup/hair Products Still Toxic

Beauty products, including makeup, shampoos, conditioners, and hair styling treatments, continue to include potentially harmful chemicals, according to scientists and consumer-safety experts. These ingredients include things like formaldehyde-releasing preservatives, certain phthalates, PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances), and unlisted “fragrance” catch-alls that may hide endocrine-disrupting compounds.

In one headline study, researchers found that more than half of beauty products used by Black and Latina women contained chemicals that release formaldehyde — a known human carcinogen — particularly in hair-care and straightening treatments. Experts point out that U.S. regulation lags behind other jurisdictions (such as the European Union) in banning or limiting such chemicals. For example, the EU has banned hundreds of cosmetic-related chemicals that are still legal in U.S. products.

The concern is not only what is listed on labels, but what is not listed. Many “fragrance” components, preservatives, or contaminants don’t have to be individually named under U.S. law, making consumer awareness and product transparency difficult.  For instance, hair straightening products may release formaldehyde gas when heated—even when the label lists “methylene glycol” instead.

Because many of these products are applied directly to the skin or hair, absorption is possible, and the cumulative exposures may matter. One expert noted, “We use a lot of different products every single day… and many of them contain toxic chemicals.”

The disparity in exposure also shows up by demographic: products marketed to women of color often contain ingredients or formulations with higher incidence of the chemicals of concern.

To help consumers navigate this, experts suggest checking for certain ingredients (or avoiding them): formaldehyde-releasing preservatives (e.g., quaternium-15), phthalates (look for “DEP,” “DBP”), parabens (“propylparaben”), PFAS (look for “fluoro” or “polyfluoro”), and vague “fragrance” listings should raise questions. Some states (like Washington) are already restricting many of these ingredients under their state laws.

Join YouTube banner


Why It Matters

Daily exposure risk — Millions of consumers use multiple personal-care items each day, increasing cumulative exposure to chemicals of concern.

Regulatory gap in U.S. law — The U.S. cosmetic regulatory framework does not require pre-market safety approval for most ingredients, unlike some other major jurisdictions.

Health disparities — Women of color may experience greater exposure to harmful chemicals due to targeted marketing and product formulation, raising equity and public-health concerns.

Consumer trust & transparency — When ingredients are hidden under vague terms like “fragrance,” consumers may feel misled or unable to make informed choices.

Innovation & market shift — As awareness grows, demand for “clean,” non-toxic or better-regulated beauty products increases, pushing manufacturers and retailers to reformulate and disclose.


Key Social Outcome

Heightened consumer activism — More people are scrutinizing ingredient labels, posting online about chemical risks, and switching to safer alternatives, fueling the growth of clean-beauty movements.

Empowerment of vulnerable communities — Women of color and other groups disproportionately affected by exposure are increasingly organizing for safer product standards and demanding equitable regulation.

Retail & brand reputation shift — Brands are under growing pressure from consumers to disclose full ingredient lists, remove questionable chemicals, and visibly certify safer products.

Increased public-health literacy — The broader public is becoming more aware that “beauty” products can carry health risks and that beauty routines intersect with chemical exposure, environmental justice, and prevention.

Market transformation toward transparency — As pressure mounts, we’re seeing retailers highlight “phthalate-free,” “paraben-free,” or “PFAS-free” claims, and more third-party databases (like EWG’s Skin Deep) gaining traction as trusted resources.


Top Chemicals of concern (Sources: ChemFORWARD, EWG)

  • Behentrimonium chloride
  • Butylated hydroxytoluene
  • Butylparaben
  • Butylphenyl methylpropional
  • Carbomer (if chlorinated)
  • Cetrimonium chloride
  • C13-14 Alkane; C13-14 Isoalkane; C13-16 Isoalkane
  • CI 77288 (Chromium Oxide)
  • Cyclopentasiloxane; Cyclomethicone
  • Diazolidinyl urea
  • Dibutyl phthalate
  • DMDM hydantoin
  • Ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate
  • Imidazolidinyl urea
  • Iodopropynyl butylcarbamate
  • Methylisothiazolinone; methylchloroisothiazolinone
  • P-phenylenediamine
  • Pigment Red 181/D&C Red No. 30
  • Propylparaben
  • Quaternium-15
  • Resorcinol
  • Stearalkonium chloride
  • Triethanolamine

Comments are closed.