ABOUT
Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Written by EWG staff.
DONATE TO EWG TODAY
We need you to help protect your health and environment! Please donate $5 to EWG today.
GET EWG'S TIPS & ACTION ALERTS
Sign Up here to receive email updates and tips from EWG and stay informed on the issues that matter most to you.
Get EWG widgets & blog badges.
ENVIROBLOG TO YOU
ENVIROBLOG VIA EMAIL
You could (almost) eat this furniture
Is your sunscreen in EWG's Sunscreen Hall of Shame?
Fracking: Live chat with EWG & 'Gasland' director Josh Fox
Understanding Sunscreen: 4 Questions about SPF
SEARCH ENVIROBLOG
FEATURED
Why, oh why is there plastic in my aluminum water bottle?
Cell phone radiation series - Part 2: 8 Ways to reduce your exposure
Infant formula: How to choose it & use it
EWG's Tips for Parents: The Series
EWG's Tips to avoid BPA exposure
Let's talk some serious shop about TSCA reform
EWG on TV
Cutting the Pork from U.S. Farm Bill
Sunscreen safety & DC drinking water
Perchlorate in people, kids' personal care products & plastics, and sunscreen
BPA in baby formula & safe cosmetics
What can I do about fluoride in my water?
What is new carpet treated with? What can I do?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?
PEOPLE TALKING TOXICS
TALK TO US
Did we miss something? Email Enviroblog.
« It's not just about the weather any more | Main | Envirohealth in Blogs: Corn is not the devil »
Hair product, or tasty treat?
"If you can't put it in your mouth," says Burt's Bees CEO John Replogle, "you shouldn't put it on your skin." Then, according to New York Times reporter Louise Story, he scoops out a fingerful of the company's Avocado Butter Hair Treatment and eats it.
As I read the article, I wondered if Mr. Replogle does that trick for reporters often. And if he does, does he always use the same product? Burt's Bees products have some of the best overall scores in Skin Deep, ranging from 0 to 6 (on a scale where 0 means "low hazard" and 10 means "high hazard"). Still, even their products wouldn't be my snack of choice.
Take, for example, Burt's Bees Coconut Foot Cream. Sounds pretty harmless and, who knows, maybe even tasty. It contains low-hazard ingredients like oat flour and rosemary leaf oil and, of course, coconut oil. But it also contains fragrance (of which you should always be skeptical), which is linked to asthma, allergies, and immunotoxicity. Also, although many of the ingredients received good scores, they have data gaps as high as 100% (sucrose distearate), which means there's a lot we don't know about them. Overall, the product rates a 4 out of 10, or "moderate hazard."
I would advise Mr. Replogle to avoid using the company's Radiance Eye Cream as an example. It carries a Skin Deep score of 6 for ingredients linked to developmental and reproductive toxicity, neurotoxicity, endocrine disruption and bioaccumulation (among other things).
The product that Mr. Replogle was snacking on gets a low-moderate score of 3, mostly because it contains "fragrance," that commonly used allergen and irritant that often contains phthalates. Although it isn't the safest of Burt's products, the Avocado Butter Hair Treatment sure does sound like the tastiest.
Whether Burt's Bees is the brand for you is a judgment call, and there are a lot of factors to consider (from ownership of parent-company Clorox to Burt's Bees' environmental policies). If you're looking for a tasty treat, though, I'd look elsewhere.
Psst! Want to help build the Skin Deep database? A $10 donation through our I Feel Pretty campaign will add another product, and it could even help us win a grant.
Great article! I saw this a few days ago and while I do use a few Burt's Bees items I stick with the ones that clearly say "paraben and phthalate free". I've found great comparable safe products and probably won't be spending too much money on Burt's any time soon...
Actually, I think Replogle hit upon a great idea. If companies don't want to release the proprietary components that make up "fragrance" in their products, they should have to prove that they didn't include anything too unhealthy. And what better way to do that than to force the CEOs of cosmetic companies to chow down on their own products?