Micro plastics and the beauty industry.
A proposed EU bill banning microplastics in cosmetics “doesn't go far or fast enough,” said major beauty brands in an open letter to the European Commission.
A group of 15+ brands led by Swiss beauty brand Weleda signed the open letter and criticized, in particular, the exceptionally long time frame to implementation.
Brands in support of swift ban of intentionally added microplastics from ALL cosmetics products.
The proposed EU bill provides flexible and lengthy transition periods for companies to remove microplastics from their cosmetic products, giving 6 years for perfume to become compliant and up to twelve years for lipsticks and other makeup products.
“The exceptionally long transition periods in the current proposal, especially 12 years for leave-on products such as makeup, remain at odds with the principles laid down in ongoing European Commission initiatives and therefore have no justification,” the open letter reads.
The EU amendment in question is seeking to amend current legislation concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), which does not address or regulate the use of intentionally added microplastics in products.
Despite the lack of regulation, the use of microplastics in cosmetics has been steadily declining over the last decade, dropping from 8,600 tons in the EU in 2012 to 4,500 tons in 2020. But critics argue the speed is not enough to match the pace of the climate crisis and the negative impacts on human health.
WHat are microplastics
Microplastics are any piece of plastic less than 5 mm in size, which is about the size of a sesame seed. Microplastics can be manufactured to be this size, or they can be debris eroded from larger plastic pieces. Interestingly enough, one of the largest sources of microplastics is actually tires – around 28 percent of microplastics in the ocean come from tires shedding microscopic pieces of rubber as they degrade.
Then there’s the impact of the beauty industry. One study found 87 percent of products from ten major beauty brands contained microplastics. Microplastics were found in mascaras, in glittery nail polishes, and even in shampoo.
But regardless of the source, microplastics have the same toxic impacts: microplastics accumulate throughout the marine food chain, poisoning the fish and invertebrates that we then ingest. On land, microplastics release harmful toxins into the soil that then leach into groundwater supplies.
Plastics can take thousands of years to decompose already; the problem with microplastics is they’re often too tiny to be seen, so they cannot be targeted in plastic clean-ups, and they’re small enough to escape through water filtration systems. Microplastics are in the air we breathe, in the food we eat, in the clothes we wear, and in the washes we use on our face.
Why is that bad? Microplastics are increasingly showing up inside us. They’ve been found in our lungs, in our blood, and even in the placentas of unborn fetuses. Though a new field of research, and the long-term impacts of this are not well understood, some of the consequences of this exposure can be oxidative stress, cellular damage, and even changes to our DNA.
What is microplastic-free beauty?
Certain global beauty brands still heavily rely on microplastics in their formulations, especially in exfoliating face washes. These microbeads are rough in texture and intended to clear away dead skin cells.
There are a multitude of sustainable alternatives, however, and consumer pressure can drive the switch. Take St. Ives’ infamous apricot facial scrub, which was once renowned for using microbeads but finally switched to apricot seeds and walnut shells as the key exfoliating ingredients amid public criticism with regulatory backing.
That switch is indicative of the larger micro-plastic free beauty movement, which aims to formulate new cosmetics and beauty products without plastic or to switch current plastic-dependent formulations to more natural ingredients.
Now brands that have been campaigning for better sustainability for years are pushing back against regulatory lag to force other brands to do the same.
“For years now, we have worked tirelessly and successfully to remove microplastics from our products. We have demonstrated that microplastics are not essential in producing a wide range of cosmetic and beauty products. It is about the willingness to do so,” said the letter’s signatories.
It’s notable that a segment of private sector businesses are the ones pushing for stronger environmental regulations, as opposed to the government enforcing legislation on unwilling companies. This shows the tides are turning in terms of sustainability and environmental responsibility, with a coalition of beauty businesses setting and exceeding environmental standards.
“As responsible industries, we believe we should contribute to shaping tomorrow’s world, not fight to maintain yesterday’s practices,” the letter concluded.
WHATS UP NEXT …
