Re: Nanotech in Skin Care & Cosmetics

[Guest guest]

Great article Sue!

I was shocked at the part where it read:

" It's very difficult to get anything through the skin, " said

, the executive vice president for science of the Personal Care

Products Council, an industry trade group in Washington. " The skin is

a very effective barrier. "

Yeah.... Right! We know better!

Hugs to you gal!

Trly

>

> From todays New York Times, an article on nanophobia towards

> ingredients used on human skin. Barely brushes the surface of this

> trend & inaccurate in some regards as far as research I've done -

> note the " experts " are mostly trade spokespeople & the notorious

FDA,

> which has been using a similar illogic here as it does with GMO

food.

> The article doesn't appear in the Science section, rather in

Fashion

> & Style. Any " science " mentioned in it seems as faddish as the

usual

> coverage. Mostly notable for being reported in such a highly

regarded

> newspaper. Best wishes, Sue

>

> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/fashion/04skin.html

>

> Skin Deep

> New Products Bring Side Effect: Nanophobia

> By NATASHA SINGER

> Published: December 3, 2008

>

> IT sounds like a plot straight out of a science-fiction novel by

> Crichton. Toiletry companies formulate new cutting-edge

> creams and lotions that contain tiny components designed to work

more

> effectively. But those minuscule building blocks have an unexpected

> drawback: the ability to penetrate the skin, swarm through the body

> and overwhelm organs like the liver.

>

> Humans have long lived in dread of such nightmare scenarios in

which

> swarms of creatures attack. Alfred Hitchcock envisioned menacing

> flocks in " The Birds. " In the 1990 film " Arachnophobia " a killer

> spider arrives in the United States, where it attacks and

multiplies.

>

> And now comes nanophobia, the fear that tiny components engineered

on

> the nanoscale — that is, 100 nanometers or less — could run amok

> inside the body. A human hair, for example, is 50,000 to 100,000

> nanometers in diameter. A nanoparticle of titanium dioxide in a

> sunscreen could be as small as 15 nanometers. (One nanometer equals

a

> billionth of a meter.)

>

> " The smaller a particle, the further it can travel through tissue,

> along airways or in blood vessels, " said Dr. Adnan Nasir, a

clinical

> assistant professor of dermatology at the University of North

> Carolina at Chapel Hill. " Especially if the nanoparticles are

> indestructible and accumulate and are not metabolized, if you

> accumulate them in the organs, the organs could fail. "

>

> Indeed, some doctors, scientists and consumer advocates are

concerned

> that many industries are adopting nanotechnology ahead of studies

> that would establish whether regular ingestion, inhalation or

dermal

> penetration of these particles constitute a health or environmental

> hazard. Personal care products are simply the lowest hanging fruit.

>

> But people are already exposed to nanoparticles. Stoves and toaster

> ovens emit ultrafine particles of 2 to 30 nanometers, according to

> the National Institute of Standards and Technology; the researchers

> reported last month that long-term contact with such appliances

could

> constitute a large exposure to the smallest of nanoparticles.

>

> Several products already use nano-engineered materials. There

> are " nano pants, " stain-resistant chinos and jeans whose fabric

> contain nano-sized whiskers that repel oil and dirt, and nanocycles

> made from carbon nanotubes that are stronger and lighter than

> standard steel bicycles. And in lotions and creams, the use of

> nanocomponents may create a more cosmetically elegant effect — like

> uniformity or spreadability.

>

> Some ingredients may behave differently as nanoparticles than they

do

> in larger forms. Nano-sized silver, for example, can act as an

> antibacterial agent on the skin. Larger particles of zinc oxide and

> titanium dioxide result in white pasty sunscreens; but as

> nanoparticles, they appear more transparent.

>

> When it comes to beauty products, however, some consumer advocates

> are concerned that dynamic nanoparticles could pose risks to the

skin

> or, if they penetrate the skin, to other parts of the body. Mineral

> sunscreens have attracted the most attention.

>

> " Substances that are perfectly benign could be toxic at the nano

> scale, " said Hansen, a senior scientist at Consumers Union,

> the company behind Consumer Reports. " Because they are so small,

they

> could go places in the body that could not be done before. "

>

> This month, the magazine published a study it had commissioned that

> found mineral nanoparticles in five sunscreens, even though four of

> the companies had denied using them. In October, Dr. Hansen sent a

> letter to the Food and Drug Administration commissioner, asking the

> agency to require cosmetics and sunscreen manufacturers to run

safety

> tests on nano scale ingredients. In the letter, he cited a few

> studies published in scientific journals that reported that

exposure

> to nanoparticles of titanium dioxide caused damage to the organs of

> laboratory animals and human cell cultures.

>

> But cosmetics industry representatives said there was no evidence

> that personal care products that contain nano-size components

> constitute a health hazard. Furthermore, no rigorous clinical

trials

> have been published showing that cosmetics with nanocomponents

caused

> health problems. A review of the potential risks of nanomaterials,

> carried out for the European Center for Toxicology in 2006,

concluded

> that sunscreens with metal nanoparticles were unlikely to penetrate

> healthy skin, but it did raise the question of whether safety

studies

> should examine if such materials may penetrate damaged skin.

>

> " It's very difficult to get anything through the skin, " said

> , the executive vice president for science of the Personal

Care

> Products Council, an industry trade group in Washington. " The skin

is

> a very effective barrier. "

>

> Indeed, some nanotechnology researchers said it was illogical to

> assume that a nano-size component inherently carries greater risk

> than a larger component. Furthermore, some say cosmetics may

contain

> molecules like a silicone fluid called cyclopentasiloxane that are

> even smaller than nanomaterials.

>

> " I think it's a double standard because nanoparticles are less

likely

> to go through the skin than solutions where you are using single

> molecules, " said S. Langer, a chemical engineering professor

> at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. He is

> developing nanoparticles for the targeted delivery of cancer

> medications, and is a founder of Living Proof, a cosmetics company

> that makes hair products. " The molecules in a cream are certainly

> going to be smaller than a nanoparticle. "

>

> The Food and Drug Administration does not require manufacturers to

> list the format of ingredients on labels. The agency does require

> cosmetics manufacturers to ensure that their products are safe for

> use; in 2006, the agency created its own task force to investigate

> the safety of engineered nanomaterials.

>

> Ken Marenus, the senior vice president of regulatory affairs

> worldwide at the Estée Lauder companies, said nanomaterials had to

> undergo the same kind of assessment for exposure, risk and dosage

> levels as any other cosmetic component. " The same toxicological

> standards for every chemical will apply to nano, " he said.

>

> Dr. of the Personal Care Products Council estimated that

> several thousand sunscreens and cosmetics currently use some kind

of

> nanoscale component.

>

> Cor soap, for example, uses 50-nanometer particles of silver

combined

> with silica that are smaller than the size of a skin pore. The

> material is designed to enter the pores and kill bacteria.

>

> " The silver suffocates the bacteria and then you rinse it off with

> water, " said McKinley, the chief executive of Cor.

Although

> a study has shown that nanosilver can permeate broken skin, Ms.

> McKinley said the soap was safe because it contains only a limited

> amount of nanosilver and the particles do not remain on the skin.

>

> Indeed, using nanoderivatives of precious metals is becoming a

trend.

> Last year, Chantecaille introduced Nano Gold Energizing Cream, a

$420

> face cream that contains 5-nanometer particles of 24-carat gold

> encapsulated in silk fibers. Sylvie Chantecaille, the chief

executive

> of the company, said the capsules delivered the gold particles,

which

> work as an antioxidant, into the surface layers of the skin. " It's

a

> very effective way to transport beneficial ingredients, " she said.

>

> But many beauty companies are shying away from discussing minuscule

> particles in their cosmetics. And that kind of avoidance may itself

> stoke nanophobia. For example, when La Prairie introduced its

> Cellular Cream Platinum Rare earlier this year, the company sent

out

> press materials promoting " nano-sized Hesperidin Smart Crystals to

> protect DNA " in the formula. But, in a phone interview, Sven Gohla,

> the company's vice president for research and development,

distanced

> the brand from nanotechnology. Just because the particles of

> hesperidin, a flavonoid, in the formula are small does not mean

they

> are manufactured nanotechnology, he said.

>

> Last month, a consumer group in London called Which? published a

> survey it had conducted of 67 cosmetics companies on the prevalence

> and safety testing of nanomaterials in personal care products. Only

> 17 companies responded, of which eight acknowledged using

> nanomaterials.

>

> " When nanotechnology was hot, everybody wanted to talk about `nano

> this, nano that.' Look at the iPod nano, " said Dr. Hansen of

> Consumers Union. " But now that the concerns have come out, people

are

> not so sure the word nano is a good thing to be touted. "

>