Misinformation is one of the biggest challenges I see in the cosmetic space today. There are so much fear and mistrust, and I find this is severely stunting the ability as an industry to do better. Instead, the brands are bending to the fear-mongering trends to appease consumers.
EWG is a respected leader in the fight for safer products, and thousands of consumers rely on their research to help them make informed decisions. In order to allay your concerns, and empower you to make more informed choices, I’d like to take a moment to point out what I’ve learned since the release of this article.
Environmental Working Group (EWG), an organization that coins themselves as science-based, but seems to always be complacent with half-truths.
EWG’s Skin Deep Database is a showcase of poor interpretation of science and straight-up bias. Alas, it’s the dose that makes the toxin. Anything can be a hazard - even water if you drink enough. It’s obvious that they simply have a preference for natural, which you’ll be hard-pressed to find negative points on…
Even when there’s strong evidence to support an ingredient's safety, they are seemingly unwilling to change their ratings. I.e. there’s a few or even just one study that indicates danger… let’s ignore the bulk of the data and just focus on this one study, regardless of methods or if it’s been replicated. There’s a name for this. They are cherry-picking data, only using science when it supports their beliefs, a hallmark for quacks. To my understanding, the EWG NEVER changes its stance on a cosmetic ingredient. Something to remember here - they are also political. It doesn’t look that great to consumers if you change your opinion.
It’s data aggregation - NOT product testing. EWG’s assessment is chemical-by-chemical. They don’t take into consideration ingredient concentration or test final product formulation. Their site even has this disclaimer: "The ratings below indicate the relative level of concern posed by exposure to the ingredients in this product - not the product itself." Another aspect of product formulation overlooked in a chemical-by-chemical assessment is the chemistry of acids and bases. Sometimes ingredients balance or neutralize one another resulting in a final product that’s safer than the individual ingredients.
Unbeknownst to consumers, they are heavily funded by the organic lobby. Their certifications are not cheap for brands, but they’ve got such a rapport with consumers, even larger companies like Procter & Gamble with Herbalescense, are jumping on the bandwagon. Fear-mongering is an incredibly effective strategy to sell products.
A general flaw for us humans at thinking critically, we’re emotional decision-makers. When someone, especially when they’re propped up on a pedestal, tells us that natural products are safer (or greener), that your products are killing you, that cosmetic scientists are evil and corrupt, well it would be dangerous not to believe them…They’re using consumer ignorance of cosmetic science - and ignorance isn’t a bad thing here, of course, consumers don’t have a background - to sell products and make money.
The EWG also makes money through their affiliate programs. Here is the Aveeno Active Naturals Radiant Tinted Moisturizer with a rating of 10. A 10 rating is the most dangerous product that can be found in the Skin Deep Database (according to them). But if you click on the picture they’ll be happy to have you buy the product through their affiliate program.
EWG does an impressive job of pulling a ton of information together into one searchable database. But the system is far from infallible and cannot be substituted for actual product testing. It’s a starting point for better understanding the chemicals in your products, but definitely not an ending point for understanding specific products.