Catherine Glisnkaya Mr. Anthony Borrero Engl 1102 03.20.

13

C.A.P. Project 1st draft.

Working Title: A beauty elixir, or poison?

Plan: 1) Introduction. Engage with the audience, ask, make them think,

example of blinded woman. Question the safety of the cosmetics. 2) FDA. Transition to FDA , decode the abbreviation, give some info

about the organization, what it claims to do etc. a little of history when and why it was established. 3) Lists of banned chemicals. Compare Europes to FDAs. Explain the

difference. Possibly add Praise EU for being precautious. And suggest that the FDA takes that into consideration and be serious about their job and be more precautious. 4) Talk about some dangerous chemicals from EUs banned list. Say

what they can do to human health, why they are dangerous. Raise the question why they are still present I went and checked my personal care products. ask so why are they present on the label of my frangrance/toothpaste/ shampoo

5)

lead to conclusion. Some parties think that the amount of those

chemicals used in cosmetics industry they mean in every bottle we buy does not impose the danger to our health. But do they take into consideration how much of it is applied to our bodies on daily basis? How many items an average woman puts on her face while doing makeup, or an average man uses while shaving in the morning? And how many times the concentration of those chemicals rises? 6) Actual conclusion/ ask to be aware of the issues (sort of remind

the audience the problems), ask to act ban those cosmetics that use dangerous chemicals, ask to act. There seems to be no answer for those questions. It seems that the customers are left to decide for themselves whether to trust or not to trust companies since we became more aware of potential danger (decide and choose for ourselves). But arent government agencies supposed to do what they were created for ensure customers safety? ..But the real solution I see in: to force the government to pass the real regulations and to empower exact organizations (whether it is FDA itself, or a new org) to monitor and regulate the cosmetics industry. To entitle them and authorize them not only to send letters asking to remove potentially dangerous products, but enforcing its recall and warning the facility to be shut down. To give them legislative power to shut down/close the facility and/ or fine the company if they do not align with the regulations.

BODY

Many people nowadays seem to be concerned about safety and regulations in drug and food industry, but we take little stance when it comes to the safety of cosmetics. We simply are not being cautious of what we buy when it comes to shampoos, toothpaste, baby powder etc., being led by attractive bottles, advertisement, slogan or some catchy word presented on the label. Cosmetics industry is one of the largest industries, offering plenty of options to choose from. Logically consumers would think that all the cosmetics are made from safe ingredients, otherwise, they would not have been on the shelves of the supermarkets. American customers dont even question their safety. We seem to be confident in what we buy, simply because we trust the government and the companies that produce cosmetics. Is our trust grounded on a stable soil? Or is it sinking in the quicksand? We are certain that the cosmetics are regulated by the government. Rachel Pomerance breaks this granite of customers unconditional trust by indicating that the cosmetics we purchase may occur to be quite not as safe as we believe they are (). A huge scandal related to cosmetics industry took place in 1930s. Several women suffered corneal damage after using an eyelash beautifier an eyelash and eyebrow dye called Lash Lure (from cosmetics and skin). One of the women went blind. Taking into consideration that these injuries happened several decades ago, we would assume that now, after dramatic cases like that the government would have corrected the situation by carefully regulating cosmetics industry. Unfortunately, passing legislative regulations has not become the result. American government seems not to notice the safety concerns. This may be proven by about 38,000 injuries related to cosmetics,

which required medical treatment, that were registered in America in 1990[citation from preventcancer].

It seems that the issue of safety in cosmetics has not been solved even till nowadays. Many of the customers suffer from skin rashes, inflammation and burns, blistering, allergies that are caused by cosmetics. These injuries, according to Thompson Solicitors, [citation] can leave lasting effects or even scarring. And some allergic reactions to cosmetics may effect the respiratory system with serious health implications, even to the point of causing asthma. [citation from thelegal line]. [In fact] talk about dangerous chemicals

Plan adjustmenets: Talk about dangerous chemicals. - is anything is regulated? Talk about FDA. Some citation from cancer prevetion coalition (info in the additional research) - Banned lists. Compare FDAs to EUs. Raise question about that document. [Talk about the banned lists in Europe and FDAs 8 chemicals which seem to be given out to publics judgment to calm it down and ensure that the work is being done and the chemicals have been carefully examined. ] Only 11? % of the cosmetics is examined/checked. And the FDA calls cosmetic industry the most regulate one. ?? (raise questions about that) Use something to say that the FDA should better be precautious. (since I cannot use the cats example anymore, think of something else)

Provide with the list of chemicals from the back of a fragrance or whatever

[I have to admit] there has been an attempt to control the cosmetics industry talk about Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011 that was not passed. labeling issues. Not all ingredients may be labeled, and it can absolutely occur that the most dangerous ones were omitted. After some research no real labeling is introduced. Some companies do not/may not include substances they feel will harm their reputation or simply unnecessary to be labeled. Are they afraid to disclose the truth? And arent they supposed to be monitored? Let me switch gears right here and reformulate the question. Are there organizations who hold the power of real regulations?