BACKGROUND: Personal care products are a source of exposure to endocrine disrupting and asthma-associated chemicals. Because use of hair products differs by race/ethnicity, these products may contribute to exposure and disease disparities. OBJECTIVE: This preliminary study investigates the endocrine disrupting and asthma-associated chemical content of hair products used by U.S. Black women. METHODS: We used gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) to test 18 hair products in 6 categories used by Black women: hot oil treatment, anti-frizz/polish, leave-in conditioner, root stimulator, hair lotion, and relaxer. We tested for 66 chemicals belonging to 10 chemical classes: ultraviolet (UV) filters, cyclosiloxanes, glycol ethers, fragrances, alkylphenols, ethanolamines, antimicrobials, bisphenol A, phthalates, and parabens. RESULTS: The hair products tested contained 45 endocrine disrupting or asthma-associated chemicals, including every targeted chemical class. We found cyclosiloxanes, parabens, and the fragrance marker diethyl phthalate (DEP) at the highest levels, and DEP most frequently. Root stimulators, hair lotions, and relaxers frequently contained nonylphenols, parabens, and fragrances; anti-frizz products contained cyclosiloxanes. Hair relaxers for children contained five chemicals regulated by California's Proposition 65 or prohibited by EU cosmetics regulation. Targeted chemicals were generally not listed on the product label. CONCLUSIONS: Hair products used by Black women and children contained multiple chemicals associated with endocrine disruption and asthma. The prevalence of parabens and DEP is consistent with higher levels of these compounds in biomonitoring samples from Black women compared with White women. These results indicate the need for more information about the contribution of consumer products to exposure disparities. A precautionary approach would reduce the use of endocrine disrupting chemicals in personal care products and improve labeling so women can select products consistent with their values.
BACKGROUND: Personal care products are a source of exposure to endocrine disrupting and asthma-associated chemicals. Because use of hair products differs by race/ethnicity, these products may contribute to exposure and disease disparities. OBJECTIVE: This preliminary study investigates the endocrine disrupting and asthma-associated chemical content of hair products used by U.S. Black women. METHODS: We used gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) to test 18 hair products in 6 categories used by Black women: hot oil treatment, anti-frizz/polish, leave-in conditioner, root stimulator, hair lotion, and relaxer. We tested for 66 chemicals belonging to 10 chemical classes: ultraviolet (UV) filters, cyclosiloxanes, glycol ethers, fragrances, alkylphenols, ethanolamines, antimicrobials, bisphenol A, phthalates, and parabens. RESULTS: The hair products tested contained 45 endocrine disrupting or asthma-associated chemicals, including every targeted chemical class. We found cyclosiloxanes, parabens, and the fragrance marker diethyl phthalate (DEP) at the highest levels, and DEP most frequently. Root stimulators, hair lotions, and relaxers frequently contained nonylphenols, parabens, and fragrances; anti-frizz products contained cyclosiloxanes. Hair relaxers for children contained five chemicals regulated by California's Proposition 65 or prohibited by EU cosmetics regulation. Targeted chemicals were generally not listed on the product label. CONCLUSIONS: Hair products used by Black women and children contained multiple chemicals associated with endocrine disruption and asthma. The prevalence of parabens and DEP is consistent with higher levels of these compounds in biomonitoring samples from Black women compared with White women. These results indicate the need for more information about the contribution of consumer products to exposure disparities. A precautionary approach would reduce the use of endocrine disrupting chemicals in personal care products and improve labeling so women can select products consistent with their values.
Authors: Zorimar Rivera-Núñez; Pahriya Ashrap; Emily S Barrett; Adana A M Llanos; Deborah J Watkins; Amber L Cathey; Carmen M Vélez-Vega; Zaira Rosario; José F Cordero; Akram Alshawabkeh; John D Meeker Journal: Environ Res Date: 2021-11-17 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Vy Kim Nguyen; Adam Kahana; Julien Heidt; Katelyn Polemi; Jacob Kvasnicka; Olivier Jolliet; Justin A Colacino Journal: Environ Int Date: 2020-02-26 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Patricia F Coogan; Lynn Rosenberg; Julie R Palmer; Yvette C Cozier; Yolanda M Lenzy; Kimberly A Bertrand Journal: Carcinogenesis Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 4.944
Authors: Rajrupa Ghosh; Mefruz Haque; Paul C Turner; Raul Cruz-Cano; Cher M Dallal Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-26 Impact factor: 3.390