06.16.08
Are Nanoparticles Safe? The BFA has doubts
The Biological Farmers of Australia have called for certification of organic products to be applied only to products free of nanoparticles. The Australian organic body echoes the concerns of the British-based organic body, the Soil Association, which instigated a similar ban on the use of nanoparticles in organic certified cosmetics products earlier this year. (see page to the right for the complete story).
“There should be an immediate freeze on the commercial release of nanomaterials until there is a sound body of scientific research into all the health impacts,” says the head of the Soil Association. He reflects the concerns of the British Royal Society and the Friends of the Earth; both of these organizations have earlier called for a moratorium on nanoparticle use until more studies can be done.
Nanoparticles in sunscreens
Nanoparticles are now routinely used in sunscreens, with micronized particles of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide being the most commonly used UV filters.
In spite of the growing concerns voiced by scientific bodies internationally many companies defend use of nanoparticles in their products. In a report issued by researchers at L’Oreal in collaboration with scientists at the University of Queensland, Australia, the finding was “that nanoparticles do not pose a risk to human health…[because]there was no evidence to suggest that nanoparticles actually penetrate the epidermis or the dermis.”
There are two problems with this finding that strike me immediately, and I would like to pose a few questions first of all to our distinguished researchers.
1) if nanoparticles do not penetrate the epidermis why are nanocapsules almost universally touted as being excellent delivery systems for anti-aging products?
2) one can infer from the L’Oreal study that nanoparticles are only safe if they do not penetrate the skin. Can we accept the corollary to this as true, namely that a risk is present in cases where the epidermal barrier is compromised, for example by a scratch or cut?
Why MV uses non-micronized zinc oxide
1) Safety: not only does the L’Oreal study dodge several important issues discussed above, there reigns in my mind the paramount question; why not just hold off on using nanoparticles until we have definitive, rather than self-serving, studies?
(I believe the answer lies in their reluctance to disinvest in a technology they have already sunk millions into, but that’s another story.)
2) Better protection
I have long been a proponent of using non-micronized versions of zinc oxide as a sunblock agent. Besides safety, it should be mentioned that larger-sized particles provide better UV protection, the larger the particle, the better the protection.
Formulator’s Standards
My suspicion is that nanoparticles represent an easy way out for formulators who have to deal with consumer complaints about using a product that leaves a sticky, greasy feel to the skin. Nevertheless, nanoparticles may not be the answer, as their safety is in serious doubt. Rather than defend their use in advance of soild data it behooves us as responsible cosmetic formulators to take the road marked “Safety First.”
We must resist consumer pressure to develop products that have cosmetic appeal but which have the potential, in the long run, to harm the user. The standard asked of doctors entering their profession–”First, do no harm,” should apply to us as well.
