We\u2019ve all heard the misleading claims that nail polish is harmful unless it\u2019s \u201c3-Free\u201d. The facts are that this was deception from the very beginning. All nail polish can be used safely, and that\u2019s been true for more than eighty years. Nail polish formulas haven\u2019t changed much since the 1930s. How did they so suddenly become dangerous? I don\u2019t know of any cases when nail polish has harmed anyone, other than it catching fire. Fresh nail polish is flammable – so don\u2019t do as my friend did and light up a cigarette immediately after polishing your nails. All nail polishes are safe. Those that market their polish as \u201csafer\u201d are splitting hairs. It\u2019s like saying that using an SPF 70 lotion isn\u2019t as safe as SPF 80. The fact is both are safe. Don\u2019t be concerned about nail polish causing any harm to your health, when used as directed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Como come\u00e7ou toda essa desinforma\u00e7\u00e3o sobre esmaltes?
Tudo come\u00e7ou como uma campanha de marketing inteligente e altamente enganosa de um grupo ativista baseado no medo. Esse grupo criou uma falsa preocupa\u00e7\u00e3o com a seguran\u00e7a e depois lucrou com as doa\u00e7\u00f5es, alegando que estava salvando o mundo dos esmaltes perigosos! Eles fizeram afirma\u00e7\u00f5es exageradas sobre os ingredientes para assustar desnecessariamente o p\u00fablico. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Por exemplo, eles alegaram que o tolueno \u00e9 perigoso em esmaltes de unha, mas essa informa\u00e7\u00e3o \u00e9 contr\u00e1ria aos fatos. O prestigioso Cosmetic Review Expert Panel (CIR) analisou o tolueno. Depois de analisar com imparcialidade todas as informa\u00e7\u00f5es cient\u00edficas, esse painel de m\u00e9dicos e cientistas de classe mundial determinou que o tolueno \u00e9 considerado seguro em quantidades de at\u00e9 50% em esmaltes de unha. A Uni\u00e3o Europeia fez o mesmo teste e concluiu que o tolueno \u00e9 seguro em esmaltes de unha at\u00e9 25%. Essa \u00e9 a concentra\u00e7\u00e3o normalmente utilizada. Portanto, especialistas cient\u00edficos independentes dos EUA e da UE afirmam que o tolueno \u00e9 seguro para uso em esmaltes de unha. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ent\u00e3o, por que o tolueno n\u00e3o \u00e9 mais usado para essa finalidade?
Manufacturers voluntarily eliminated toluene because it is a volatile organic compound (VOC), and it was found to contribute slightly to ozone depletion. Nail manufacturers wanting to do their part for the environment agreed to replace toluene with other solvents. Even so, these fear-based advocacy groups again deceived the public! They pretended that manufacturers change because of toluene\u2019s toxicity, which is an outright lie. These same activist groups lie to the news media as well, and tell them that even nail polish formulas with <0.1% toluene are still toxic – even though this is contrary to all of the scientific facts. These groups pretend there is no safe amount of anything they say is dangerous. This just shows they don\u2019t understand the science or the facts. Instead, they want the world to be black and white, when this clearly isn\u2019t so. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) is another example. This ingredient hasn\u2019t been used very much at all in nail polish formulas for at least ten years, but that didn\u2019t stop these groups from stretching the truth. It is no longer used, even though it has been found to be safe for nail polish applications. Better replacements are now used to increase the wearability of nail polish, which was how DBP functioned in polish. There has NEVER been any credible evidence to show that DPB was harmful in nail polishes. Other phthalates with similar-sounding names were determined to be unsuitable for cosmetics, but these were never used in nail polish. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The fear-mongering activists paint everything with a broad brush so, without evidence, they assumed that DBP must also be dangerous. In other words, rather than explain that some phthalates are safe, they decided to scare consumers by telling them that all phthalates are dangerous, again, because they don\u2019t understand the facts. They hide their lack of knowledge and reduce everything to black and white. They don\u2019t like the scientific facts; they\u2019d rather base their unfair attacks on pure speculation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Formaldehyde at room temperature is a gas, but in cosmetic manufacturing it is usually stored and used in a water-based liquid form, such as formalina<\/strong> ou methylene glycol<\/strong>. Historically, these liquid forms were used in some nail hardeners. In nail polishes, formaldehyde has been present mainly as tosylamide\/formaldehyde resin (TSFR)<\/strong>, a polymer that improves shine, durability, and adhesion. While resin forms remain the standard in polishes today, the fact that free liquid formaldehyde has been used in certain nail treatments in the past is important to note.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Years ago, nail polish manufacturers were required to call this resin by a name that included the word \u201cformaldehyde,\u201d even though it is chemically very different from the gas or liquid form of formaldehyde itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u00a0The name of the resin was toluene sulfonamide formaldehyde resin (TSFR). This isn\u2019t toluene or formaldehyde. These substances were used to make a completely different ingredient and, because they were made using these ingredients, it was assumed that they were in the polish.\u00a0\u00a0However, when this resin is used, the nail polish might contain 0.0005%. So you can\u2019t technically say they are \u201cformaldehyde-free\u201d, but for all practical purposes, they are indeed free of formaldehyde. Because of the misinformation spread by these fear-mongers, nail manufacturers worked behind the scene to have this misleading name corrected. Some may still use the old name for this ingredient, but this is slowly changing as manufacturers update their labels.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n