<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Do moisturisers cause skin cancer?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/08/14/do-moisturisers-cause-skin-cancer/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/08/14/do-moisturisers-cause-skin-cancer/</link>
	<description>The latest news, views and opinions from Cancer Research UK</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 20:36:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: shelley kramer</title>
		<link>http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/08/14/do-moisturisers-cause-skin-cancer/#comment-1390</link>
		<dc:creator>shelley kramer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2009 21:26:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cancerresearchuk.wordpress.com/?p=332#comment-1390</guid>
		<description>Obviously the people responding to the information on my website, have no clue about the facts what they are saying. I have been researching this area of cancer for over 25 years. I research the research and do not put up anything on my website that is not factual. Read Dr. Samuel Epstein&#039;s books and website (he is from the UK) www.preventcancer.com. Read www.safecosmetics.org, read, www.ewg.org. These are third party organizations that tell about the dangers of these chemicals in daily used products. It is up to us as consumers to know this information. I am only the messenger and a cancer survivor and only want the public to be able to make healthy choices, once they know the information. I am not out to &quot;scare people&quot; as stated above. Again I guess this person did not do their own research to find out the truth of the matter. The EU is much stricter on chemicals used in products than the US, and long ago stated that cocoamide DEA, diethanolamine, TEA, triethanolamine, sls, mineral oil, petrolatum, propylene glycol (from petrol) are harmful ingredients.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obviously the people responding to the information on my website, have no clue about the facts what they are saying. I have been researching this area of cancer for over 25 years. I research the research and do not put up anything on my website that is not factual. Read Dr. Samuel Epstein&#8217;s books and website (he is from the UK) <a href="http://www.preventcancer.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.preventcancer.com</a>. Read <a href="http://www.safecosmetics.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.safecosmetics.org</a>, read, <a href="http://www.ewg.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.ewg.org</a>. These are third party organizations that tell about the dangers of these chemicals in daily used products. It is up to us as consumers to know this information. I am only the messenger and a cancer survivor and only want the public to be able to make healthy choices, once they know the information. I am not out to &#8220;scare people&#8221; as stated above. Again I guess this person did not do their own research to find out the truth of the matter. The EU is much stricter on chemicals used in products than the US, and long ago stated that cocoamide DEA, diethanolamine, TEA, triethanolamine, sls, mineral oil, petrolatum, propylene glycol (from petrol) are harmful ingredients.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: uvb light</title>
		<link>http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/08/14/do-moisturisers-cause-skin-cancer/#comment-1289</link>
		<dc:creator>uvb light</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 06:42:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cancerresearchuk.wordpress.com/?p=332#comment-1289</guid>
		<description>I thing the most imporatand and prominent cause of skin cancer is uvb light from sun.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thing the most imporatand and prominent cause of skin cancer is uvb light from sun.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: blake</title>
		<link>http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/08/14/do-moisturisers-cause-skin-cancer/#comment-920</link>
		<dc:creator>blake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 02:53:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cancerresearchuk.wordpress.com/?p=332#comment-920</guid>
		<description>because it will help find cancer before we know its there and help cure cancer</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>because it will help find cancer before we know its there and help cure cancer</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raffaella</title>
		<link>http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/08/14/do-moisturisers-cause-skin-cancer/#comment-892</link>
		<dc:creator>Raffaella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 19:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cancerresearchuk.wordpress.com/?p=332#comment-892</guid>
		<description>In the same way as it dissolves the grease on car engines, sodium lauryl sulfate also dissolves the oils on your skin, which can cause a drying effect. It is also well documented that it denatures skin proteins, which causes not only irritation, but also allows environmental contaminants easier access to the lower, sensitive layers of the skin.

Perhaps most worryingly, SLS is also absorbed into the body from skin application. Once it has been absorbed, one of the main effects of sodium lauryl sulfate is to mimic the activity of the hormone Oestrogen. This has many health implications and may be responsible for a variety of health problems from PMS and Menopausal symptoms to dropping male fertility and increasing female cancers such as breast cancer, where oestrogen levels are known to be involved.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the same way as it dissolves the grease on car engines, sodium lauryl sulfate also dissolves the oils on your skin, which can cause a drying effect. It is also well documented that it denatures skin proteins, which causes not only irritation, but also allows environmental contaminants easier access to the lower, sensitive layers of the skin.</p>
<p>Perhaps most worryingly, SLS is also absorbed into the body from skin application. Once it has been absorbed, one of the main effects of sodium lauryl sulfate is to mimic the activity of the hormone Oestrogen. This has many health implications and may be responsible for a variety of health problems from PMS and Menopausal symptoms to dropping male fertility and increasing female cancers such as breast cancer, where oestrogen levels are known to be involved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kat Arney</title>
		<link>http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/08/14/do-moisturisers-cause-skin-cancer/#comment-544</link>
		<dc:creator>Kat Arney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:06:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cancerresearchuk.wordpress.com/?p=332#comment-544</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the comments – sorry it’s taken us a while to get to this one.

The safety of cosmetics is obviously an important area of concern for many people, and in the EU there are strict regulations about what can and can’t be included in them. Cosmetics ingredients are also tested for potential cancer-causing effects.

With regard to Shelley’s comment, there is little solid scientific evidence to support the claims that she is making. 

We are surrounded by chemicals – both natural and unnatural – that do us harm and good. Water is a chemical, oxygen is a chemical, the food we eat is full of naturally occurring chemicals.  Looking at the example of mineral oil, it has been shown by IARC (the International Agency for Research on Cancer) that there is sufficient scientific evidence that untreated and mildly treated mineral oils can cause cancer in humans, yet there is inadequate evidence that highly-treated oils (the kind mainly used in cosmetics) can cause cancer. http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/suppl7/mineraloils.html

Statements like this “Sodium lauryl sulfate could be from the contaminated coconut ingredients and combines with other chemicals, like propylene glycol, for form nitrosamines, cancer causing ingredients” are simply not supported by scientific evidence, and there’s nothing to show that these chemicals (in the context of cosmetic usage) pose any kind of significant cancer risk to humans.   

Finally, it’s important to focus on the cancer risks that are supported by large, consistent scientific studies.  We know from plenty of solid research that excessive exposure to UV radiation, either from sunlight or sunbeds, is the major cause of both melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancers.  As Ed pointed out in his post, the main “take home message’ from this story should be that exposure to excessive UV is the real baddie here, not necessarily the moisturiser.

Rather than focusing on unsupported inferences and conjecture about what may or may not be present in cosmetics – which are regulated and tested – it’s best to take care of your skin in the sun, and avoid sunburn and sunbeds.

Kat</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the comments – sorry it’s taken us a while to get to this one.</p>
<p>The safety of cosmetics is obviously an important area of concern for many people, and in the EU there are strict regulations about what can and can’t be included in them. Cosmetics ingredients are also tested for potential cancer-causing effects.</p>
<p>With regard to Shelley’s comment, there is little solid scientific evidence to support the claims that she is making. </p>
<p>We are surrounded by chemicals – both natural and unnatural – that do us harm and good. Water is a chemical, oxygen is a chemical, the food we eat is full of naturally occurring chemicals.  Looking at the example of mineral oil, it has been shown by IARC (the International Agency for Research on Cancer) that there is sufficient scientific evidence that untreated and mildly treated mineral oils can cause cancer in humans, yet there is inadequate evidence that highly-treated oils (the kind mainly used in cosmetics) can cause cancer. <a href="http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/suppl7/mineraloils.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/suppl7/mineraloils.html</a></p>
<p>Statements like this “Sodium lauryl sulfate could be from the contaminated coconut ingredients and combines with other chemicals, like propylene glycol, for form nitrosamines, cancer causing ingredients” are simply not supported by scientific evidence, and there’s nothing to show that these chemicals (in the context of cosmetic usage) pose any kind of significant cancer risk to humans.   </p>
<p>Finally, it’s important to focus on the cancer risks that are supported by large, consistent scientific studies.  We know from plenty of solid research that excessive exposure to UV radiation, either from sunlight or sunbeds, is the major cause of both melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancers.  As Ed pointed out in his post, the main “take home message’ from this story should be that exposure to excessive UV is the real baddie here, not necessarily the moisturiser.</p>
<p>Rather than focusing on unsupported inferences and conjecture about what may or may not be present in cosmetics – which are regulated and tested – it’s best to take care of your skin in the sun, and avoid sunburn and sunbeds.</p>
<p>Kat</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: anon</title>
		<link>http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/08/14/do-moisturisers-cause-skin-cancer/#comment-528</link>
		<dc:creator>anon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:03:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cancerresearchuk.wordpress.com/?p=332#comment-528</guid>
		<description>please delete the above comment- it has no factual basis and may confuse cancer sufferers and individuals with no scientific background.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>please delete the above comment- it has no factual basis and may confuse cancer sufferers and individuals with no scientific background.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shellley Kramer</title>
		<link>http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/08/14/do-moisturisers-cause-skin-cancer/#comment-497</link>
		<dc:creator>Shellley Kramer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:45:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cancerresearchuk.wordpress.com/?p=332#comment-497</guid>
		<description>Finally the truth is coming out although they left out some of the most important parts. Mineral Oil is from gasoline, no question about it, which is a known carcinogen, and reported on the governments Dept of Toxicology Report on Carcinogens. Mineral oil and cocoamide DEA (which was on NBC news not ABC back in 1998) has been banned from European products for many years, as is cocoamide DEA, which is from the coconut plant, However, they are usually 99% sprayed with pesticides and contain dioxans, which are carcinogens. The public has to wake up to the facts, truths and avoid many of the chemicals that are in the daily used personal care and beauty cosmetics. Read Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, Environmental Working Group. The companies that provided the products make so much money off consumers, and because there are no new laws, they produce what they want. Do they really care about humans or corporate profit? Sodium lauryl sulfate could be from the contaminated coconut ingredients and combines with other chemicals, like propylene glycol, for form nitrosamines, cancer causing ingredients. The Public Deserves the right to know what they are putting in and on their bodies and know that safe alternatives are available. I am a cancer survivor myself, from basal, and squamous cell tumors removed from my lip, eyelid, nose. I have been studying the whys of cancer for over 26 years. Finally the truth is being told about the chemicals in our products. If there is any doubt a chemical could be harmfull, why would anyone want to use it when alternatives are available? www.healthy-communications.com
&lt;em&gt;
[Edited by Kat to add - Cancer Research UK is not responsible for the content of external websites. We will be responding to this comment shortly]&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Finally the truth is coming out although they left out some of the most important parts. Mineral Oil is from gasoline, no question about it, which is a known carcinogen, and reported on the governments Dept of Toxicology Report on Carcinogens. Mineral oil and cocoamide DEA (which was on NBC news not ABC back in 1998) has been banned from European products for many years, as is cocoamide DEA, which is from the coconut plant, However, they are usually 99% sprayed with pesticides and contain dioxans, which are carcinogens. The public has to wake up to the facts, truths and avoid many of the chemicals that are in the daily used personal care and beauty cosmetics. Read Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, Environmental Working Group. The companies that provided the products make so much money off consumers, and because there are no new laws, they produce what they want. Do they really care about humans or corporate profit? Sodium lauryl sulfate could be from the contaminated coconut ingredients and combines with other chemicals, like propylene glycol, for form nitrosamines, cancer causing ingredients. The Public Deserves the right to know what they are putting in and on their bodies and know that safe alternatives are available. I am a cancer survivor myself, from basal, and squamous cell tumors removed from my lip, eyelid, nose. I have been studying the whys of cancer for over 26 years. Finally the truth is being told about the chemicals in our products. If there is any doubt a chemical could be harmfull, why would anyone want to use it when alternatives are available? <a href="http://www.healthy-communications.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.healthy-communications.com</a><br />
<em><br />
[Edited by Kat to add - Cancer Research UK is not responsible for the content of external websites. We will be responding to this comment shortly]</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
