22 INTERVIEW
list, or not on their clean beauty list. These ingredients are legally
okay but, like I say, they have been discriminated against. And the problem with the cosmetic ingredients industry is we are much too technical to reach the heart of the consumer when it comes to communication. Influencers and other social
media communicators tend to speak to the heart of the consumer by focusing on the emotional side rather than the technical side and following science. There is a deep difference
in terms of communication and certain ingredients can be promoted or destroyed very quickly, for sometimes very little reason. There are many cases like this, and the industry is in difficulty worldwide when it comes to communication. It is not just a European problem.
“It is possible the new definition could transform cosmetic ingredients
from non-nano to nano simply because the definition has changed” Andrea Maltagliati, General Secretary, European Federation for Cosmetic Ingredients (EFfCI)
Director General of Cosmetics Europe; Francine Lamoriello, the Executive Vice President of Global Strategies at PCPC, and others.
TP: The European Commission recently imposed major restrictions on siloxanes D5 and D6 in all cosmetic products from 6 June 2027. That’s quite a big deal, isn’t it? AM: Yes, but to be honest, this is old news because D5 and D6 have been under the spotlight for many years. We have known this restriction was coming. These substances can be found
as directly added ingredients, e.g. D5, or as impurities. Industry has worked hard to reduce impurity levels of D5 and D6 to below the permitted threshold of 0.1%. However, this will for sure still impact the use of silicones in cosmetics.
TP: How significant is it that D5 and D6 will be restricted to a maximum concentration of 0.1% in leave-on and rinse-off cosmetic products? AM:Well, I’m not a formulator but the performance of these silicones is impressive. I have been hearing about alternative, natural ingredients that mimic the
PERSONAL CARE September 2024
performance of the silicone for around 15 years, but actually there is not a one-to-one replacement of silicones.
For the moment, it will be
very difficult to achieve the same performance without silicones.
TP: So it’s a significant change? AM: Yes but the industry must undergo these changes because it has been imposed by the authorities. You cannot go against the law. And while people are discussing the ban now that it has been finally officially released, in reality it has been years in the making.
TP: You mentioned octocrylene earlier. What is the discussion around it and any potential restrictions? AM: The hazard profile of Octocrylene, an organic UV filter, is currently under review by regulatory authorities. It has also been caught up in the questionable argument that UV filters contribute to coral bleaching, something that has not yet been scientifically proven. We hope to have open discussions between industry and the regulatory authorities and the
opportunity, where possible, to generate scientifically relevant data to facilitate the review. It is hard to predict the
outcome of the assessment – all cases are individual, but generally speaking, ingredient usage is either reduced or the substance banned.
TP: Do you worry about NGOs and influencers peddling misinformation? Not specifically on UV filters or sunscreen, but with cosmetic ingredients in general? AM: You are touching a sore point! We could speak for days about this! The cosmetics market has a big
problem with miscommunication, with fake news or with incorrect information that reaches consumers on social media and other channels. At the moment it is fashionable
to say, for example, that you cannot use a certain UV filter, or a surfactant like SLES and so on. This could be simply because someone says that a particular ingredient is not ‘green’, or not sustainable. There is also discrimination
against certain ingredients that are on a blacklist because of the prevailing fashions of the day. You have ingredients that are on a certain brand or retailer’s banned
TP: You mentioned SLES. Is SLES on the radar of the authorities? AM: Fortunately, no! A few decades ago, the safety of SLES was bought into question in the US. The allegation was completely unfounded with not a single study confirming this; in fact, important and eminent evidence has been brought in to disprove it. This was perhaps an early
example of fake news, but in several cases, this led to consumers not wanting to have SLES in their formulations. So, it was not in the crosshairs of the authorities, but of marketing.
TP: You see it on the labels, don’t you? SLES-free etc. AM: Yes, but this is not related to the safety and legality of the product, it is simply marketing. We have seen a crackdown on claims that could be misconstrued as ‘greenwashing’ in Europe this year across all applications. However, in cosmetics, we have had specific regulations on the justification of claims since 2013. The supporting, but non-binding guidance, gives examples of when ‘free from’ claims may and may not be used. It will be interesting to see if there is an appetite to review this again given the current climate.
TP: Is there anything else on your radar in terms of personal care ingredients? Anything you think that might be come under attack in future? AM: First of all, let me state that the cosmetics industry welcomes
www.personalcaremagazine.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88
