Skip to main content
  • 1996.08.15
  • Cancer-causing additives found in lipsticks
  • Excessive levels of lead found in progressive hair dyes
  • How to use hair dyes safely ?
  • Broken frosty mugs leak poisonous chemicals
  • Is yoghurt a tasty snack, a tantalising dessert or a "health food ?
  • Price survey on long distance call services of mobile phones
  • More facts about life insurance
  • Price survey on residential flats in the Mid-Levels and the Southern 

 

The safety of lipstick, probably the most popular cosmetic product on the market, has come under the scrutiny of the Consumer Council again.

A Consumer Council test has detected possible cancer-causing colour additives, namely, Rhodamine B and Permanent Orange, in 10 brands of lipstick.

Both substances were known to cause cancer in rats and mice in laboratory experiment, and were prohibited from use in cosmetic products in the United States and countries in the European Community.

The alert for potentially hazardous lipsticks was first raised by the Consumer Council in a similar test in 1993 when 5 out of 29 lipstick samples were found to contain Rhodamine B. The lipsticks in question have since ceased to be on sale on the market.

In view of the health hazard, since some amount of lipstick will almost inevitably be swallowed during eating and drinking, the Consumer Council has been concerned with the safety of this product.

Results of the latest test conducted by the Government Laboratory has indicated that 10out of 43 brands were still unsatisfactory: 4 contained Rhodamine B, 3 Permanent Orange and the remainders both substances.

The Council has, at the first instance, notified the Customs and Excise Department's Trading Standards Investigation Bureau as the presence of potential carcinogenic substances in lipsticks may constitute an offence under the Consumer Goods Safety Ordinance which came into force in October last year.

The recent test has focused on lipsticks that fell within a price bracket of $10 to $70as all problem lipsticks detected in the previous test were priced from $10 to $35 and available only at hawker outlets.

And as with the last test, all but one of the 10 problem lipsticks were without proper country-of-origin labelling. They were either simply without any indication or labelled with fancy tags such as "Material in France", "Beauty Series Paris", "Admired in Paris" and "Admired in U.S.A".

Further, there was no information provided on the net weight and ingredients nor the provision of a packaging box for the product.

Consumers and in particular the lip fashion conscious are advised to look out for these tell-tale signs of substandard lipsticks before making their purchase. They can consult the test report published in this August issue of the Council's monthly magazine 'CHOICE'.

In addition to colour additives, the test also investigated the presence of heavy metals (arsenic, chromium, lead and mercury) and carcinogens (4-Aminoazobenzene,4-Aminobiphenyl, Benzidine, Aniline, p-Toluidine and Azobenzene). None of these harmful substances was detected in the samples.

The test showed that 4 of the lipsticks could not retract fully into their case. Users might squash them when putting their caps back on, or stain the caps and in turn stain the users' hand and clothing.


Some frosty mugs are not only prone to cracking and leakage, the liquid coolant inside the frosty mugs may contain some poisonous chemicals.

The Consumer Council reported last month that 5 of the 7 frosty mug samples tested failed in the impact resistance test, giving rise to the concern over the safety of the coolant contained between the layers of the plastic frosty mugs.

A follow-up test was carried out and the findings were startling: present in the coolant of 4 of the samples were found methanol and ethylene glycol. Both substances are poisonous to humans if ingested.

The test showed that 3 of the frosty mugs with methanol were also samples that failed in the impact resistance test. It is possible that accidental ingestion of the coolant could result due to leakage.

It was found that 2.50 to 4.51mL of methanol was present in 3 samples although the lethal dosage is set at 25 to 100mL but even as little as 10mL of methanol may cause blindness. 11.5mL of ethylene glycol was found in one sample and the lethal dosage is 60to 100mL.

The report noted that none of these frosty mugs was labelled with the chemical composition of the coolant - and the direction for handling accidental ingestion.

Instead they all carried labels suggesting that their coolant is non-toxic and some even stated that the product is safe for children.

Consumers are advised to check their frosty mug regularly. If there is any sign of cracking, the frosty mug should be discarded immediately. And if in doubt, stop using it.


Is yoghurt a tasty snack, a tantalising dessert or a 'health food'?

Whatever it is, it has come clean of a recent Consumer Council test to investigate the hygiene condition of this product.

No coliform was detected in the vast majority (89 percent) of the samples analysed. Coliform count is a hygiene indicator for yoghurt products.

All samples - a total of 44 that included yoghurt, yoghurt drinks and frozen yoghurt -were able to comply with the coliform standard in the Frozen Confections By-Laws.

On the other hand, many a dramatic health and nutritional claim has been made for yoghurt. But how accurate is such claim?

Yoghurt generally contains less than half the calorie and less than 4 times fat than ice cream. It also contains less sugar.

Of the 44 yoghurt products analysed, 20 have claimed to be either 'Low Fat', 'Reduced Fat' or 'Low Calorie'.

The test revealed that only 14 of these 20 samples were true to their claims according to the US Nutrition Labelling and Education Act (NLEA). The claims of the other 6 samples- all frozen yoghurt - could not be substantiated.

One exceeded twice the NLEA standard in low calorie. The 4 others which made the claims in their promotional brochures and not on their product labelling, were also in excess of the NLEA standard in low fat and low calorie.

Of these samples, 3 exceeded slightly the low fat standard and twice the low calorie standard, and had a high sugar content of 17 to 20 percent comparable to that of ice cream. One sample, a frozen yoghurt bar with chocolate coating, has even higher fat and calorie contents closely matching those of chocolate ice cream bar.

According to the Food and Drugs (Composition and Labelling) (Amendment) Regulations,1996 which was gazetted in February this year, pre-packaged food products making special claim on a particular ingredient were required to declare the percentage by weight or the actual amount of that particular ingredient on the label. This provision would come into operation on a later date to be appointed by the Secretary of Health and Welfare.

Yoghurt enthusiasts are urged to consult the test report in this August issue of 'CHOICE' for choice of a growing diversity of yoghurt products - and the veracity of claims - on the market.


Users of progressive hair dyes beware!

A recent Consumer Council test has detected in some (4 out of 8) progressive hair dyes excessive levels of lead, a toxic substance detrimental to health.

According to the US Food and Drugs Administration and the European Community, the use of lead as acetate in hair dyes should not exceed the permitted concentration of 0.6percent.

Lead can accumulate in the human body and develop gradually its toxicity effects that may include impairment of neurological system, haem synthesis, dysfunction of kidney, and increased blood pressure in adults.

Users are advised to wash their hands after use and keep the hair dyes away from children.

The test also examined 4 temporary hair dyes. They were given a clean bill of health: all were free of heavy metals, banned colouring agents and skin irritants.

Results of the test on semi-permanent hair dyes were published in the last (July) issue of 'CHOICE'.


Other highlights in this 238th issue of 'CHOICE':

Mobile Phone Roaming Service Charges - a comprehensive report comparing the various charges by the present 4 operators of mobile phone roaming service while you are abroad.

Cooling-off Rights for Purchasers of New Life Insurance Policies - everything you need to know, and beware of, to take advantage of this new measure of consumer protection introduced in July this year.