Latest news with #NationalInstituteofEnvironmentalHealthSciences
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Health
- Time of India
Breathing trouble at home? Doctor warns cockroaches may be the hidden health hazard you're ignoring
Think cockroaches are just gross? Think again. That creepy crawler skittering across your kitchen floor might be doing more than just raiding your biscuit tin. According to cardiologist Dr. Deepak Krishnamurthy's recent viral tweet, cockroach infestations can trigger respiratory symptoms like chest tightness and shortness of breath—and it's time we all paid attention. Yes, you read that right. These unwelcome house guests aren't just annoying—they're potentially hazardous to your health. What's so dangerous about cockroaches? Most of us associate cockroaches with dirty kitchens and night-time sneak attacks, but what you might not know is that their body parts, saliva, and even feces are loaded with proteins that can trigger allergic reactions and asthma. These particles don't just disappear—they float around in your home's air, settle in your furniture, and make themselves at home in your lungs. According to the image shared along with Dr. Krishnamurthy's tweet, cockroach-transmitted illnesses go beyond just triggering allergies. We're talking serious stuff like: Asthma – Aggravated by cockroach allergens, leading to wheezing, chest tightness, and difficulty breathing. Salmonella – Which can cause gastrointestinal distress and even typhoid fever. E. coli – Responsible for severe food poisoning and potentially life-threatening symptoms. It's not just fear-mongering. Studies have shown a strong link between cockroach infestations and increased asthma symptoms, especially in kids living in urban environments. One major study from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences even found that children allergic to cockroaches were four times more likely to be hospitalized for asthma. What are the warning signs? You don't need to see cockroaches crawling around your kitchen to know they've made themselves at home. Sometimes, your body starts dropping hints before you even catch a glimpse of one. If you've been running a low-grade fever that just won't quit, or you're feeling off with random bouts of nausea and vomiting, your body might be reacting to more than just a bad meal. Add diarrhea to the mix, and it's easy to blame food poisoning or a stomach bug. But if it keeps coming back—or doesn't make sense with what you've eaten—there might be something else going on behind the walls or under the sink. Muscle aches and joint pain can also creep in, making you feel like you've got the flu, except it never really goes away. And here's the big one: if your chest feels tight, you're wheezing, or you've developed a persistent cough with shortness of breath, it's time to pay closer attention. These are classic signs of an allergic or asthma-like reaction—often triggered by cockroach allergens floating invisibly through the air. So if you've ruled out COVID, the flu, or any obvious infections, maybe it's time to stop reaching for the meds and start looking for the real culprits—those sneaky roaches that could be turning your home into a health hazard. How are these tiny creatures causing such big problems? The science is pretty straightforward. Cockroach droppings, shed body parts, and saliva contain potent allergens. When these tiny particles become airborne, they can enter your respiratory tract. For people with asthma or chronic respiratory issues, this can be dangerous—even life-threatening. But even if you're healthy, constant low-level exposure can still lead to inflammation in the lungs, triggering symptoms that look suspiciously like a chest infection—or worse. And here's the kicker: cockroaches love hiding in warm, moist, dark places. Bathrooms, kitchens, under the fridge, behind the cabinets. So even if you keep your home reasonably clean, they could still be creeping around, causing chaos without you knowing. Start with awareness If you or a loved one is experiencing unexplained respiratory symptoms, think beyond pollution and pollen. Think pests. Especially if your symptoms get worse at night or after spending time indoors. Here's what you can do: Get a professional pest inspection done—even if you don't see bugs. Clean food crumbs, seal leftovers, and fix water leaks (cockroaches love moisture). Use insect traps or natural repellents like bay leaves or boric acid (safely and sparingly). Keep your indoor air clean with purifiers—especially HEPA filters that trap allergens. And most importantly, if your breathing issues persist, talk to a doctor and mention the possibility of allergen exposure from pests. It's easy to laugh off cockroaches as harmless household pests. But if you're waking up wheezing, coughing, or feeling tightness in your chest, the issue might not be in your lungs—it might be hiding under your sink. As Dr. Krishnamurthy rightly pointed out, the health risks posed by cockroaches are real, and they're sneaky. So the next time you spot one darting across your floor, don't just scream—take action. Because protecting your home from bugs might just protect your lungs too.
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Chances are you have 'forever chemicals' in your blood. See PFAS levels in your Florida city
Water. "Forever chemicals." Those are words you generally don't want to see together. For 42 million Americans, it hits home. Water coming from their faucets is contaminated with unacceptable levels of 'forever chemicals,' according to a USA TODAY analysis of records the Environmental Protection Agency released on June 2. Studies have shown the chemicals can accumulate in our bodies, leading to certain cancers and other health complications. What's even worse is that per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, otherwise known as PFAS, are a family of manmade chemicals engineered to be nearly indestructible. Here's what you should know, including how to find out if any of the forever chemicals are in your water and how you can limit some exposure to PFAS. Over the past two years, the EPA has collected complete sets of test results from about 6,900 drinking water systems, with thousands more expected as the PFAS testing initiative continues another year. USA TODAY's analysis of these systems with complete results shows nearly a quarter of large water utilities serving at least 100,000 customers exceeded limits the EPA approved last year on two chemicals: PFOS and PFOA. According to a 2020 study published in "Science" by the Environmental Working Group, an estimated 200 million Americans are served by water systems that contain PFAS. "And it's not just public systems; a 2023 study by the U.S. Geological Survey found approximately 20% of private wells are contaminated." Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, abbreviated as PFAS and known as forever chemicals, have been around since the 1950s. They're used in many products, from cosmetics to nonstick cookware. PFAS are used in the aerospace, automotive, construction, and electronics industries. Over time, PFAS may leak into the soil, water, and air, according to the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. "PFAS molecules have a chain of linked carbon and fluorine atoms. Because the carbon-fluorine bond is one of the strongest, these chemicals do not degrade easily in the environment," according to the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. They can last for thousands of years, according to Carsten Prasee, assistant professor in Environmental Health and Engineering at Johns Hopkins. 'We estimate there are more than 12,000 individual PFAS compounds, and unfortunately for most of them, we have basically no understanding about toxicity." The most common method of destroying PFAS is incineration, but some studies indicate this fails to eliminate all the chemicals, and instead releases the remaining pollution into the air, according to Johns Hopkins. "In water treatment systems, the main methods for destroying PFAS are reverse osmosis, activated carbon, and ion-exchange resins — but these technologies are costly." PFAS are synthetic compounds that "are an unseen ingredient in many items that we use in our daily lives, like cleaning products, food packaging, nonstick cookware, cosmetics, personal care items like dental floss, water-repellent clothing, as well as stain-resistant carpets and upholstery," according to Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. 'Unfortunately, PFAS are also present in biosolids which are used as agricultural fertilizer,' creating a pathway from contaminated soil to produce in the grocery store." "When items containing PFAS inevitably reach landfills, the compounds leach into the environment. And every day, people flush PFA-laden products — like shampoo, cleaning liquids, even some toilet papers — down the drain." "People are most likely exposed to these chemicals by consuming PFAS-contaminated water or food, using products made with PFAS, or breathing air containing PFAS," according to the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. "Because PFAS break down slowly, if at all, people and animals are repeatedly exposed to them, and blood levels of some PFAS can build up over time." An estimated 98% of the U.S. population has detectable concentrations in their blood, according to Johns Hopkins. The Centers for Disease Control said 97% of Americans have PFAS in their blood. Research has said there are possible links between human exposures to certain PFAS and some adverse health outcomes, according to the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. These health effects include: Reduced ability of the immune system to fight infections. Altered metabolism and body weight regulation, and risk of childhood obesity. Increased risk of some cancers. Other health problems linked to PFAS listed by the Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control include: Delay of puberty in girls Decrease in bone mineral density Type 2 diabetes in women Increased risk for thyroid cancer Liver damage Increases in cholesterol levels Lower antibody response to some vaccines Pregnancy-induced hypertension and preeclampsia Small decreases in birth weight Kidney and testicular cancer Prasse and other experts recommend a variety of actions to minimize exposure to PFAS: Avoid using nonstick cookware. Limit use of food packaging, such as grease-resistant takeout containers. Filter your water at the tap, with pitchers that are certified for PFAS. Avoid wearing water-resistant textiles. Seek out PFAS-free retailers' products — including menstrual products and large items like carpets or furniture. Some products that may contain PFAS include: Stain-resistant carpets, upholstery, and other fabrics. Water-resistant clothing. Cleaning products. Personal care products and cosmetics (such as shampoo, dental floss, nail polish, and eye makeup). Paints, varnishes, and sealants. USA TODAY found 774 systems don't meet the limits for forever chemicals. These utilities will likely need to install advanced filtration systems or find alternative sources of drinking water by 2031. The deadline for systems to meet the water standards was originally set for 2029, but in May, the EPA proposed an extension and announced it intends to rescind limits on four other types of PFAS set under the Biden administration in 2024. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said the delay was to provide 'common-sense flexibility' to 'support water systems across the country, including small systems in rural communities, as they work to address these contaminants.' This article originally appeared on Florida Times-Union: 'Forever chemicals', PFAS contaminate US, Florida drinking water
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
In-Vitro Toxicology Testing Market is Poised to Attain Valuation of US$ 57.55 Billion By 2033
Regulatory endorsement, AI-driven omics analytics, organ-chip advances, CRO expansion, and heavy investment are propelling global in-vitro toxicology testing toward faster, humane, standardized, and highly predictive workflows across pharma, cosmetics, and chemical industries. Chicago, May 19, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The global in-vitro toxicology testing market was valued at US$ 26.00 billion in 2024 and is expected to reach US$ 57.55 billion by 2033, growing at a CAGR of 9.23% during the forecast period 2025–2033. As 2025 unfolds, the in-vitro toxicology testing market is experiencing an unmistakable inflection point driven by rising ethical expectations, stricter drug-development deadlines, and the proven predictive value of cell-based assays. Global brands, particularly in pharmaceuticals, agrochemicals, and food additives, now specify advanced in-vitro data as a prerequisite for supplier qualification, prompting laboratories worldwide to upgrade microfluidic platforms, imaging systems, and organ-chips. According to the Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing, 176 novel non-animal protocols entered premarket validation pipelines between January 2022 and December 2023, illustrating how pipeline diversity is expanding beyond traditional cytotoxicity and genotoxicity end-points. Manufacturers consequently face mounting pressure to deliver modular workstations without compromising reproducibility. Download Sample Pages: Equally influential is the widening acceptance of organoid libraries sourced from induced pluripotent stem cells, which allow developers to screen environmental contaminants under physiologically appropriate flow conditions. Recent data from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences show that toxicogenomic signatures generated through three-dimensional liver microtissues correctly forecasted hepatotoxic outcomes for 287 out of 293 candidate molecules during 2023 collaborative trials, cutting late-stage project attrition. Because each mis-predicted compound can cost sponsors millions in sunk chemistry and regulatory fees, accurate early diagnostics translate into measurable timetable savings, underscoring why venture funds such as Arch, GV, and Novo Holdings earmarked USD 740 million for next-generation in-vitro toxicology startups during 2023 alone. Key Findings in In-Vitro Toxicology Testing Market Market Forecast (2033) US$ 57.55 billion CAGR 9.23% Largest Region (2024) Europe (42.8%) By Solution Assay (42.70%) By Method Cellular Assay Methods (44.50%) By Toxicity Endpoint & Test Skin Irritation, Corrosion, And Sensitization (38.30%) By Technology Cell Culture Technology (47.60%) By End User Pharmaceutical Industry (40.0%) Top Drivers Regulator-mandated reduction of vertebrate testing accelerates in-vitro assay adoption globally. High-throughput imaging platforms cut screening costs, boosting pharmaceutical decision speed. Expanding availability of human-derived organoids improves relevance and predictive accuracy. Top Trends Integration of AI with imaging data streamlines toxicity interpretation workflows. Shift toward microphysiological systems enables exposure studies without animal models. Cloud-based data repositories facilitate multi-site collaboration and regulatory submission harmonization. Top Challenges Limited standardization across assays generates variability, hindering cross-laboratory data comparability. Complex metabolic pathways remain difficult to replicate in in-vitro systems. High capital expenditure for automation restricts adoption among smaller laboratories. Pharmaceutical Industry Drives High-Content Screening and 3D Cell Model Integration The pharmaceutical sector remains the single largest adopter of sophisticated in-vitro toxicology testing market innovations, primarily because clinical attrition penalties have never been higher. According to BioPharmaData, global R&D pipelines contained 6,921 active small-molecule candidates at the start of 2024, and each must pass a barrage of cytotoxicity, cardiotoxicity, and hepatotoxicity screens before entering Phase I. High-content imaging with multiplexed fluorescent reporters has become the workhorse technique: during 2023, Pfizer's Groton campus alone generated 48 million annotated images using CellVoyager CQ1 units connected to a centralized data lake running Amazon HealthLake for downstream machine learning. This dataset now feeds structure-activity relationship models that flag mitochondrial liabilities days earlier than workflows. The integration of three-dimensional cell models is accelerating equally fast, particularly for immuno-oncology assets in the in-vitro toxicology testing market where tumor–stroma interactions determine therapeutic index more than raw potency. In H2 2023, Novartis paired AIM Biotech organoids with Sartorius perfusion modules to test 26 bispecific antibodies, cutting pilot animal usage from 421 mice to 17 for PK confirmation. January 2024 saw Eli Lilly roll out MIMETAS OrganoPlate Graft across five teams, delivering 4,000 spheroids-per-week throughput for T-cell infiltration assays. Such harmonized datasets populate FDA-aligned BioAssay Ontology repositories, allowing reviewers to benchmark results quickly and giving early adopters commercial advantage. Major CROs now bundle these platforms into turnkey packages, further broadening pharmaceutical demand throughout 2024 globally. Cosmetics Sector Showcases Real-World Success For Animal-Free Toxicity Assessment Strategies The cosmetics industry, historically constrained by the European Union's 2013 ban on animal testing for finished products, has matured into a laboratory proving ground for the in-vitro toxicology testing market. Since this ban, manufacturers have systematically swapped Draize and LD50 assays for reconstructed human epidermis, ocular microtissues, and metabolic activation co-cultures, resulting in detailed protocol libraries now referenced globally. In 2024, the European Chemicals Agency listed 138 approved in-vitro methods under REACH Annex XI, with 67 covering cosmetic ingredients; that is a threefold increase over 2018. L'Oréal's Episkin plant in Lyon, reopened in October 2023, produces 1.2 million tissue inserts annually for in-house and global customers including Shiseido and P&G. Retail adoption underscores viability of the in-vitro toxicology testing market: Sephora's Clean + Planet Positive program compelled 312 reconstructed-skin dossiers during 2023. In February 2024, Ulta Beauty and MatTek began a rapid irritation screening service returning certificates within five days, cutting formulation cycles for indie brands. Croda's Seatons unit released a catalog linking each emollient to OECD-TG 439 or 492 reports, letting chemists filter ingredients by irritation score. Together, these moves prove that transparent in-vitro toxicology testing market data accelerate product launches and reinforce ESG positioning within beauty. Industry observers note that the average cruelty-free claim now appears on store shelves seven months sooner than in 2020, a timeline shift directly traceable to validated in-vitro workflows. Emerging Bioinformatics Tools Deliver Granular Insights From Omics-Based Toxicology Workflows The explosion of multi-omics datasets is redefining the analytical backbone of the in-vitro toxicology testing market, enabling researchers to trace molecular perturbations long before overt cytotoxic signals emerge. During 2023, the NIH-funded ToxCast program released 12.4 terabytes of integrated transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic profiles derived from 1,482 chemical exposures across 27 human cell lines, up from only 2.1 terabytes in 2021. Such scale demands purpose-built informatics; consequently, vendors like Benchling, Clarivate's Bioinfogate, and Aigenpulse launched toxicology modules that automate pathway enrichment, adverse outcome pathway mapping, and chemical similarity indexing within secure cloud environments. These tools export GLP-compliant reports that slot into eCTD submissions, bridging the gap between scientists and reviewers. Artificial intelligence amplifies the power of omics pipelines by extracting latent toxicity signatures that evade manual scrutiny in the in-vitro toxicology testing market. In November 2023, IBM Research trained a graph neural network on 4.6 million gene-expression nodes that predicted mitochondrial stress biomarkers 48 hours sooner than ATP assays when validated against 320 blinded compounds. DeepTox AI, spun out of ETH Zurich in February 2024, raised USD 35 million to commercialize a self-supervised model converting RNA-seq counts into numeric toxicity scores for high-throughput triage. Both frameworks share JSON schemas, letting CROs integrate results into LIMS and providing auditors a complete, paperless data trail. This interoperability accelerates hazard ranking, dose-response modeling, and cross-species extrapolation across research networks. Rise Of Contract Research Organizations Reshapes Global Testing Service Landscape Demand for specialized expertise and flexible capacity has propelled contract research organizations to the forefront of the in-vitro toxicology testing market. According to LabViews Analytics, 726 CRO facilities worldwide now advertise dedicated in-vitro toxicology suites, up from 498 in 2020, reflecting a decisive shift away from captive in-house labs. Eurofins Discovery, for example, doubled its MatTek EpiDerm capacity in November 2023, allowing the company to run 9,600 disintegration and phototoxicity plates monthly, while Charles River Laboratories installed Emulate's intestine-chip systems across three continents to meet dietary ingredient demand. This geographic spread helps clients standardize protocols across submission regions and maintain audit readiness without juggling multiple supplier contracts or data silos. Service differentiation increasingly hinges on digital integration and time-to-data metrics, not just price. January 2024 saw Labcorp launch Claritas, a portal that streams raw fluorescence files within four hours and computes Z-factors via embedded Jupyter notebooks. Clients in the in-vitro toxicology testing market say review cycles fell from 14 days to five, letting chemists iterate leads faster. In March 2024, Biopolis agreed to supply organ-chip toxicology to Samsung Biologics for bioconjugate lots, illustrating supply-chain integration. By coupling advanced assays with near-real-time analytics, CROs turn outsourcing from a cost-saving tactic into a strategic accelerant. Notably, seven of the ten largest pharma firms renewed multi-year master service agreements in 2023, collectively securing over 2,400 assay slots per month. Investment Landscape Highlights Strategic Mergers, Venture Funding, And Infrastructure Expansion The investment climate surrounding the in-vitro toxicology testing market is remarkably active, reflecting both scientific momentum and regulatory tailwinds. In 2023, there were 41 disclosed venture deals targeting assay development, bioinformatic analytics, or organ-chip hardware, representing total capital inflows of USD 2.3 billion, according to PitchBook's March 2024 health-tech digest. Flagship Pioneering's USD 350 million launch of Quotient Bio, focused on immune-competent microphysiological systems, exemplifies the scale of single-round funding now achievable. Meanwhile, Thermo Fisher Scientific spent USD 720 million acquiring Sweden's Cellink in December 2023, gaining bioprinting capabilities that directly support complex tissue fabrication for toxicology workflows. Integration plans include scaling Cellink's BIO X6 printers to 40 centers within 18 months. Real-estate expansion mirrors financial enthusiasm, with several purpose-built facilities breaking ground in 2024. April 2024 saw Singapore's JTC allocate 24,000 square meters at Tuas Biomedical Park for an organ-chip manufacturing hub designed for eight start-ups and two multinational suppliers. Earlier, in November 2023, the State of North Carolina approved USD 180 million in tax incentives to establish a Center of Excellence for Advanced Toxicology, anchored by IQVIA and North Carolina State University. The center will include BSL-2 cell culture wings, high-content imaging cores, and a 10-petabyte data warehouse, creating a magnet for labor. Such infrastructure commitments provide capacity insurance for sponsors and reinforce advantages for jurisdictions that embrace new-method testing. Browse the Table of Contents to access and purchase individual report sections: Future Outlook Prioritizes Accessibility, Standardization, And Artificial Intelligence Integration Pathways As the in-vitro toxicology testing market enters its next maturity phase, stakeholders are focusing on democratizing access and scaling standards to sustain momentum. Low-cost microfluidic chips fabricated via injection-molded cyclic olefin polymers now retail for less than USD 12 per unit, compared with USD 48 for glass devices in 2021, allowing university labs and emerging-market regulators to conduct sophisticated barrier assays. Concurrently, ASTM International's work item WK84690, initiated in February 2024, seeks to codify performance criteria for kidney-on-chip devices, including shear-stress ranges, TEER measurement protocols, and media composition guidelines. Such benchmarks will form the backbone of procurement frameworks announced by the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industry, scheduled for Q4 2024. Artificial intelligence will increasingly orchestrate end-to-end workflows in the in-vitro toxicology testing market, turning raw microscopy images and omics matrices into regulatory-ready narratives. The FDA's Digital Health Center of Excellence confirmed in March 2024 that it is piloting a secure-sandbox program, allowing algorithm developers to test adverse outcome pathway models against anonymized IND datasets without formal data-use agreements. Meanwhile, cloud providers are embedding features: Google Cloud's May 2024 Vertex Bio update introduced a 'toxicology' notebook template that automates cytotoxic curve fitting and attaches metadata schemas compliant with SEND 3.1. Looking ahead, analysts expect hybrid wet-lab/AI subscriptions, where users order pre-configured assays and receive interpreted results via an API, to become mainstream by 2026, altering revenue models. Global In-Vitro Toxicology Testing Market Major Players: Charles River Bio Rad Laboratories, Inc Abott Thermofisher Scientific Inc. Catalent Inc. GE Healthcare Eurofins Scientific Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings Evotec Genotronix BioIVT Merck Other Prominent Players Key Market Segmentation: By Solutions Equipment Assay Bacterial Toxicity Assays Protein Degradation GPCRs Nuclear Receptors Tissue Culture Assays Others Consumables Services By Method Cellular Assay Biochemical Assay In Silicon Ex-Vivo By Technology Cell Culture Technology High Throughput Technology OMICS Technology By Toxicity Endpoint & Test ADME Skin Irritation, Corrosion & Sensitization Genotoxicity Testing Cytotoxicity Testing Ocular Toxicity Phototoxicity Testing Dermal Toxicity Others By End User Pharmaceutical Cosmetics & Household Academic Institutes & Research Laboratories Diagnostics Chemicals Industry Food Industry Others By Region North America Europe Asia Pacific Middle East & Africa (MEA) South America Need More Info? Ask Before You Buy: About Astute Analytica Astute Analytica is a global market research and advisory firm providing data-driven insights across industries such as technology, healthcare, chemicals, semiconductors, FMCG, and more. We publish multiple reports daily, equipping businesses with the intelligence they need to navigate market trends, emerging opportunities, competitive landscapes, and technological advancements. With a team of experienced business analysts, economists, and industry experts, we deliver accurate, in-depth, and actionable research tailored to meet the strategic needs of our clients. At Astute Analytica, our clients come first, and we are committed to delivering cost-effective, high-value research solutions that drive success in an evolving marketplace. Contact Us:Astute AnalyticaPhone: +1-888 429 6757 (US Toll Free); +91-0120- 4483891 (Rest of the World)For Sales Enquiries: sales@ Follow us on: LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube CONTACT: Contact Us: Astute Analytica Phone: +1-888 429 6757 (US Toll Free); +91-0120- 4483891 (Rest of the World) For Sales Enquiries: sales@ Website: in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Are these popular salon treatments a health threat?
A few years ago, strange things began to happen to Merideth Pedack. The Washington-based hairstylist found she could taste her clients' deodorant on the back of her tongue, even from ten feet away. A sharp metallic smell clung to her nose throughout the day, and she started getting grinding headaches that seemed to last longer and longer with each passing week until one day they simply never stopped. 'The pounding in my brain and skull and spine and eyes and ears. It was all day. It was all night,' says Pedack, who started having panic attacks from the pain. 'The sound of people's voices hurt. My eyeballs hurt to move. I couldn't look at screens. I couldn't watch TV. I couldn't listen to music. It is a nightmare to be in that much pain.' She says she could no longer work or even leave her house. Pedack says her doctors told her she had developed a severe form of chemical intolerance known as Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) from the products she used at work, causing her body to overreact to any and all chemicals in her environment. Although there is no medical consensus on the exact definition of MCS, studies show that sufferers experience debilitating headaches, respiratory discomfort, impaired memory and chronic pain, which can lead to significant emotional distress and isolation. Pedack said her friends and family couldn't enter her home unless they conducted a complex decontamination protocol. Though Pedack's case is extreme, hers is one of many health struggles that disproportionately affect those who work with hair dyes and chemical straighteners that contain formaldehyde, polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), DNA-damaging phenylenediamines, and hormone-disrupting phthalates. Multiple studies suggest that, compared to the general population, hairdressers have a higher risk of cancer; reproductive disorders and respiratory illnesses; and are more likely to give birth to babies with congenital defects. In 2022, a study led by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) found that women––particularly Black women who used chemical hair straightening products—were over twice as likely to develop uterine cancer than those who didn't. Thousands of ongoing lawsuits have been filed on the heels of these findings, claiming some of the country's most popular hair relaxing manufacturers sold products they knew, or should have known,could hurt people. 'Salon workers shouldn't have to choose between their health and their career,' said Danica Winters, owner of The Plum, a holistic hair salon in San Francisco. Risks to hairstylists Hairstylists are overexposed and under-protected from dangerous and potentially life-threatening chemicals, says Astrid Williams, an adjunct professor of health sciences at the University of Phoenix and environmental justice manager for Black Women For Wellness. 'Studies show that salon workers suffer from significantly higher rates of disease compared to other occupations,' she said. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has legal limits for workplace chemical exposure and issues fines to salons that violate safety regulations. But, according to Jamie McConell, deputy director at Women's Voices for the Earth (WVE), an organization that has been advocating for salon workplace safety for nearly a decade, many salon workers are independent contractors who are not officially employed by the salon they work at, meaning they don't have the same workplace protections. As a result, salon workers are a particularly under-protected demographic. Something many of them remain unaware of. 'There's this idea that there are folks out there who care and would not subject us to products that would be super harmful to our health,' said San Francisco-based hair stylist Opal Baedeker. Since 2023, the FDA has repeatedly missed self-imposed deadlines to propose a ban on formaldehyde in cosmetics products. During reporting for this article that occurred last year, an FDA representative told National Geographic that the ban continues to be a high priority, and that the agency had been conducting additional research ahead of a rule to ban formaldehyde. They added that 'the rulemaking process takes time. Before a proposed rule can be published in the Federal Register for public comment, it must be reviewed and approved within both the FDA and other parts of the Federal government.' The FDA did not respond to a recent request to comment on whether the ban remains a high priority. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) obtained FDA emails via the Freedom of Information Act, which show that the first reported adverse event for hair smoothing products in the FDA's CAERS database occurred in 1993. A complicated regulatory landscape Unlike food or drugs, cosmetics manufacturers, with the exception of color additive manufacturers, don't need FDA approval before they are put on store shelves, according to the FDA's website. Instead, the FDA relies on post-market surveillance and voluntary reporting when something goes wrong, or someone gets hurt. In 2023, chemical exposure from cosmetic products triggered the most health risk alerts issued by the European Union's monitoring network, which prompted some member nations to recall products. Yet, not a single cosmetics product was recalled in the U.S. in 2023, according to the FDA's database of recalled products. Part of the reason for this discrepancy is the difference in banned and restricted chemicals in cosmetics. Since 1976, European countries have banned or restricted over 2,500 chemicals used in cosmetics, while the FDA has banned or restricted only 11 chemicals in nearly double that timespan. Instead, the FDA issues public health alerts and sends manufacturers warning letters, which are essentially advisory notices asking for voluntary compliance. According to an FDA spokesperson earlier this year, 'the FDA can, and does, take action on unsafe cosmetics, even if the unsafe ingredients are not specifically banned or restricted.' What do ingredient labels really tell us? Until the recent passing of the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act in 2022, the FDA's regulatory power over cosmetics was concentrated on labels, requiring that personal care products contain a complete and accurate list of ingredients on the packaging. The new law gives the FDA more authority to regulate product labels and production facilities and recall harmful products. Providing a list of ingredients should, in theory, allow both consumers and salon workers to make informed choices about product safety. The Fair Packaging and Labeling Act prohibits misleading labels. However, companies are not required to disclose trade secrets like 'fragrance' or 'flavor', according to the FDA's website, making it difficult to determine whether or not toxins are present. And if a hair stylist knew the dangers of a particular chemical, they would also need to be able to identify it from a lineup of what OSHA refers to as chemical 'synonyms' on product labels. Known toxins like polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) can show up as polytetrafluoroethylene, perfluorooctyl triethoxysilane, perfluorodecalin, and perfluorohexane. Formaldehyde can appear as formalin, methanal, diazolidinyl urea, morbicid acid, glyoxal, methylene glycol, glyoxylic acid, cyclopentasiloxane, and a number of other alphabet-salads. 'It's absolutely ridiculous to expect anyone to know what all of these ingredients are,' said Baedeker, a hairstylist for 25 years who claims she started getting debilitating migraines and developed symptoms of asthma after doing chemical hair straightening treatments. She points out that product labels in the U.S. don't indicate chemical concentrations, or harmful byproducts that might result when the product chemically reacts with other common hair products. 'No person on this planet is going to memorize these ingredients or know how they work together, aside from someone who is specifically a chemist making these products,' Baedeker added. Baedeker says she assumed that the hair products being sold were completely safe to use. 'If somebody said, you need to stop what you're doing or you could be so sick that—maybe you won't be dead, but you'll wish that you were—I would have made different choices,' said Pedack. 'I found out the hard way.'
National Geographic
07-05-2025
- Health
- National Geographic
Are these popular salon treatments a health threat?
Chemical hair straighteners promise smooth, frizz-free hair, but research has linked these treatments to an increased risk of serious health conditions. Chemical hair straightening treatments promise smooth, straight hair, but studies have linked them to health issues. Photograph By Nikola Nenadović, Shutterstock A few years ago, strange things began to happen to Merideth Pedack. The Washington-based hairstylist found she could taste her clients' deodorant on the back of her tongue, even from ten feet away. A sharp metallic smell clung to her nose throughout the day, and she started getting grinding headaches that seemed to last longer and longer with each passing week until one day they simply never stopped. 'The pounding in my brain and skull and spine and eyes and ears. It was all day. It was all night,' says Pedack, who started having panic attacks from the pain. 'The sound of people's voices hurt. My eyeballs hurt to move. I couldn't look at screens. I couldn't watch TV. I couldn't listen to music. It is a nightmare to be in that much pain.' She says she could no longer work or even leave her house. Pedack says her doctors told her she had developed a severe form of chemical intolerance known as Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) from the products she used at work, causing her body to overreact to any and all chemicals in her environment. Although there is no medical consensus on the exact definition of MCS, studies show that sufferers experience debilitating headaches, respiratory discomfort, impaired memory and chronic pain, which can lead to significant emotional distress and isolation. Pedack said her friends and family couldn't enter her home unless they conducted a complex decontamination protocol. Though Pedack's case is extreme, hers is one of many health struggles that disproportionately affect those who work with hair dyes and chemical straighteners that contain formaldehyde, polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), DNA-damaging phenylenediamines, and hormone-disrupting phthalates. Multiple studies suggest that, compared to the general population, hairdressers have a higher risk of cancer; reproductive disorders and respiratory illnesses; and are more likely to give birth to babies with congenital defects. In 2022, a study led by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) found that women––particularly Black women who used chemical hair straightening products—were over twice as likely to develop uterine cancer than those who didn't. Thousands of ongoing lawsuits have been filed on the heels of these findings, claiming some of the country's most popular hair relaxing manufacturers sold products they knew, or should have known,could hurt people. 'Salon workers shouldn't have to choose between their health and their career,' said Danica Winters, owner of The Plum, a holistic hair salon in San Francisco. Risks to hairstylists Hairstylists are overexposed and under-protected from dangerous and potentially life-threatening chemicals, says Astrid Williams, an adjunct professor of health sciences at the University of Phoenix and environmental justice manager for Black Women For Wellness. 'Studies show that salon workers suffer from significantly higher rates of disease compared to other occupations,' she said. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has legal limits for workplace chemical exposure and issues fines to salons that violate safety regulations. But, according to Jamie McConell, deputy director at Women's Voices for the Earth (WVE), an organization that has been advocating for salon workplace safety for nearly a decade, many salon workers are independent contractors who are not officially employed by the salon they work at, meaning they don't have the same workplace protections. As a result, salon workers are a particularly under-protected demographic. Something many of them remain unaware of. 'There's this idea that there are folks out there who care and would not subject us to products that would be super harmful to our health,' said San Francisco-based hair stylist Opal Baedeker. Since 2023, the FDA has repeatedly missed self-imposed deadlines to propose a ban on formaldehyde in cosmetics products. During reporting for this article that occurred last year, an FDA representative told National Geographic that the ban continues to be a high priority, and that the agency had been conducting additional research ahead of a rule to ban formaldehyde. They added that 'the rulemaking process takes time. Before a proposed rule can be published in the Federal Register for public comment, it must be reviewed and approved within both the FDA and other parts of the Federal government.' The FDA did not respond to a recent request to comment on whether the ban remains a high priority. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) obtained FDA emails via the Freedom of Information Act, which show that the first reported adverse event for hair smoothing products in the FDA's CAERS database occurred in 1993. A complicated regulatory landscape Unlike food or drugs, cosmetics manufacturers, with the exception of color additive manufacturers, don't need FDA approval before they are put on store shelves, according to the FDA's website. Instead, the FDA relies on post-market surveillance and voluntary reporting when something goes wrong, or someone gets hurt. In 2023, chemical exposure from cosmetic products triggered the most health risk alerts issued by the European Union's monitoring network, which prompted some member nations to recall products. Yet, not a single cosmetics product was recalled in the U.S. in 2023, according to the FDA's database of recalled products. Part of the reason for this discrepancy is the difference in banned and restricted chemicals in cosmetics. Since 1976, European countries have banned or restricted over 2,500 chemicals used in cosmetics, while the FDA has banned or restricted only 11 chemicals in nearly double that timespan. Instead, the FDA issues public health alerts and sends manufacturers warning letters, which are essentially advisory notices asking for voluntary compliance. According to an FDA spokesperson earlier this year, 'the FDA can, and does, take action on unsafe cosmetics, even if the unsafe ingredients are not specifically banned or restricted.' What do ingredient labels really tell us? Until the recent passing of the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act in 2022, the FDA's regulatory power over cosmetics was concentrated on labels, requiring that personal care products contain a complete and accurate list of ingredients on the packaging. The new law gives the FDA more authority to regulate product labels and production facilities and recall harmful products. Providing a list of ingredients should, in theory, allow both consumers and salon workers to make informed choices about product safety. The Fair Packaging and Labeling Act prohibits misleading labels. However, companies are not required to disclose trade secrets like 'fragrance' or 'flavor', according to the FDA's website, making it difficult to determine whether or not toxins are present. And if a hair stylist knew the dangers of a particular chemical, they would also need to be able to identify it from a lineup of what OSHA refers to as chemical 'synonyms' on product labels. Known toxins like polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) can show up as polytetrafluoroethylene, perfluorooctyl triethoxysilane, perfluorodecalin, and perfluorohexane. Formaldehyde can appear as formalin, methanal, diazolidinyl urea, morbicid acid, glyoxal, methylene glycol, glyoxylic acid, cyclopentasiloxane, and a number of other alphabet-salads. 'It's absolutely ridiculous to expect anyone to know what all of these ingredients are,' said Baedeker, a hairstylist for 25 years who claims she started getting debilitating migraines and developed symptoms of asthma after doing chemical hair straightening treatments. She points out that product labels in the U.S. don't indicate chemical concentrations, or harmful byproducts that might result when the product chemically reacts with other common hair products. 'No person on this planet is going to memorize these ingredients or know how they work together, aside from someone who is specifically a chemist making these products,' Baedeker added. Baedeker says she assumed that the hair products being sold were completely safe to use. 'If somebody said, you need to stop what you're doing or you could be so sick that—maybe you won't be dead, but you'll wish that you were—I would have made different choices,' said Pedack. 'I found out the hard way.'
