Weblogic

By Joe Valdez

The good news from the Natural Beauty Summit October 2008 in Paris was that after six years of discussion, the most renowned certification bodies in Europe’s organics industry – France’s ECOCERT, Germany’s BDIH and the U.K.’s Soil Association – agreed to consider a mutual standard for labeling all organic or natural cosmetic products.

“Let’s calm down on the infighting and provide a cohesive standard for everyone to win,” pleaded Joe Smillie, senior vice president with NSF, from the floor of the summit. ¹

But on our side of the Atlantic, the debate over a mutual organic standard only appears to be heating up. In the United States, private labels such as OASIS – founded by members of Aveda, Estee Lauder and L’Oreal among others – broke away from the USDA in 2008 to develop their own organic standard. OASIS has since been sued in California Superior Court by family owned Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soap, which accuses OASIS, ECOCERT and others of misleading consumers with their organic labeling.

Though the mood may be more conciliatory in Europe, consumers there are no closer to a universal standard in organic cosmetics. April 2009 has been penciled in as the date when the European companies will reach an agreement on which standards will ultimately be adopted. Even if an accord is reached, it may still be two more years before consumers are given organic labels that are consistent from product to product, country to country.

In an effort to make heads or tails of the debate, here’s a guide to the major certification labeling organizations, their supporters and detractors, and what industry experts have to say about these standards.

Click on a logo above to skip to that section

Country of origin: France

Year of origin: 1991

Who they are: ECOCERT began as an agricultural association grown out of Europe’s organic farming movement in the 1970s. Now a privately held company, ECOCERT tests and certifies food products, as well as cosmetics, perfumes, detergents, and textiles. They inspect about 70% of the organic food industry in France and up to 30% worldwide.²

Where they are: ECOCERT maintains offices in 15 countries and conducts inspections in over 80 countries, including Canada, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Japan, Brazil and South Africa.

Peeling Back the Label: ECOCERT’s natural and organic cosmetics logo (BIO) guarantees 95% of plant ingredients are certified organic, 10% of total ingredients certified organic and 95% of total ingredients are of natural origin. Their natural cosmetics logo (ECO) guarantees 50% of plant ingredients certified organic, 5% of total ingredients certified organic and 95% of total ingredients are of natural origin. ³

Proponents: The announcement that the glycol Zemea had become the first glycol to receive ECOCERT certification prompted Steve Mirshak – president of DuPont Tate & Lyle Bio Products – to state, “The ECOCERT label is a mark that represents superior quality of product. Cosmetic and personal care companies who are seeking ECOCERT certification for their products now have an ECOCERT approved glycol to use in their formulations. They can be confident that Zemea will add to their natural content requirement for ECOCERT certification.” ⁴

Opponents: In April 2008, Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps named ECOCERT in a lawsuit it filed in California Superior Court against personal care brands making what it considers misleading organic claims. David Bronner states, “ECOCERT is both the most permissive and misleading standard out there, allowing various petrochemicals in main cleansing ingredients as well as synthetic preservatives no one else does, yet certifies outright ‘Organic’ product claims on products with as low as 10% organic content. Highly misleading to organic consumers.” ⁵

Contact: Visit the Our Liaison Offices page of the ECOCERT website for details of the office in your country, including the United States.

Country of origin: Germany

Year of origin: 1996

Who they are: Bundesverband Deutscher Industrie und Handelsunternehmen (BDIH) translates as “Federation of German Industries and Trading Firms.” BDIH is a trade association advising their members on the manufacture and marketing of cosmetics, food and pharmaceuticals. Though they do not certify organic products, in 2000 BDIH became the first to issue comprehensive guidelines for natural cosmetics. They have tested more than 2,000 products for their contents and production methods. ⁶

Where they are: BDIH represents 440 manufacturers and distributors of natural cosmetics internationally including Avalon, Bioflore, Dr. Hauschka Skin Care, Pure Elements and Weleda. In 2004, Aubrey Organics became the first U.S. company to bear the BDIH Certified Natural Cosmetics seal. ⁷

Peeling Back the Label: BDIH guidelines include the following.
1) As far as possible, raw materials obtained from plants should be used from controlled biological cultivation, taking quality and availability into account, and certified wild harvest.

2) No animal testing may be performed or commissioned when end products are manufactured, developed or tested. It is prohibited to use raw materials obtained from dead vertebrates (e.g. spermaceti, terrapin oil, mink oil, marmot fat, animal fats, animal collagen or living cells).

3) The use of inorganic salts and raw materials obtained from minerals is generally permitted, except for those listed in point 5.

4) For the production of natural cosmetics, it is permissible to use components which are extracted through hydrolysis, hydrogenation, esterification, transesterification or other crackings and condensations from the following natural materials: fats, oils and waxes, lecithins, lanolin, monosaccharides, oligosaccharides and polysaccharides and proteins and lipoproteins.

5) Deliberate rejection of organic-synthetic dyes, synthetic fragrances, ethoxylised raw materials, silicones and paraffin and other petroleum products.

6) Certain nature-identical preservatives are allowed, in addition to natural preservatives. These are: benzoic acid, its salts and ethylester, salicylic acid and its salts, sorbic acid and its salts, and benzyl alcohol. ⁸

Proponents: Kate O’Brien, founder of Alima Cosmetics states, “In the U.S., neither the Food and Drug Administration nor the beauty industry has agreed upon a definition of the term ‘natural,’ so companies can use it to mean anything – or nothing. For this reason, it made sense of us to seek European certification of Alima Products. The BDIH seal is an easy way for consumers to know that the products they’re using are safe and meet a strict set of natural ingredients guidelines.” ⁹

Opponents: Paul Crawford – head of regulatory services for the UK's Cosmetic, Toiletry & Perfumery Association – criticized the BDIH list of restricted ingredients, calling them a barrier against companies to accept the label. “The BDIH standards are focused on sustainability and minimizing the number of chemical transformations. But most cosmetics need some chemical reactions to get to something useful; all standards allow some chemical processing. We'd be happier if they concentrated more on sustainability and ethical trading than banning chemical processes which can create ingredients with improved performance characteristics.”¹⁰

Contact: Visit the Contact page of the BDIH website for details.

Country of origin: England

Year of origin: 1946

Who They Are: An independent charity registered in England and Wales, Soil Association promotes ecologically friendly foods and farming through its work with consumers, farmers, growers, retailers and policy makers. Its genesis was the 1943 publication of The Living Soil, in which Lady Eve Balfour – co-founder of Soil Association and its first serving president - advocated an alternative, sustainable approach to agriculture. This has become known as organic farming. ¹¹

Where They Are: Soil Association maintains a staff of 180 personnel at their headquarters in Bristol in southwest England. Their logo can be found on 70% of all organic produce in the United Kingdom. With the establishment of organic beauty standards in 2002, cosmetics brands carrying the Soil Association logo now include Food For Thought, Mother Nature Organics, Organic Planet and Wild & Free.

Peeling Back the Label: Products carrying the organic logo from Soil Association must contain at minimum 95% organic ingredients. If less, the logo will say so, but the minimum organic ingredient standard on all products is 70%. Synthetic ingredients cannot contain genetically modified material. In addition, synthetic ingredients cannot be used if available in an organic version, or if found to have detrimental impact on the health of consumers or the environment. ¹¹

Proponents: London based Community Foods states, “Most of the products we import are certified organic under the Soil Association Organic certification scheme. We primarily use the Soil Association as we believe they are the leading certification scheme in the UK. They are a respected and trusted body, active in the promotion of organic foods and do a good job in communicating the benefits of organic to a wide audience.” ¹²

Opponents: In an editorial for New Scientist magazine, consultant Michael Bond criticized Soil Association for its ban on nanoparticles, such as those found in suncreams. "There is no evidence that people who apply suncreams are putting themselves at risk, as the Soil Association implies, but there is still a great deal of research to be done.” Bond feels Soil Association has over-reacted against man-made nanoparticles, ignoring the potential effects of those found in nature. "Just because they existed in the environment in which we evolved does not mean we are immune to their effects. It is fine to flag up risks as they arise, but not to use false, unscientific distinctions when pressing your case." ¹³

Contact: Visit the Contact Us page of the Soil Association website for details.

Country of origin: United States

Year of origin: 1990

Who They Are: The National Organic Program (NOP) is a regulatory body administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. It was established to promote organic foods, but following a lawsuit in 2005, non-food products such as soaps, oils and cosmetics began carrying the USDA logo, if their ingredients adhered to the federal standards established for organic foods.

Where They Are: The NOP is staffed by fewer than twelve employees in Washington D.C., relying on “Accredited Certifying Agencies” to inspect farms and ensure they meet the requirements for an organic label.¹⁴ Aubrey Organics, One Group, Origins and Terressentials are among the companies whose products are NOP certified.

Peeling Back the Label: The NOP features four distinct logos
1) 100% organic - "Product must contain (excluding water and salt) only organically produced ingredients.”

2) Organic - "Product must contain at least 95% organically produced ingredients (excluding water and salt). Remaining product ingredients must consist of nonagricultural substances approved on the National List or nonorganically produced agricultural products that are not commercially available in organic form, also on the National List.”

3) Made with organic ingredients - "Products contain at least 70% organic ingredients and product label can list up to three of the organic ingredients on the principal display panel.”

4) Less than 70% organic ingredients - "Products cannot use the term ‘organic’ anywhere on the principal display panel. However, they may identify the specific ingredients that are USDA-certified as being organically produced on the ingredients statement on the information panel.” ¹⁵

Proponents: David Bronner of Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps – whose lawsuit against the NOP prompted the agency to amend certification to include personal care products - rates the government standard at five stars. “This certification reflects basic organic consumer criteria for organic personal care; i.e. what organic consumers expect when they see ‘Organic’ on a personal care label.” ¹⁶

Opponents: At the 2004 meeting of the National Organics Standards Board, Mark Kastel - director of The Organic Integrity Program - accused the USDA of “watering down the standards to benefit large corporations at the expense of organic consumers and family-scale organic farmers.” Kastel supported regime change at the federal agency, adding “We need management and staff at the NOP who are qualified, have a strong organic background and respect the organic community.” ¹⁷

Contact: Visit the Contact Information page of the USDA website for details.

Country of origin: United States

Year of origin: 2008

Who They Are: The Organic and Sustainable Industry Standards (OASIS) is a non-profit trade association formed to set standards for organic beauty products in the U.S. Its board members include personnel from over thirty leading personal care companies, including Aveda Corporation, Estee Lauder, Hain-Celestial, L’Oreal and Origins. New members are added on an on-going basis. ¹⁸

Where They Are: OASIS was organized in the state of Nevada.

Peeling Back the Label: The OASIS "organic" logo currently certifies 85% of the product as organic, but new standards will be introduced over the next four years: in January 2010, 90% of products under the “organic” logo will be certified organic. By 2012, 95% of the product under the “organic” logo will be certified organic. A "made with organic" logo certifies only a minimum of 70% of the product is organic ¹⁹

Proponents: Founding member Tim Kapsner – a research scientist for Aveda – stated, "The USDA's food standards were never designed for this industry, and its strict guidelines limit even certain types of green chemistry and pose significant challenges to those looking to create certified organic products.” ²⁰

Opponents: In 2008, the advocacy group Organic Consumers Organization blasted OASIS for permitting potentially harmful synthetic materials into products labeled as organic. “The OASIS standard is not merely useless but deliberately misleading to organic consumers looking for a reliable indicator of true 'organic' product integrity in personal care.” They also dispute the OASIS claim that they are the first organic standard in the U.S., adding "In actuality, the USDA National Organic Program has been certifying personal care products for over four years." ²¹

Contact: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Country of origin: Belgium

Year of origin: 2007

Who They Are: NaTrue is a non-profit, special interest group lobbying the European Union on behalf of the natural cosmetics industry in Europe. They’re dedicated to establishing a transparent, international and consumer friendly standard for natural and bioorganic cosmetics.

Where They Are: NaTrue has the support of some of the largest German natural cosmetics companies - including Dr. Hauschka and Weleda - companies whose personnel broke away from organic harmonization talks in Europe to establish their own certification program. ²²

Peeling Back the Label: NaTrue features a three star grading scale.
1) One star indicates a natural cosmetic, with ingredients meeting “all the strict basic requirements imposed on ingredients from nature.” Further information on requirements may be found on the NaTrue website.
2) Two stars indicate a natural cosmetic with organic ingredients, with “at least 70 % of the natural substances of plant and animal origin contained therein must come from controlled organic production and/or controlled wild collection in line with the criteria of the EC Eco Regulation.”
3) Three stars indicate an organic cosmetic, with “at least 95 % of the natural substances of plant and animal origin contained therein come from controlled organic production – these are genuine organic cosmetics.” ²³

Proponents: Moritz Aeberfold – part of Weleda’s management team – maintains that the cosmetics industry has the right to shape any talks on the harmonization of organic standards. "When naturals are defined legally, which we expect to happen sooner rather than later, we want to be there on the table and to have a strong voice in the negotiations. We want to present our point of view and our own research on natural ingredients and products, as well as our experiences."²⁴

Opponents: David Bronner of Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps writes that NaTrue, “like OASIS represents the same greedy overreach of the cosmetic industry for outright ‘Organic’ claims on products that violate basic organic consumer criteria: that organic personal care be free of sulfated, hydrogenated and synthetically-preserved ingredients.” ²⁵

Contact: For inquiries, visit the Contact page of the NaTrue Label website.

Continent of origin: Europe

Year of origin: 2003

Who They Are: Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and restriction of CHemicals (REACH) is a bill passed into law by the European Union in December 2006. Its purpose is to reduce health risks associated with everyday chemicals by mandating companies ensure their safety, and in some cases, substitute dangerous chemicals with safer alternatives. At 1,000 pages in length and some seven years in the making, REACH is the most complex legislation in the history of the EU. ²⁶

Where They Are: REACH is the law in the 27 member states of the EU, including the United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Germany, Italy and The Netherlands. It affects all countries and companies that do business in Europe.²⁷ The registration, evaluation, authorization and restriction process is managed by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) headquartered in Helsinki, Finland. ²⁸

Peeling Back the Label: REACH guidelines include the following.
1) Any chemical produced or imported in excess of one metric ton must be tested, unless sufficient safety information already exists. The cost will be the responsibility of the producer or the importer.

2) Companies will only be able to use "substances of very high concern" with authorization from the newly formed European Chemicals Agency. These questionable substances include those causing cancer, mutation or interference with the reproductive system, take a long time for the body to break down – particularly if toxic – or have irreversible effects on human beings or the environment. Authorization will be granted under specific conditions, and will have to be regularly renewed, encouraging companies to seek safer alternatives. ²⁹

3) Pure botanicals, minerals or polymers which are not chemically modified are exempt from REACH certification.

4) Chemicals imported or produced in amounts of 1,000 metric tons or more must be registered by November 2010. Chemicals of only 1 metric ton or more have until May 2018 to register. ³⁰

Proponents: Ria Oomen-Ruijten, spokesperson for the EPP-ED – the largest political party in the European Parliament – states, "The new regulation should lead to more protection of the environment and more protection of human health while at the same time enhancing industrial competitiveness. In our agreement we tackled the last differences making the legislation less bureaucratic. It is a good compromise between all stakeholders." ³¹

Opponents: In April 2003, then U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell sent a cable to diplomatic posts urging American officials to raise objections with EU members over REACH’s “complex regulatory approach.” The Bush administration favored legislation where "environmentally sound management of chemicals can be achieved through approaches that better balance risk and economic considerations." ³²

In 2006, Caroline Lucas – member of the Green Party in European Parliament – asserted that the bill in fact favored economic considerations at the expense of consumers and the environment. "This deal is an early Christmas present for the chemicals industry, rewarding it for its intense and underhanded lobbying campaign. While the legislative text has now been agreed, the devil will be in the detail of the implementation of these rules. We are deeply worried that the key goal of this legislation - to offer EU citizens and the environment sufficient protection from dangerous chemicals - appears to have been lost in the haste to agree a compromise.³³

Further update

On November 7, 2008, ECOCERT, BDIH and Soil Association were among the European certification bodies that put to rest six years of discussion and published a long awaited harmonized standard for natural and organic products. This has been dubbed the COSMOS-standard. ³⁴

The intent of the COSMOS-standard is promote trade by making it much less costly or complicated for a company to certify its product in Europe, where different countries use any number of the standards mentioned in the article above. The agreement would give importers a uniform set of compliance standards. Highlights include:

» At least 95% of physically processed agro-ingredients must be organically produced. The COSMOS-standard defines “agro-ingredient” as any plant, animal or microbial product derived from agriculture, aquaculture or wild collection.

» All products will consist of no more than 5% synthetic ingredients.

» Nanoparticles, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), irradiation and animal testing will be prohibited.

» Operators who are already certified by Cosembio/ECOCERT (France), BDIH (Germany), Soil Association (UK), Bioforum (Belgium) or ICEA (Italy) must comply with the COSMOS-standard by January 1, 2011.

How NaTrue will react to the COSMOS-standard remains to be seen. The lobbying group has broken away with their own standards and has the support of some of the largest cosmetics firms in Germany. While the only universal standard for organic and natural products that everyone seems to agree on is that there is no universal standard, COSMOS may become a major piece of the puzzle.

References

¹ “How close are we to global harmonization of organic and natural standards?” By Katie Bird. CosmeticsDesign.com. Oct. 14, 2008
²Wikipedia
³Ecocert Standard Certification Body
⁴DuPont News: August 14, 2008
⁵“A 5-Star Comparison & Ranking of US & European “Organic”, “Made With Organic” and “Natural” Personal Care Standards” By David Bronner. Organic Consumers Association.
⁶BDIH
⁷Aubrey Organics
⁸BDIH: Certified Natural Cosmetics
⁹News Releases – Alima Pure
¹⁰“The natural choice: natural cosmetics may be a booming market, but do consumer really know what they are getting when they buy them.” By Cath O’Driscoll. Chemistry and Industry. April 8, 2007
¹¹Soil Association
¹²Commutity Foods – Affiliates
¹³“Does Natural Really Mean Safer?” By Katie Bird. Cosmeticsdesign.com. January 28, 2008
¹⁴“Is Your Organic Food Really Organic?” By Jill Richardson. August 7, 2008
¹⁵A Bunch of Greens
¹⁶“A 5-Star Comparison & Ranking of US & European “Organic”, “Made With Organic” and “Natural” Personal Care Standards” By David Bronner. Organic Consumers Association.
¹⁷“Critics To Protest Weakening of Organic Food Standards at Chicago Meeting this Friday.” Organic Consumers Association. April 29, 2004.
¹⁸Organic and Sustainable Industry Standards
¹⁹Organic and Sustainable Industry Standards
²⁰“OASIS creates first US organic beauty standard” By Guy Montague Jones. Cosmeticsdesign.com. March 10, 2008
²¹“Is New Organic Beauty Label ‘Bogus’?” By Dan Shapley. The Daily Green. March 17, 2008
²²NaTrue.org
²³NaTrue: Label at a glance
²⁴“Natural cosmetics lobby group formed.” By Katie Bird. Cosmeticsdesign-Europe.com. November 29, 2007.
²⁵“A 5-Star Comparison & Ranking of US & European “Organic”, “Made With Organic” and “Natural” Personal Care Standards” By David Bronner. Organic Consumers Association.
²⁶“EU’s REACH chemicals law begins life in Helsinki.” By Andrew Rettman. EUobserver. May 31, 2007.
²⁷“Regulation on REACH” Huntsman
²⁸REACH Legislation
²⁹“Chemical Reaction: The U.S. Response to REACH.” By Harvey Black. Environmental Health Perspectives. March 2008.
³⁰“Q&A: Reach Chemicals Legislation.” BBC News. November 28, 2005
³¹“REACH adoption welcomed: EPP-ED success on core issues.” EPP-ED Group in European Parliament. December 13, 2006.
³²“REACH and the Long Arm of the Chemical Industry.”By Joseph DiGangi. Multinational Monitor. September 2004.
³³“REACH: EP rubberstamps weak deal with no guarantee of greater protection from hazardous chemicals.” The Greens. December 13, 2006.
³⁴“Leading certifiers publish draft of harmonized natural and organic standard” By Guy Montague-Jones. Cosmeticsdesign-europe.com November 7, 2008.