Toxic Hair Braiding

[00:00:00] Speaker A: Foreign. Welcome to Uptown Chats, a podcast where we share stories about environmental justice by and for everyday people. I'm your co host Jaron. [00:00:25] Speaker B: And I'm your other co host, Lonnie. [00:00:27] Speaker A: And today we're joined by not one but two special guests to talk about another topic that Lani and I have been wanting to cover for a while now and that's toxic chemicals in hair braiding products. [00:00:38] Speaker B: Yeah. This topic builds on some previous conversations we've had about beauty justice and how many products marketed towards people of color, especially women of color, often contain unsafe levels of toxic chemicals. [00:00:49] Speaker A: And to help us dive into this topic, we'll be joined by James Rogers and Orion Chin from Consumer Reports who tested a variety of braiding hair products and found some concerning results. We'll get into that, but before we jump into our conversation with them, Lonnie, can you share we act's mission? [00:01:09] Speaker B: Absolutely. We act's mission is to build a healthy communities by ensuring that people of color and low income residents participate meaningfully in the creation of sound and fair environmental health and protection policies and practices. [00:01:19] Speaker A: Thank you, Lonnie. As we alluded to, this topic builds on some previous conversations we've had about beauty justice on the show, including one of our earliest episodes with TK Sacco. And you have Osper, where we talked about beauty justice more generally. And on another previous episode we spoke with Elizabeth Reyes, one of wex former Cecil Corporate Mark Fellows, who's now our Toxic Campaign Coordinator, about the Beauty justice act and what we'll include links to both of those episodes if you want to go back and listen to them in the show. Notes [00:01:53] Speaker B: we're still in the fight to pass the Beauty Justice Act. This past legislative session we were able to get the bill passed in New York State Senate. So that's awesome. But we still have some ways to go and we will continue our advocacy in the new year to get the bill passed in New York State assembly and for Governor Hochul to sign it into law. So be sure to subscribe to we act newsletter for more ways to get involved with that. [00:02:12] Speaker A: With that said, let's go ahead and jump into our conversation with James and Orianne. Thank you both so much for joining us. I think this is going to be interesting conversation. Lanya and I are both very unfamiliar, I will say, with this with this topic, but are excited to be learning a lot about the work that you all have been doing and some of your work around testing of hair braiding. And so before we get too far into the conversation itself, I Wanted to give you both a chance to introduce yourselves and just tell us a little bit about your roles. [00:02:46] Speaker C: My name is James Rogers. I'm the director of food safety at Consumer Reports, but I also lead some product safety testing, such as our conversation on artificial braiding hair. I'm a food and water microbiologist by training, and I've been with consumer reports about 10 years. And I also have nutrition under my responsibility, too, here at Cross. [00:03:13] Speaker D: Hi, everyone. My name is Orianne Shin, and I am manager for safety advocacy here at Consumer Reports. I've been with this organization for the last seven years working on product safety specifically. And so this includes our work on synthetic braiding hair, hair dyes, and other cosmetics that we're beginning to look into at Consumer Reports. And so really looking forward to talking to you all about this issue. [00:03:39] Speaker B: Awesome. Again, thanks for coming on and talking about this topic. We're about to learn a lot because as you can tell, we don't necessarily use braiding hair ourselves, but I know a lot of our users do, and it's something that we've been talking about as well with a lot of our members. But before we dive into the report itself, I guess the first question is why test braiding hair? What kind of sparks that kind of decision to test, test those kind of products? [00:04:08] Speaker C: Well, from the testing side, our content folks informed me that they were going to be writing a story about artificial braiding hair. A lot of this work spun out from conversations with black women who, if you ask them, what are they the most concerned about for health and safety, personal care products was number one. And then within personal care products, it was artificial braiding hair. So there was that. So a editorial effort and then a concern from women that we spoke to. So they, in preparation for the article, they love to have testing data at Consumer Reports if they can get it. So I was approached to see if I could provide some testing data. And I said, well, I can do a small project because I'd already started the fiscal year testing and let's see if there's something there. So that's what stimulated it on my side to actually support the testing, to do the testing. And then if you look at our reporting, we actually had two stories. And the second story spun from this first because, and we'll get into this, we did find stuff in contamination in artificial braiding hair. And then the women came back to us and said, well, what can we do? Because everything that we I'm giving the game away a little bit, but everything we tested the first Time we found something in it that was potentially harmful. And they said, well, is there anything out there that we could use? And so we did the second testing, and we can talk about that later on. So that was the reasoning. I. That was the reason I was brought into the conversation. [00:05:52] Speaker D: Yeah. And I can fill out a little bit more with the information that I have. So other colleagues in my division, the consumer. Consumer Impact division. So this. My division is really comprised of all of our advocates, so those who are lobbying for bills like the Beauty justice act in New York, as well as our community engagement team. So they're the ones going out to the communities and seeing what they want to talk about. And I think that is exactly what Jim was mentioning was our content team, our journalists, plus our community engagement team, brought together a community of black women to talk about what concerns them most. And so when this came up, our advocates on our team were really interested in seeing what can be done, because the more we looked into this issue from a regulatory perspective or from just the law, it was so unclear as to what kind of laws were out there. And we knew that. We fully supported Jim's research and the investigations that came out of it to really tell the story of why we needed change at the. At the federal and at the state level when it comes to beauty products like synthetic braiding hair. [00:07:05] Speaker C: And I had an additional personal reason. I have two daughters that use this product, and they actually use it a little bit more now that they're both working, because it is an easy way to deal with your hair in the morning. You know, you shake it out and you go to work. And so I was really concerned for them because they still wear braids, and I really wanted to give them advice or information to help them make their selections. And in fact, one of my daughters let me know that she did purchase one of the products that we found was safer. So I had a personal investment also. [00:07:41] Speaker A: I appreciate the context of that story. It's always interesting to hear how report and just the investigative process really gets started and who the initial impetus of something like that comes from. So a couple of things that you mentioned, I appreciate you calling out. One is just couching this conversation in the larger, I guess, conversation around the beauty industry, personal care products, and also hair braiding, kind of in this larger context of protecting women of color from these products that are marketed towards them and often toxic, and some of the complications there and bringing some of that information to light so that folks can make informed decisions about the products that they're purchasing. And Consuming and also some of the policy aspects of it with the Beauty justice act and some of the work that we act has done to help move that work forward. So really touching on some of the context pieces here. And then of course, James, the personal aspect of it, I feel like all these issues that we talk about always connect back to people at the end of the day, and especially when it's someone close to you having some information to be able to share with them that feels grounded in data is. There's some comfort in that. And so I appreciate you sharing that aspect of the story too. So with that, let's just go ahead and talk through how you went about testing hair braiding, what that process looked like, and just kind of walk us through that process a little bit. [00:08:58] Speaker C: So I always say that scope determines the tests. And we had to determine the scope. And so I've already mentioned that it was late in my testing calendar. So I only had resources to do a small test initially. And the first thing I actually did is go to a beauty supply store because I wanted to get an idea of what are the samples, the possible samples that we could purchase. And at least one close to my house, there was literally a wall of hair. I mean, colors, lengths, textures, purposes. Then you have the shelf of wigs and clip ons and everything. And I initially did not know where we could even make a dent in this. But what we decided to do is to do a market analysis to see what were the top selling brands in one color. And we also talked to the women again and said, well, what do you use for your braids or your children's braids? Because some of these products, if you look at the packaging, is actually sold toward children. They have pictures of young girls with braids in their, in their hair. And so we combine those two lists, came up with seven products to test. We purchased everything ourselves, which we always do a Consumer Reports. We also purchase at the always purchase at the consumer level. Found a lab that could test for heavy metals, lead, cadmium, arsenic and mercury. And then chemicals called volatile organic compounds. These are chemicals that are released when you heat something, which will tie into the story in a second. And they can cause various health problems, such as acetone. It irritates the breathing passages. If you've ever been in a nail salon where the acetone is so heavy you can feel it in your throat and in your eyes. We found the lab that was willing to test for us. And so we shipped all 10 products to the lab to test for the heavy metals and the Acetone got the results back. And what we discovered was that for the volatile organic compounds, and these are chemicals that are used to make solvents and paints and other chemicals, the highest concentration of these VOCs was in acetone. And there was many times higher than what is considered a safe amount for this chemical. And the heavy metals, every heavy, every product, the 10 products that we tested had an issue with one or more heavy metals, such as lead or cadmium. So that told us that there was a potential of these products to actually cause harm. We developed our own, what we call a risk assessment that tries to determine if a certain level of a chemical actually can hurt a person. And we also developed our own model as to where can these chemicals get into the body. We suggested that these chemicals can get in either through your skin, through inhalation, or orally. So you have a number of different ways that if you are ingesting this hair by accident, even small pieces of hair, or breathing it in, or the hair is laying on the scalp and releasing these chemicals, you could potentially harm the wearer. And so we published those. That was study number one. And it was a very popular study for us. And we had a number of women come back and say, well, everything that you tested had an issue. Is there anything that's out there that is safe or safer? And so that was round two of testing. And so what we wanted to do is look for any product that may be different, safer, claim to be safer. And the first 10 products were made of a chemical called Kanekalon. This was a chemical that was purposely synthesized to give the appearance and the feeling of hair. But for round two, what we did is we did additional Kanekalon products that were labeled safe or safer or natural or organic. We also tested human hair because for some women, they default to human hair instead of the synthetic hair. Then we also tested some of the new stuff that was out there, plant based hair. There is a company called Rebundle that makes human like hair out of banana fiber. So it is a recycled product that is usually discarded from banana cultivation. And there's another company that makes hair products out of banana corn fiber. So we did 30 different products. We picked those that, you know, had those safe labels. We did the human hair, we did the plant based hair. And what we found with that is that human hair actually has the highest amount of lead in anything that we've ever tested in this series of tests. Magnitudes higher than, let's say, the Kanekalon. And we suggest that maybe the women that are growing their Hair for selling are picking up the lead from the environment, from their diet. Somewhere this lead is coming from and lead will be accumulated in the hair. And so when they cut their hair and they sell it, what we're seeing is the lead that they've been exposed to in their normal everyday life. So human hair is not any safer and in fact it's less safe in our opinion than the artificial hair. The products that are labeled safer were no more safer than the regular kanekalon products without the label because there is no regulation on the labels. A company can put just about anything on there or omit from the label what they want to about what's in their product. And the plant based products kind of fell toward the lower end of contamination. So they're a little bit safer, but they're not, you know, extremely safe just because they're not this Kanekalon product. And so some of the follow on work that some of the women ask us about is there's a term called stripping where some women will take the artificial hair, wash it in apple cider vinegar and water to try to remove some of the chemicals. One woman told me about hydrogen peroxide. Another woman actually says she puts her hair in a washing machine before she puts it in. And so there's a lot of different avenues for at home base making this product safer. But one of the products that we tested had no heavy metals at all which told us that this product, if the manufacturers want to, can make it without heavy metal contamination. So there's hope for the Kanekalon, but the manufacturers are going to have to want to see what is the contamination, where is it happening during the entire prep process of synthesis and actually do something about it. And so that's the basics of the testing that we did. And our second report went over very well too with consumers. One observation I made is that a number of the companies are actually small companies owned by black women and they seem to be the most engaged in trying to make their products better. Like we had conversations with Rebundle, the banana fiber company to say, well maybe you should test the soil where you're harboring the harvesting the bananas and see if there is high levels of cadmium or high levels of lead. So we have had some conversations with manufacturers. The larger ones tend to ignore us or they say, or we stand on our product being safe. But like I said, the report I thought went over very well and was very fulfilling for me personally that we were able to do this work. [00:16:48] Speaker B: I just felt like I learned so much in a Short amount of time. So much to possibly react to. I know we can't react to at all. But also getting the kind of a behind the scenes of how the Consumer Reports kind of comes together. I very well known brand and name and I've gone to the website plenty of times. I've read articles Consumer Reports. So it's interesting to hear how you kind of go about the process of testing. And I really like this idea of actually going to the consumers too, and asking them, or what do you actually use versus just kind of pulling some stuff off of a shelf and then also think about the market share and what people are actually buying. It just really makes me think about the total supply chain of something. You know, thinking about even human hair and where that comes from and how that has the highest level of lead. It's like, well, where are they getting that from? And I'm worried about the people who are exposed to this much lead to where it's in their hair. But with those, for either of you, were there anything that was, like, super surprising or shocked you in this process of doing the testing or the reports or the results? [00:17:48] Speaker C: Well, I already gave you mine. Which was the human hair. [00:17:52] Speaker D: Yeah, human hair was shocking, I will say for me, when I was looking at it from the policy angle, it was utter confusion. It took us a while to figure out who even is the regulator. At the federal level, that took us weeks to figure out because we weren't getting a straight answer. So that was a little shocking because usually jurisdiction over a product is easier to determine. Like beef. You know, it's, oh, I'm going to mess this up now, Jim. But I think it's the usda. [00:18:26] Speaker C: Yes, [00:18:27] Speaker D: yes. Not the fda. But if it's a cosmetic. But if it's a cosmetic, like lipstick, it's the fda. But for some reason, when it came to synthetic braiding hair, nobody could give us an actual straight answer or on who held the jurisdiction. Was it the Consumer Product Safety Commission or the fda? Ultimately, I think we did determine that it would be the fda, but it took us some digging and some real, like, prodding to figure that out. And that was really surprising to me. Like, it was like, nobody really wanted to, like, even talk about it, which was just kind of wild to me. From my angle, my perspective, that was super surprising. I think the other surprising thing about the testing specifically was that you can only find safer, not safe. So all the products had a certain level of a potentially harmful chemical that you have to be concerned about how long you wear it or Ingest it, things like that. And that was a really concerning thing. You would hope that there would be at least one where there would be no issues with it. But to think women are choosing natural braiding hair, thinking it might be the safer option than having the highest level of lead is. It's wild. And Jim, correct me if I'm wrong, but there were a lot of things that, as I was diving into this issue more and more, it just seemed like there was always a surprise around the corner one way or another. And it was to your point. CR's team is. It's been incredible to work with this team specifically because we have such dedicated and passionate people who want to get it right and want to call out the bad actors, but also keep people safe. And so from my perspective, from the advocacy perspective, it's been really powerful to take all the testing and investigative stuff that Jim and our journalists have put together on synthetic braiding hair and then utilizing that to then push for actual change, whether it's with companies or with lawmakers or policymakers, [00:20:31] Speaker C: and realize too that this is a worldwide issue because of the African diaspora. I have done conversations about this subject with people from France, from Nigeria, from Germany and over there. They're just as in the dark about the potential hazards in these products as we are over here and usually has been. My experience on the food safety side, Europe is ahead of us, right? They have more regulations, better regulations, lower levels of allowed contaminants, but they just seem to be in the same place we are. And I don't know if it's because of the market. And so there's really not a whole lot of concern with that particular segment of the market or the manufacturers really, really believe that this stuff is safe or they don't test, so they don't know. I don't know what the problem is here, but it has been very clear that when we lit this match, it shined a lot of light on the real status of this product. Also, we are collaborating with other researchers. Dr. Alicia Franklin with the Silent Spring Institute tested at about the same time we did, but tested for different chemicals. And she found issues too. And she got a. She published this in a peer reviewed journal. So she found issues with this product too, with just a separate set of chemicals too. So this stuff may really have some issues at a lot of different chemical contamination levels that were just. That are just unfolding that we didn't know about before. [00:22:07] Speaker A: So much of what you all are both saying, I think it's kind of leading us in the direction of thinking about the reality that this paints for consumers on the market of really struggling to find a product that is truly safe, that they're able to purchase without having to worry about potential contamination from different chemicals or heavy metals. And so I think that's kind of shifting us into our next question, which is trying to understand how this is an environmental justice issue and unpacking some of the layers there. We kind of already touched on some of it in terms of who these products are marketed towards and primarily used by, and then what the, I guess, impact is by the fact that there aren't really good, safe alternatives for these products. So just wanting to unpack that with you both of, like, how is this an environmental justice issue from your perspective and from looking at the data from the testing that you all have done? [00:23:03] Speaker D: Yeah. And I'll start this one off. So when we're talking about the environmental justice question, we do need to start with who these products are targeted. Right. Like, these products, the synthetic and natural braiding hair, really targets black women specifically for their beauty needs that have been set by societal standards. But with that, if the products that they're essentially that they need to use to meet these types of standards are riddled with chemicals or VOCs that can be exposed, and they can be exposed in a number of ways. Whether it's absorption through the skin or ingestion or breathing, breathing in any of these harmful chemicals. These all have the potential to affect their health. Like, not just, oh, my throat is sore, but it's. It's their nervous system that it might be impacting. It might be their reproductive system. These are, like, really sensitive systems that will. Then that could also lead. That could also result in reproductive issues. Like. And so we have to be really careful. And some of these are even carcinogens. So if we're talking about environmental justice, like, I know I generally frame it as beauty justice because that is how the bill is being framed and everything. But beauty justice, environmental justice, it really doesn't matter how you frame it, really is about how these specific products are targeting a specific marginalized group like black women and the. And the community that relies on these products for their beauty needs. And nothing's being done to address it, or very little. Especially before Jim started digging into this with their content. Now there is more light. Light being shed on it through the different bills and through the testing, and more people have their eyes on it. But before, we couldn't even. We didn't even know which federal agency had jurisdiction over this. It sounds like all over the world, they're still grappling with this because they're not paying attention. And so that's the core issue here, is that these products aren't being made safer because it's not thought about, because it's about margin. It's about how it impacts a very, a very specific community, which is just. Which is injustice in a lot of ways because they're the ones that are going to have to take the brunt of the health issues. This product still hasn't really been fully addressed. Like the Beauty justice act in New York died before it could get passed this year. We have to try again. How many more years does it have to be until states and federal policymakers actually wake up to this issue and address it? [00:25:51] Speaker C: And we already talked about the human hair issue right there. But I'm very curious. I haven't seen anything looking into this. Most of these products, if they do have a country origin label on it, are made in Pakistan, Taiwan, China, et cetera. And these are synthesized products. They are made through chemistry. And what are the waste products naturally, how they make this stuff is business proprietary. They won't tell you how they tell you what is in Kanekalam. They won't tell you how it is made. And so what are some of the race products that are probably that it could be polluting the environment? What are the people that are working in the factories being exposed to? And so there's a lot of questions that deal with upstream from the final product. And then, you know, what comes as a result of the product that we know nothing about and environmental pollution or anything like that about these factories, that the process is very tightly held. But we won't know where the final product and this contamination comes from until we can analyze each step, test at each step and see where lead may be being introduced into the product because of faulty machinery, or it may be next to a lead battery factory and the lead is coming over from there. We won't know that until we actually look into, you know, how this product is made and what could be, you know, generated as a result. [00:27:26] Speaker D: Right. And all we see really is in the, in the different salons or in the beauty shops, a wall of very pretty outline outlaid marketed products. And so and if they claim that they're safe, the consumer has really no reason to believe that. It's not until somebody says so. And we've seen this time and time again in the beauty, in the beauty world, whether it was mercury beforehand or actually arsenic, I think was used at a certain point. But eventually we all realize, oh, these are not good. The question is, when will this happen for this. This specific category and others? [00:28:07] Speaker B: Yeah, I think this is. It just really points to the dilemma that you have that you're putting on here, is that as consumers, we don't know what we're doing unless it's labeled, unless there is something there to show and display us to be able to make the right decision. But in this case, there's a lot of different things. It seems like that doesn't allow the consumer to really have that power in that choice, whether that be deceptive labeling or not having certain ingredients there or not knowing what's there. [00:28:36] Speaker D: And I would argue that consumers shouldn't have to know. Consumers should be able to trust that these products are safe if it's for sale. It's just time and time again we see that that is not the case, and it won't be called out until an inquisitive mind like Jim or like the community of black women we talk to you tell us so. And so I'm very grateful that we had this opportunity to look into this, because who else would have broken this? Who else would have looked into it? [00:29:11] Speaker B: Yeah. Given all of these different, you know, issues that you had when you were testing in and doing that and giving the reporting that's out, what do you think regulators could be doing to protect consumers? [00:29:22] Speaker D: So I think regulators, first of all needs to, like I've been saying, they need to just first of all understand what this product is. It's clear that they don't even pay attention to it, which is the first problem. The second problem really is that lawmakers need to pay attention. And I think in New York, they started to. And I know in other states that they've started to as well. But the Beauty justice act in New York is that is that is why the Beauty justice act in New York is so important. Because New York's a huge market. It can help to dictate what happens across the country. And so for a lot of reasons, that's what makes that bill so important. It's important for New Yorkers, but also for setting the tone for the rest of the country, along with the other states that have also who have become aware of this issue. And then you have the Congress and then you have the federal level with Congress people. So there is a federal bill called the Toxic Free Beauty act that does try to also address this issue with cosmetics generally, just like Beauty justice act does, but that's been introduced for a number of years now, and it hasn't gone anywhere. We need that kind of legislation to move so that regulators can then take those laws and put them into practice. And so there is a lot that needs to happen. And really prioritizing this as an issue is probably the top, is the first thing that we need to get done. And we need, and honestly, we do need the Beauty justice act and New York, the New York Legislature to wake up and get this done. We got so close last this year. We got so close this year, like, we almost made it to the assembly floor. We just need to get it there this time around. And if we can, I think we can really make a big difference. [00:31:19] Speaker C: My previous job was with USDA Food Safety Inspection Service, and I was on the let's generate a new regulation side. It is achingly slow at the federal level to even get to the point where a regulatory agency like the FDA will consider establishing just chemical concentrations that will be allowed in a product, establishing official methods. This is how you have to test it. Establishing rules that as this stuff is imported to the United States, you will test it and see if it is contaminated with these chemicals. It is just so hard and so slow. I think I started at FSIS probably 20 years ago, and there's still stuff that was introduced back then that has not been made into regulation yet. And so it's very, very frustrating. And we talk about states doing things just like in New York, maybe with this Congress. That's where we're going to have to go. We're going to have to rely on the states to actually help us on this issue. Because I don't think the feds are going to do it right now. [00:32:29] Speaker D: Not right away. Absolutely not. It does need an act of Congress. New York can lead the way, as they should. And so that's kind of where we need to head right now. And also just keep beating that drum that this is an important issue. If for some reason that stops, they'll move on to the next shiny thing. And so we need to keep shining a light on this issue and force change. [00:33:03] Speaker A: I feel like we touched on so many aspects of this issue, but I know that just as we're getting toward the end of our time for this conversation, I wanted to give space for any of the other things that we didn't ask about, specifically things that you all wanted to mention. Additional insights, upcoming reports listeners might be interested. And just in general, for folks that are listening, what do you feel like their takeaway from this conversation should be? In a nutshell, there's lots of layers to this conversation, obviously, both in terms of the products that are out there, the regulatory landscape for this. But just if you were to be on the street with someone who happened to be interested in this topic, what would you say to them? How would you recommend that they navigate, you know, this, this landscape, but with this, with this product? [00:33:52] Speaker C: Well, I want to acknowledge that we never said stop using artificial braiding here. Right. We acknowledge that this is a cultural thing for the black community that is an important beauty pathway for many, many women. And I mentioned my two daughters. But what we also tried to do is give some points and some tips as to what they may consider doing. So for instance, we said, if you're using a new product of braiding hair, do a patch test, put in one, one braid, let it sit there and see if you're going to get irritated. If you get irritated, don't use that product. Don't put the braids in so tight because you could cause micro tears into your scalp, which allows these chemicals to get into your body easier. Don't wear the braids as long as you typically do. I knew my, my daughters tend to wear them about four to six weeks. You know, cut that down and then extend the time between braiding events because that's less exposure. And as we've talked about, read, look at tests, look at reports, try to adjust your buying patterns to stuff that seems to be safer. Get a relationship with your dermatologist, you know, because just in case you have irritation and they know what you've been using and what you've been wearing, and you can have conversations, medical level conversations, about any reactions that your body is having. And so we're hoping that some of the tips that we've given to women lessen the challenges that this product can offer to certain parts of the population. But we don't want to discourage women from choices that they make. We just want them to make it safer. As, as Orion said, we can't find an absolute safe answer for you, but we can give you some safer tips to kind of get you there. The other thing we haven't touched on is, is the braiding salons and the braiders, right? They're exposed to these products hours upon hours, days upon days. Bad ventilation with open hand, with ungloved hands, without mask. Very concerned about what are they being exposed to too. If it's on the braids and it's on their clients, why are we assuming that it's not getting in them too? So that's another area that there's a concern with also. [00:36:17] Speaker D: Yeah, no, honestly, it was exactly where I was going. Jim. The one other thing I would say is if you are feeling, if there is any kind of irritation that you are experiencing or any kind of pain, don't ignore it. Especially like, as he said, do a patch test. I know beauty is pain. That's a, that's an old adage that people have heard, but it really. But it's something that we don't have to suffer through anymore. We can find ways to alleviate the pain and kind of protect ourselves more. And we shouldn't let, we shouldn't let these companies get away with it either. Like, buy the safer products. Use your market power to, to say, no, I don't want. I don't want to use your product because you scored. You. You clearly have like, I can smell the chemicals coming off your hair. Like, take that into consideration and maybe try to use one of the, the. One of the more safer. The more safer. The safer products that. That are. That our testing has shown because we do have. We have found that certain ones have lower, lower concentrations of these. These concerning toxins or chemicals. And so I, I don't think I could say provide the tips any better than Jim. But we don't have to suffer in silence anymore. Women don't. We really don't. Nor should we. We're talking about our, our lives here essentially. Like, if it's affecting our nervous system or reproductive system, that's just something that I don't think that we should be putting at risk then. But yeah. And then one other thing that I will flag is CR is looking into other products more and more when it comes to this, their chemical safety for cosmetics and personal care. So be on the lookout for that kind of thing if that is something that you're. You would be interested in looking at and learning more about. So more to come on that. [00:38:13] Speaker B: Absolutely. Well, not only thank you for coming on the podcast and sharing and I think. I think everyone learned a lot to be very honest. There's so many things that we can probably keep going and talking about, but unfortunately we have a little bit of limited time with you, but we definitely appreciate you guys coming on and we also appreciate the work that you guys are doing. This is very important work and it connects very much to weac's mission and what we try to do and what we advocate for. So thank you again. [00:38:42] Speaker A: Thanks for listening. If you like this episode, make sure to rate and review the show on whatever platform you listen on. If you have thoughts about the show, or suggestions for topics you want us to discuss, we encourage you to reach out to [email protected] [00:38:57] Speaker B: I also want to remind folks about our Uptown Chats hotline, where listeners can call in with questions they have about climate, environmental justice. Got a question? Give us a call at 877-Uptown-6. That's 877-878-6966. [00:39:09] Speaker A: Call us and check out react on Facebook at weact4ej. That's W E a C T F O R E J on Instagram, Blue sky and YouTube at react4ej. That's W E A C T number 4ej. And check out our website react.org for more information about environmental justice. [00:39:29] Speaker B: Until next time. [00:39:30] Speaker A: Bye. Sam.