Filed under: Food and it's Impact on Our Health
Filed under: Going Green; How and Why...
There are a few items that I have been still using that are not “green”. I have been looking for a good alternative to the plastic green kitchen scrubbies…they really work! I use a loofah, cut in slices, to wash dishes with. Works great and when I am through with it, it goes into the compost.
But if a pot or dish has stuck on food that a long soak in water doesn’t work on…I still grab that green thing. A few days ago I got determined to find an alternative, as my last one is almost dead. I found this, at- http://www.worldchanging.com/
Biodegradable Dish Scrubbie Eases My Eco-Guilt
Emily Gertz
March 2, 2006 4:04 PM
Sometimes it’s the little things. Sure — it’s gotten easy to find great coffee that’s organic, bird-friendly, and Fair Trade in the average U.S. town or city, and the rBGH-free organic milk to drink it with. But what are the options to clean the coffee stains off of my mug? Usually some plastic scrubbie or abrasive pad — which I’ll have to throw away eventually. Contemplating that little scrubbie’s carbon-emission-intensive journey to some landfill three states away, where it will join gazillions of other throwaway plastic whatsits in eternal unbiodegradable rest, is painful enough to keep my mugs looking dingy.
Enter the Sandclean, a biodegradable scrubbie. "Lasts a long time and does not break, tear or shed pieces which might otherwise remain on dishes or get into food…will not rust or hurt your hands like steel wool. Works great on tea or coffee stains in teapots and cups!" Sounds great! And it even comes in two grits for mild or tough cleaning jobs.
The Sandclean scrubbie isn’t exactly cheap at $7.50 a pop. But it’ll be nice to have stain-free cups without consigning another plastic scrubbie to the landfill.
I also found these at- 
"Japanese ""Turtle"" Large Tawashi Vegetable Brush"
Japanese "Turtle" vegetable brushes are known in Japan as tawashi. Each is a completely natural scrub brush made from palm fibers, then is tightly bound with thick wire. It is the perfect utensil for scrubbing root vegetables and other items without bruising the skins. Also excellent for washing pots and pans, especially ones made from cast-iron, earthenware and stainless steel. Tawashi brushes also are fantastic for getting the crevasses of suribachi bowls and sushi mats clean. They are inexpensive and will outlast regular synthetic brushes. They’re even great for scrubbing clean wooden cutting boards, utensils or even bathtubs.
Tawashi Made with 100% Palm Fibers, with a metal hanging loop for easy drying and storage.
Click here to go to their website
From EWG
If you follow our work on cosmetics, you know that companies have free reign over what they put in your products. FDA can’t require companies to test products for safety before (or after) they’re sold, and unlike for food additives and drugs, FDA doesn’t review or approve cosmetics before you buy them. Companies are the deciders when it comes to what’s safe enough to sell.
Cosmetic companies may not have to test, but they do have to list ingredients on product labels, and on at least 126 products you’ll find the ingredient “squalene” listed in tiny print. It’s an oil used to soften skin and hair.
Turns out that squalene can either be squeezed out of the livers of deep-sea sharks, or made naturally from rice or wheat. Seems an obvious choice for cosmetic formulators. But guess what Unilever picked.
Thanks to pressure from our friends at Oceana, Unilever announced this week that it would switch from sharks to plants to make the squalene it adds to Pond’s, Dove, and other Unilever brands. This is great news and an important action, given that shark populations are plummeting worldwide from overfishing.
But what remains disturbing is the fact that, either way, Unilever’s choices are in full compliance with federal cosmetic standards, which allow companies to use ingredients synthesized from, well, anything really — including animal species collapsing globally in numbers, or petroleum products, or mining industry products –with no requirement that health or the environment be considered.
Our research shows that companies even use ingredients that are known human carcinogens (like coal tar) and chemicals that can harm brain development (like mercury). Not to mention the nearly 90% of cosmetic ingredients that have never been assessed for health or environmental impacts, by the cosmetic industry’s safety panel, the FDA, or any other publicly accountable institution.
Unilever’s action, spurred by public pressure, is taking a big bite out of your face cream. But it’s a nibble when you consider the more than 7,000 other cosmetic ingredients in face cream, sunscreen, deodorant, toothpaste, baby products, and more that still need the same kind of scrutiny.
This is from http://www.enviroblog.org/
May 28, 2009
Baby products should not contain toxic ingredients, according to common sense as well as 40 + organizations lead by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) co-founded Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.
Just last week, the Campaign sent a letter to Johnson and Johnson asking that its products made for children don’t contain hidden carcinogenic contaminants 1,4-dioxane and formaldehyde.
No More Toxic Tub
The action comes after a recent Campaign-sponsored No More Toxic Tub report that found those two contaminants in over 60 percent of the 48 products tested. Both 1,4-dioxane and formaldehyde are known carcinogens and formaldehyde can also trigger skin rashes. Like other toxic ingredients often found in your shampoo, lotion and deodorant, they are not limited in personal care products. In addition, since they are contaminants and not ingredients, they are not disclosed on product labels.
Not breaking the law isn’t good enough when the law is weak the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) – is so weak that under it, the federal government wasn’t able to ban asbestos! A chemical responsible for at least 10,000 deaths a year in the U.S. Low doses matter Tell Johnson & Johnson to get rid of the toxic chemicals
The line of defense for the manufacturers has been the typical "we didn’t break the law" as well as the usual "small doses are insignificant." It is true that companies did not break the law. But it’s also true that the law -
The small doses are not insignificant because we are all exposed to chemicals in personal care products every day, several times a day. Those exposures are there in addition to exposures to other toxics in food we eat, water we drink, air we breathe and so forth. All of these exposures add up, and could lead to diseases later in life.
The companies don’t have to use the toxic ingredients, as alternatives are available. Even Johnson and Johnson can make formaldehyde-free products, as they do in Japan.
Without a tough federal law that would require the chemicals in personal care products be safe, consumers are left out on their own to make the best purchasing decisions.
That’s why we created Skin Deep, a cosmetics database that can help you make informed decisions when it comes to toxic contained in personal care products you use.
Until the law is changed, you can join us and tell Johnson and Johnson that you don’t want these toxic chemicals in your baby’s shampoo and they should take it out!
