They're in Washington D.C.

[Scented]

http://www.soapguild.org/industry/leg-SCA2010.php

For those who are members of HSMG, perhaps you would like to follow. Four people have gone to Washington D.C. to represent the industry on the cosmetic act.

They will be updating through Twitter, I believe, Facebook, blogs etc.

Good luck to them and may they come away with better alternatives than what's out there!

Actually if anyone has updates, hears anything, please post here. Donna Maria Coles Johnson (IBN), Kayla Fioravanti (Essential Wholesale), Anne-Marie Faiola (Brambleberry) and Lela Barker (Bella Lucce) are the ones who are there.

Edited August 2, 2010 by Scented

[Lorrie]

Thanks for the update Julie.

[rebeccajo99]

Thank-you for letting us know. Hopefully they will be albe to get something accomplished!!!

[LuminousBoutique]

thanks for the updates.. I hope they can make our voice be heard too.

[ah-soy]

The way the new cosmetic act is written is scary...if it passes the little guys have no chance to survive. Good luck to them!

[rebeccajo99]

The way the new cosmetic act is written is scary...if it passes the little guys have no chance to survive. Good luck to them!

I agree with you Ah-soy. I have been doing some reasearch on it and I found a website that supports this act that says this will level the playing field for small business. I really don't know how since I have read the bill a couple times now and cannot see how that is going to happen. The paperwork alone will put me out of business.

[annie123]

I think that what they meant to say was it it will level small business...just like a bomb levels a building

I agree with you Ah-soy. I have been doing some reasearch on it and I found a website that supports this act that says this will level the playing field for small business. I really don't know how since I have read the bill a couple times now and cannot see how that is going to happen. The paperwork alone will put me out of business.

[rebeccajo99]

I think that what they meant to say was it it will level small business...just like a bomb levels a building

They had it written in two spots on their website. One was written like this "This legislation will be good for consumers, but it will also level the playing field for businesses that are making the safest products."... and the other way was written like this "Level the playing field so small businesses can compete fairly."

The first way makes it sound like your way, the second doesn't . Guess they can't make up thier mind either

[Scented]

I think that website owner has no clue what she's talking about, but I don't see any kind of bill leveling any kind of field and right now we need those big boys in our court because they have the scientists who can testify that some of these things people are calling for are naturally found in nature and are already regulated.

If they want to swamp the bigger companies with paperwork, what's the point? If they want labels to read more clearly then here we go ... eliminate the scientific names so people understand what's going on their skin. Maybe part of that is what the other side is looking for, but they have no clue what a nightmare and a complete PITA they are.

I don't like that by registering pretty much everything is public record except for the % used type of thing ... I also don't like that these requirements, if approved, having to pay for every formulation to be tested ... it's expensive regardless of who you are.

I do wholeheartedly support that everything needs a label and a correct label, just not the nightmare of how to label and how in the hell is someone going to be able to list processes? We buy oils and stuff that better already be approved for food (for the most part) but my label for distilled water isn't telling me jack except where it was manufactured and the company that sold it to Wal-Mart ... and I'm not about to start distilling on my own or cold pressing my own olive oil, which indicates the ingredients were freaking imported from four countries and that's it. Yes, I can see the label nightmare now along with reporting to the FDA. If they want to work so damn hard (a first for gov't anyway right?) then concentrate on demanding specifics from importers first.

As smaller businesses go, we have a right to be safe in selling to the public and not hiding or bending truths either and abiding by the laws that are in place and not trying to find a way to skirt around them. There are quite a few people out there selling stuff without labels and not understanding that a two-day old bar of CP soap just frankly isn't ready for market ... and there are other things.

Edited August 2, 2010 by Scented

[LuminousBoutique]

*nods* I'm active in the etsy forums and I cant tell you how many times there are people who know NOTHING about soap making already SELLING soap, then asking (quite frankly, idiotic) questions about it.. AFTER already listing and selling some.

That looks bad for ALL of us who are doing it right.

so some of it I wouldnt mind. For example.. being required to register and getting a registration number I could display, much like a contractor. That would show my customers I am legit. Thats fine.. I actually dont mind that. But the labeling... it makes my head swim. The paperwork too.

So, a friend whos a soap maker in canada sent me a PDF of the paperwork she already fills out.. two for them, one for her. It wasnt bad, but wouldnt we have to fill one out for every single product, since every fragrance has its own chemical makeup? And will the fragrance oil suppliers even GIVE us the information we need?

Say you make perfume in 40 different scents, does that mean 120 pieces of paperwork to get those approved for sale?

[Scented]

The way I understand/take it ... one sheet for each different one ... i.e. each different fragrance etc.

I'd love to see what Canada is filling out. Would you be up for sharing?

I don't mind the registration part either, but as I get it, the suppliers for the products would HAVE to give up the info.

What I'd rather see is that a fragrance oil doesn't have the genics they're worried about. Isn't most FO out there now pthalates free? Not sure I have the spelling right on that, but where we going to get the breakdown on EOs? AND what EOs are going to be eliminated by an undefined group that decides one year to listen to abc and the following year to listen to xyz.

Edited August 3, 2010 by Scented

[ProudMarineMom]

Sorry, interrupted when writing a reply and some of this has been said by Scented and Luminous.

I hope the HSMG representatives are able to fully express the issues with this bill. The sponsors seem to be trying to pass legislation that provides no definition on what is considered technically feasible, unclear on what information will be kept confidential, or how the FDA will maintain the prohibited or restricted use lists. Businesses will also be required to provide Safety Statements but the testing protocols have not been established. Once the bill has passed, they could do just about anything because most items are left up to the discretion of the Secretary.

Scented, I definitely agree with you on simplifying the chemical names on a label. Which would you rather see, Butyrospermum Parkii or Shea Butter. At least most people know what Shea Butter is. And, the label should be correct and accurate. Although, I think they are being excessive on the labeling requirements, listing every ingredient including the individual components of fragrances, preservatives and botanical, petroleum-derived or animal-derived ingredients. I’d like to see all of that on a tube of lip balm!

Also disagree with registering everything and making it a matter of public record. Even if just the ingredients are available and not the percentages, people will still have access to the basic recipe. And, it’s required despite the Trade Secret protection. I doubt that KFC would want to register all of the stuff in their secret spice mix. I do like what Luminous said about registering the company information. That could be something a Salon or Craft Show could ask for, in addition to the Insurance, to hopefully ensure the vendor is safe.

From what I have seen from the members of this board, the main concern is to create a safe product that has quality ingredients and has been properly tested. I’ve read several posts from newbies like me that pretty much say ‘I’ve made a candle, or soap etc, how much do you sell them for?’ and the strong advice that is given. I currently don’t sell any of my products. I’m testing everything to make sure it’s safe. And, I rely on the experience of people here to understand the entire process. I was definitely naïve when I first started, but I’m learning.

Even though I’m not yet selling, I hope to someday. But, I can read something, like this bill, and recognize ridiculous…

[Scented]

OK to update what's buzzing on Twitter.

CHeck out the blog: http://ht.ly/2k49G

As for today's meetings so far, according to Tweets (egads, ha!)

Donna Marie: @IndieBusiness Productive meetings in Sen. Feinsteins's office.

From HSMG Pres: TheSoapGuild Just finished meeting w/Schakowsky, Baldwin & Markey on SCA-2010. Heading into another, will post details later #opposesca

Kayla Fioravanti (EssentialU) Score! We just got another meeting here in DC!! just did the math organic products cost about 40% & go thru 4 layers paperwork & new bill at least 6 layers of 10x more paperwork

Kayla's blog: http://essentialu.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/08/round-two-back-in-washington-dc.html#tp

[Scented]

For those who may not know:

Track the bill:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h5786/show#users_tracking

HSMG keeping updated via blog. So far no other word that I'm seeing unless I'm not plugged into the right people.

http://www.soapguild.org/blog/category/legislation/

Edited August 3, 2010 by Scented

[Scented]

More stuff ... this coming from big business:

http://www.personalcarecouncil.org/newsroom/20100721a

and

Anne Marie's update is now live on Soap Queen

http://soap-queen.blogspot.com/2010/08/report-from-dc-education-matters.html?

Let's do it and get more involved so that it isn't just five people working for we smaller entities!

[rebeccajo99]

The way I understand/take it ... one sheet for each different one ... i.e. each different fragrance etc.

I'd love to see what Canada is filling out. Would you be up for sharing?

I don't mind the registration part either, but as I get it, the suppliers for the products would HAVE to give up the info.

What I'd rather see is that a fragrance oil doesn't have the genics they're worried about. Isn't most FO out there now pthalates free? Not sure I have the spelling right on that, but where we going to get the breakdown on EOs? AND what EOs are going to be eliminated by an undefined group that decides one year to listen to abc and the following year to listen to xyz.

shoot, that is worse than what I thought in needing a sheet for each fragrance. If I would survive this bill if passed, I think I would only be able to offer 1 or 2 scents and maybe 1 product.

I've been working on getting the word out. telling as many people as possible and getting my letter typed up for the politions. I'm not going to be a silent bystander who prays this doesn't pass.

I work hard on making my products safe. I go to shows and find things unlabeled, using food coloring to color the soaps and bath salts, using fragrances baught at wal-mart (they could be safe, but really don't know since I never researched them). I don't want all my hard work and money to go down the drain because of this bill.

Like Scented said, some things seem fair and will be benefical to the consumer, but most are over baring with no benefit to the consumer.

Edited August 3, 2010 by rebeccajo99

[LuminousBoutique]

yep, this is from that canadian soap maker I was talking about:

"It sounds like they are making some changes similar to what we have to do in Canada. If that's the case, you guys are in for a world of fun! (not) It's so tedious filling out these forms. However, there are no fees involved, and testing the product isn't necessary.

Here is a copy of the form we must fill out in triplicate. Two for them, one for our own records. Plus we have to attach a product label.

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/alt_formats/hecs-sesc/pdf/person/cosmet/info-ind-prof/_notification/cnf-dcf-eng.pdf

Here is the guidebook explaining all the codes you have to use on the form:

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/person/cosmet/info-ind-prof/_notification/guide-eng.php

And here is the "Hot List" of ingredients that are not permitted, or the maximum levels for regulated ingredients. Example - camphor can be used no greater than 3% concentration. Example - Talc is permitted, but the label must carry the following warning: "Keep powder away from child's face to avoid inhalation which can cause breathing problems"

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/person/cosmet/info-ind-prof/_hot-list-critique/hotlist-liste-eng.php "

[LuminousBoutique]

So.. more of canadas laws... which I assume this will be much similar to..

1. What Products Are Subject to Cosmetic Notification?

All cosmetic products sold in Canada are subject to notification to Health Canada under the Cosmetic Regulations. The definition of "cosmetic" can be found in section 2 of the Food and Drugs Act.

In order to be classified as a cosmetic, the product must meet the following criteria:

• The product serves a cosmetic purpose of cleansing, moisturizing, lubricating, perfuming or altering the hair, skin, teeth or complexion of humans and/or animals.
  
• The product is a substance or contains a substance or a mixture of substances that come into contact with the body to achieve the cosmetic effect. This is generally limited to the skin, hair, nails and teeth. Products meant to be applied to the oral, nasal and vaginal cavities may be considered cosmetics. Products meant to be applied directly into the eyes are not considered cosmetics (e.g. moisturizing eye drops), while those applied to the skin around the eyes would be considered cosmetics. Articles per se are not cosmetics (e.g. brushes, razors, applicators).
  
• The product does not make any representation or claims of having therapeutic properties such as the prevention or treatment of a disease, disorder or abnormal condition.
  
• The product does not contain ingredients that primarily have a therapeutic purpose (e.g. has a drug-like effect).
  

Examples of products considered to be cosmetics:

• Artificial nail builders and adhesives
  
• Soap
  
• Microdermabrasion kits / chemical peels
  
• Tooth whiteners
  
• Tattoo inks and temporary tattoos
  
• Cleansing wipes (i.e. cleansing ingredients contained within the wipes)
  
• Professional Use Products
  
• Institutional Use Products
  
• Hotel amenities
  
• Samples
  
• Feminine Douches
  

Examples of products NOT considered to be cosmetics:

• Brushes
  
• Laser treatment hair removers
  
• Collagen or 'Botox' injections
  
• Denture cleansers
  
• Insect repellents
  
• Oral supplements
  
• Acne treatments
  
• Room or fabric sprays
  

Products that appear to be cosmetics, but that fall outside of the above criteria may be subject to other regulations. Visit our Web site to links to these other programs: www.healthcanada.gc.ca/cosmetics

so... in regards to the actual cosmetic notification form... i wondered about this... does that mean your supplier if you are using bases? so this KINDA answers that...

Box 5: Other Manufacturer

Indicate the full legal name, complete mailing address, telephone and facsimile information of any other companies, apart from the manufacturer indicated in Box 4, that manufacture or formulate the cosmetic, or are otherwise involved in incorporating ingredients into the product. If there is no other manufacturer, check the box "Same as manufacturer".

It is not necessary to list companies that supply ingredients or that supply proprietary mixtures of ingredients, or companies that only package and/or label the product. List companies that provide pressurized aerosol fillers as they add propellant ingredients. Additional manufacturers may be listed as outlined under Section 4, part "c".

....So I guess what I get from that is you must list the company you get your base from, but you dont need to list your supplier of raw ingredients if you are making your own formulations. Because.. legally speaking, if you are using a base, they manufactured and formulated the cosmetic, right?

and...Incidental Ingredients

Incidental ingredients are those that may have been present in the raw material, but are not found, or remain at quantities too insignificant to contribute to an ingredient purpose in the final product. These substances do not need to be declared on the notification form or the product label.

...wouldnt lye count as an Incidental Ingredient then, considering none remains in the final product? (well, it shouldnt.. lol!)

so much to read

[annie123]

From what I have read it is not just about paperwork but every formula has to be tested by an independent lab and if you change any ingredients tested again...even the scent.

I also read something about certified sterile facility...so no more mixing in your kitchen.

[Scented]

From what I have read it is not just about paperwork but every formula has to be tested by an independent lab and if you change any ingredients tested again...even the scent.

I also read something about certified sterile facility...so no more mixing in your kitchen.

That was in the original bill, but it hasn't been a point made in conversations again so wondering if I missed it now.

[Scented]

Another blog to watch.

http://www.bellalucce.com/thebuzz/

Luminous thank you for posting that!

[CareBear]

That was in the original bill, but it hasn't been a point made in conversations again so wondering if I missed it now.

I've read the current proposed legislature over and over and I don't see those items.

[Soapintastic]

the worst part about this bill is that it makes absolutely no distinction between those of us doing things right already, and the etsy sellers using "cucumber Essential oil." (which, if you didn't know it, doesn't exist).

I refuse to stand by and watch us lose what we've worked so hard to build- our businesses!!!

Blog blog blog blog blog-- http://opencongress.org has some good ones listed. Go to each one. Post a comment. Give the poster the support they need to keep blogging. People who are keeping this topic active and going are doing us all a favor. Thank them.

[Red]

And then we have a pretty big etsy selling saying things like " I am for this bill because my stuff is already all natural. I have nothing to worry about, it's all those people that use bases that are worried" give me a break, I wanna freakin' scream at her to get educated. Yet she uses FO but claim they are naturally derived and are coconut oil based :rolleyes2 and people believe this crap and she has a pretty big business going...

[Scented]

And then we have a pretty big etsy selling saying things like " I am for this bill because my stuff is already all natural. I have nothing to worry about, it's all those people that use bases that are worried" give me a break, I wanna freakin' scream at her to get educated. Yet she uses FO but claim they are naturally derived and are coconut oil based :rolleyes2 and people believe this crap and she has a pretty big business going...

I don't believe the FDA looks kindly on people who falsify. Just saying, but it is people like her who are a problem in this industry ... maybe their life and times started by working for Mia Bella, who helped to throw a very bad spin on paraffin a few years ago.