Suds Beer Soap

Gah! It’s been way too serious around here.

Spring’s around the corner; the crocuses are popping up in my garden and the snow is melting! And we have another holiday coming our way. You know, the one where everyone’s Irish.

In honor of St. Patty’s Day, we have a special batch of Suds Beer Soap for you, made with Conway’s Irish Ale from Great Lakes Brewing Company.

AND it’s on sale on our website for $7.50 through Sunday March 14, nearly 20% off!

Now, I made absolutely sure this beer was up to par for our fine soaps by testing it out the old-fashioned way first (oh, the hardships I must endure for you). Not that I was concerned! We’re major fans of Great Lakes Brewing Company, and they have so many great beers. But they do more than make great, award-winning beer.  They are one of the most eco-friendly businesses in Cleveland.  We’re proud to have Suds soap featured in the Great Lakes Brewing Company gift shop.

As for the soap… it smells great, it feels great, and it lives up to its name! There’s an ounce of beer in every bar, and I’m no scientist, but I’m pretty sure that Suds’ amped-up lather is a beer thing.  Those of you who are soap-as-shampoo aficionados might want to give this one a try; you know what they say about beer being great for hair.  I still haven’t found a way to describe the scent other than awesome.  Sure, it smells like beer.  But not beery.  It’s fresh, full, spicy, fruity… well, you just have to try it and find out.  Plus, this batch looks way cooler than the photo above.

So, if you’ve been dying to try Suds, here’s your chance, and at a great price!

Today, I and many others in my industry listended live to over 5 hours of testimony on the Colorado Safe Personal Care Products Act (PDF document).   Many great points were made by parties against AND for the bill.

In the end, however, the Act FAILED, voted down 7-4 in committee after all discussion was presented.  The main issues were as follows:

• The Act attempted to ban any level of a substance in question, even the naturally occurring trace that may be present in something as benign as cocoa butter.  Even our bodies make toxins (our bodies manufacture formaldehyde, for example), and our drinking water has more toxins than would have been permitted by this Act.  Simply put, NOAELs were not taken into account.
• The Act attempted to ban substances that the European Union allows present in trace amounts: substances that exist naturally in shea butter, olive oil, essential oils, fruit extracts, and more.
• The Act would have given the EU regulatory power “by proxy” over Colorado’s personal care products, as it relied on the EU’s list of banned substances, with one notable exception: as above, the EU permits trace amounts of naturally-occurring toxins in products.
• The Act offered a cap on the damages that could be pursued, but this cap was still too high for small businesses, and the cost of defending ourselves in court would shut us down.
• The Act only seemed to take anecdotal evidence into account; none of its proponents could cite scientific data leading to the bill’s creation.  In other words, a very disconcerting “precautionary principle” was proposed, where legislation might have been enacted before science could even justify its existence.
• Insufficient evidence exists to indicate cosmetics are more damaging and toxic than airborne or ingested substances.
• Constitutionality of the Act was questioned:  A company could be sued simply for using an ingredient, even if no harm could be directly attributed to their products.

To give a real-world example, one cited in testimony: in order for a consumer to reach toxic lead exposure through lipstick consumption, that consumer would have to eat 4 tubes of lipstick a day for 70 years before reaching toxicity. While we all use many personal care products, and a cumulative effect is a valid concern, hopefully you can see how extreme your exposure would have to be.

Please read my previous post for more information about the bill and industry opinion.

We at Sarva sympathize deeply with cancer survivors and victims, having known many ourselves, including close friends and family.  We recognize the sensitive nature of this topic.  I lost my own grandmother, a woman whom I loved deeply and who helped raise me, to cancer.  I have seen the fear firsthand, and I can’t imagine what it must be like to live in the shadow of cancer every day.  This bill also aimed to address reproductive toxicity issues as well, and for those affected by such, we extend our most heartfelt sympathies.

However, we look forward to good dialogue with good research protecting everyone… not only for our cosmetics, but also for our food, water, and air.  And we look forward to research–not hype–driving our legislation.

We use no synthetic ingredients in Sarva Soaps.  That doesn’t mean that everything natural is safe:  we research all ingredients with great care and we tell you exactly what’s in our products.  You will find all of our ingredients listed on our website.  Where you see “essential oils” (rather than a detailed list of them) in our online ingredient list, we’ve chosen to protect our proprietary, custom essential oil blends from the competitive eyes of the Internet.  However, all of our packaging fully lists our formulations including all essential oils.  Our labeling is fully FDA compliant, even though true soap is not regulated by the FDA.  We follow closely with Cropwatch to monitor endangered or at-risk natural resources.  And I personally undertake extensive, demanding training on a regular basis to continually increase my knowledge of what I bring to you.  If you ever have any questions about our products or what’s in them, please contact us.

At Sarva, we believe in the power of nature and working in harmony with its inherent intelligence.  We work hard to bring you a beautiful, safe product, and we love what we do.

Please visit the Personal Care Products Council for assistance in choosing safe cosmetics for you and your loved ones.

Thank you for your support!

I’m in the awkward position of needing to inform you about a recent development in my industry that has left me speechless.  So I’m going to let noted industry leaders speak instead.  I’ve assembled a collection of links and quotes on the topic, with a few thoughts of my own, so you can decide for yourself.  (Edit: I’m tremendously honored; Kayla Fioravanti at Essential Wholesale has listed my blog post as “Recommended Reading” on her most recent post. I consider all of her posts recommended reading!)

But it’s important you do, because if this passes on Monday, it sets a dangerous nationwide precedent for the entire cosmetics industry.

This coming Monday, March 1, the state of Colorado will attempt to enact a “zero-tolerance” bill regarding carcinogenic substances in cosmetics. Sounds wonderful, doesn’t it?

But wait.

The state of Colorado hopes to be able to give its citizens the right to directly sue any company that makes a product containing certain ingredients. What ingredients?  Not what the FDA or cancer researchers decide are carcinogens at normal usage levels… rather, what a group called the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics deems carcinogenic.  The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (CFSC) is a consumer group, not an association of cosmetic chemists or scientists. Is this a result of lobbying? You decide.

The CFSC has been alienating its own industry for a while now. Some manufacturers, even though they work incredibly hard to bring you safe products, have even revoked their CFSC membership.  Those of you who remember the FDA Globalization Act of 2008 may recall the CFSC’s role; they drafted a petition signature in favor of the Globalization Act–an Act which, had it passed, would have threatened the very survival of every company who had voluntarily signed on to the CFSC.

Kayla Fioravanti, certified aromatherapist and owner of raw materials supplier Essential Wholesale, summarizes the bill here. And here is the actual bill (PDF format).

The matter at hand is not a question of inaccurate data… rather, it’s a question of how the data are interpreted.

As Kayla astutely points out, there needs to be differentiation between carcinogenic at normal usage levels and carcinogenic at 100% concentration.   Consider: If an essential oil contains a trace of a chemical which is proven carcinogenic at 100% concentration, from what I understand, the essential oil itself may be banned.   If an essential oil comprises 0.05% of a product’s total formulation (a common level for soaps), how much, then, of that trace carcinogen is present in the product?

Every substance–even a toxin–has a No Observable Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL), a level of weak concentration at which the substance is no longer toxic.  Did you know that strawberries contain a carcinogen called acetaldehyde?  That’s a great example of a NOAEL… more on acetaldehyde below.

If I understand correctly, Colorado would allow its citizens to sue Sarva for selling our soaps in Colorado if we use ANY ingredient that shows ANY trace of a carcinogen, even if it is used at NOAEL.  Gosh, what if we add mashed strawberries to a soap?

So, what kinds of ingredients are on the list? A great example (though not a natural substance), and a great post well worth reading from Kayla Fioravanti:

“in Colorado you will not be allowed to buy green eye shadow, because the EPA has the main ingredient listed as “likely to be a carcinogenic to humans.”   Of course the EPA was talking about Chromic acid in a mist, but it is on the list so it is banned.  The ingredient is completely safe in cosmetics.  As a matter of fact, eye lid cancer is extremely rare and is more common in men (19.6 cases per every 100,000 men) than in women (13.3 cases per every 100,000 women) and is attributed to the sun and not green eye shadow.”

As Ms. Fioravanti points out in her above blog post, many manufacturers who signed on and remain with the CFSC are going to be very surprised to find that even their products are going to be banned in Colorado.  Explain that.

And let’s not forget essential oils! From aromatherapist and author Robert Tisserand:

“…goodbye to rose otto and rose absolute. It was nice knowing you. And so long to nutmeg oil, mace oil, myrtle oil, basil oil, holy basil oil, citronella oil, ho leaf oil (linalool ct), elemi oil, and many other less common essential oils. Not because they contain acetaldehyde, but because they contain methyleugenol (ME). ME is occasionally found in traces in rosemary oil, clove oil, hyssop oil, teatree oil, cananga oil, mastic oil, cassia oil, cinnamon leaf oil, savory oil, black pepper oil and, again, many others. Have you eaten any fresh basil or pesto lately? Then you have been consuming ME. But, neither fresh basil nor pesto is carcinogenic, because they also contain antimutagens and anticarcinogens that counteract any toxic effect of ME. I’m not just saying this, it has been demonstrated. The same goes for holy basil oil, to take one example – not only is it non-carcinogenic, but it is actually anticarcinogenic. The high content of geraniol in rose otto is almost certainly protective because of its anticarcinogenic action.”

I get it; I really do.  Colorado wants to give power to its citizens and protect their health at the same time.  But who’s the authority, and who should have the power to enforce consumer safety? A cosmetic chemist? A state government? A consumer coalition? Or the actual consumer, who may know nothing at all about cosmetic chemistry?

This Act will allow any citizen in the state of Colorado to sue any manufacturer–even if that citizen is unharmed by their products—simply because any of their products contains a substance that is believed to be a carcinogen at any concentration, even if that concentration is NOT present in the product (see NOAEL above).  Olive oil contains phytoestrogens.  Have we now eliminated olive oil from personal care products in Colorado?

We have to be careful with our raw materials, and this includes natural substances such as essential oils. They are concentrated chemicals.  Fresh basil herb and basil essential oil are two very different substances containing different balances of chemicals. It’s the reponsibility of companies like Sarva to know that difference, to do our homework, and follow safe usage guidelines. There are essential oils or other additives we would never use in soapmaking, and others that we use at low levels, so that we create a safe product for you. But we base our choices on science, research, and reason… not imprecise propaganda.

After all, you can die from salt, too.

Want to help stop this act from passing?  Call these people and tell them to stop the Colorado Safe Personal Care Products Act:

Dennis Apuan (El Paso County): 303-866-3069
Betty Boyd (Jefferson County): 303-866-4857
Dianne Primavera (House sponsor): 303-866-4667
Karen Middleton (Arapahoe County): 303-866-3911
Joe Miklosi (Arapahoe County): 303-866-2910

The email addresses for the above individuals may be found in this directory.

I don’t want to prevent legislation designed to create safe personal care products.   What I do want to prevent is misinformed legislation based on bad science.   It limits good choices for all of us.

_______________________________

UPDATE, Tuesday March 2:  The act has been voted down in committee 7-4.  Please read this blog post for a synopsis.

UPDATE, Friday February 26:  Donna Maria Coles Johnson, founder of the Indie Beauty Network, has made it easy to fight back.  She’s drafted a letter for you to send. All you have to do is fill in the blanks!  She’s even included email, phone, AND fax numbers of all representatives.   D-Day is Monday March 1… this coming Monday!  I’m drafting my letters NOW.  Won’t you join me?

The Handcrafted Soap Makers Guild, in conjunction with Clean the World, has called soapmakers to action in the Haitian relief efforts.  Clean the World accepts soap donations, melts them down and turn them into new soap, and distributes this rebatched soap to people in need.

While we at Sarva focus on creating beautiful, artistic soaps for you, we believe soap is a basic necessity.  Scientists have recently confirmed  that overuse of antibiotics is causing dangerous pathogens to mutate — and actually thrive — and become drug-resistant.  Soap attacks problems at the source:  Sanitation is the best, most basic way to prevent the spread of bacteria and viruses. Bar soap, including handcrafted soap, is indeed antibacterial, even without potentially harmful antibacterial chemicals added… and what’s more, regular bar soap doesn’t kill the beneficial bacteria that live on our skin.

Sarva usually donates soap to a local homeless shelter, but in these circumstances, we have chosen to divert the majority of our routine donation to Clean the World.  Sarva has donated 40 pounds of soap to the cause.

Right now, soap is greatly needed in Haiti. It will directly help prevent the spread of disease and, thus, further loss of life and devastation.  Clean the World already has stores of soap ready to go to Haiti, and needs your financial support to make this happen.

This is a unique, practical, and directly implementable way to get help where it’s needed right now.  Please consider donating to Clean the World so they can continue their invaluable work.

Thank you so much.

Oops.

In the mad rush to restock the web site after our holiday rush and fill some wholesale orders, we goofed.  We have a small batch of Grace soap that is… shall we say… cosmetically challenged.  There’s nothing wrong with the soap aside from its appearance.  Air bubbles here and there, slightly underweight (4.2 oz as opposed to 4.5 oz), and just not up to snuff.  Customers who have already purchased these are surprised we’re not selling them at full price, but we have very high standards around here.

So, I thought this might make a great win-win situation.   You get to try incredible soap at an incredible price, and these poor bars of Grace get a loving home.

Grace normally sells for $9.00 (yes, it’s worth it).   I’m offering these “slightly imperfect” bars to you for $6.50.   Nearly 30% off!

Grace is one of Sarva’s Premium Series soaps and was the first to sell out at Christmas.  People were clamoring for this soap!   You’ll be the first to get it in the new year, and at a discount too!  Lavender, Geranium, Rosewood (sustainably harvested Rosewood leaf), topped with organic rosebuds… all in a decadent Castille base, the same as our all-time top-seller, Purity.

Based on my own experience, if you have a cold, snowy winter like we do here in Ohio… accompanied by dry, itchy skin… this is the soap for you.  Creamy and mild.  And it smells incredible — elegant, heady, sweetly floral.  When I use this soap, I feel loved and special.

Want some? Go to  the product page. Note that you can  choose to receive your Slightly Imperfect bars unboxed and unlabeled (choose “unboxed” in the dropdown menu) and save another 25 cents per bar.  If you choose that option, we’ll bag your soaps in biodegradable waxed bags, no label.

…oh, and always remember to relax and take your time, even under pressure… I sure will from now on!

Yesterday’s blog post stimulated a great deal of interesting conversation and feedback, as well as even more thought on my end.   I never regret thinking and questioning deeply. I hope that when I ruffle feathers – mine included – the movement created is ultimately a good thing.

It seems there are a few concurrent issues here:

• Green versus natural (e.g., don’t use essential oils distilled from endangered or threatened species; please see Cropwatch for more information)
  
• Safe usage of essential oils on the skin – independent of any trade organization’s mandates
  
• Regulation and recommendations and the politics therein
• The negative perception of fragrance oils by proponents of natural products (I share this perception!)
  

I speak sometimes about architecture because I live with a LEED-certified (green) architect, and I am fortunate to know other professionals in the industry as well.  I’m no expert in that field, but I hear discussion of a green concept called E-cubed:  Economy, ethics, and environment.   The dilemma is how to make balanced choices which satisfy all three.  I think most of the issues above fit into these categories.

And these categories are endless quagmires.  Is it more ethical to pay workers a low wage to harvest for essential oil distillation, is it more ethical to forbid clearing land (and risking deforestation) for a plantation, or is it more ethical to use a mindfully-created synthetic to satisfy our craving for, say, a sandalwood scent (sandalwood is endangered)?  Further, which is worse for our skin:  Too much cinnamon essential oil, which can lead to acute cross-sensitization and allergy (many aromatherapists would recommend not using it at all in a leave-on product such as a lotion), or a synthetic fragrance which is purported to carry a carcinogenic risk?  OK, what about phthalate-free fragrances, which have eliminated the carcinogen?  Perhaps you see how fuzzy this can get.

I have always been dead-set against synthetic fragrance.  I still am.  But as I learn more, I am coming to understand that they are not all created equally.  I also used to be against fragrance that is natural in source only (example:  you can obtain an almond-like scent by isolating and altering the naturally-occurring aromachemical cinnamaldehyde, which is present in cinnamon bark essential oil). So you arrive at a new class of fragrances.  Are they natural?

Bergamot essential oil, altered to be free of a chemical called bergaptene, is used by aromatherapists as a skin-safe product, allaying risk of photosensitization.  Now, IFRA ruffles a LOT of feathers, and some essential oil producers feel they have gone too far with their attempts at regulation.  Still, I have also learned that some essential oils which are banned by IFRA can be made skin-safe through a similar fractionation process, harvesting out the risky aromachemicals.   Are these still natural?

It is also true that some essential oils are not pure, especially when purchased in bulk.  So are they really natural?

There are indeed very harmful fragrance oils.  Please make sure, when you purchase products that are not naturally scented, you select phthalate-free fragrance.  If the package doesn’t say, ASK.  Phthalates are petroleum derivatives that are not good for our environment or our bodies (it is a reported carcinogen).  Even portions of these fragrance oils are created from naturally-occurring aromachemicals at times.   I would never use these, but you know what I’m going to ask…

I’m not a chemist, and I have thus far solely used essential oils in Sarva’s products.  I am still in the learning phase about these issues as they apply to fragrance–creating new materials that are natural in source–and I’m also currently wondering whether they can help us get around some the troubles as viewed from an E-cubed perspective:  (a) safe skin usage;  (b) environmental depletion; and (c) economic impact for those who harvest and distill plant matter.

In short: Are we seeing the evolution of a product made from natural aromachemicals, a new class of fragrances that addresses all of these issues?  I believe we are.

I don’t have the answers.  I still believe in nature; I still believe in essential oils.  When it comes down to it, I’m talking about 3-4% of a product formulation.  But that 3-4% carries a lot of weight in my book.    And it seems to me that we as humans are learning how to work in harmony with nature.  I think we should give this concept a chance.  And that is where I will be focusing my research.

Thanks so much for exploring this topic with me.

Holden Arboretum, Ohio. © Michelle Gilbert.

Hello everyone!  As I mentioned in my last post, there are a few changes in the works here at Sarva.   I’m going to take a few minutes and fill you in.  This is a long post, so please bear with me.  There is very important information here for anyone who is a proponent of natural products, and at the very end I want your direct feedback!

If you shop regularly, you’ve noticed that a great many soaps are sold out.  We had a wildly successful holiday 2009 season, and many varieties were completely sold out.  Thank you!   We’re currently restocking many of those varieties, some with changes, and we’re introducing some new varieties.

Rustic series soaps will share a new base formula, free of palm kernel oil.  Palm and palm kernel oil harvesting is believed to contribute to tropical deforestation and displacement of orangutans from their natural habitat.  Sarva has “adopted” and directly pays for the rehabilitation of one such orangutan, Kesi.  I continue to investigate this issue because, of course, some people do disagree.

Holiday soaps will be retired until next year, and a few other soaps are retiring:  Cinnamon Sunshine, Rosamaya, Satori, and possibly more.   For some, it is simply time to move on.  For others, there is something far larger happening in the world of fragrance (natural and synthetic), and it is something that you as a consumer should know about:  Regulation.

The International Fragrance Association (IFRA) is an organization that sets forth guidelines for safe usage of natural and synthetic fragrance materials.  They evaluate the environmental as well as the personal (skin safety) impact of these materials.  Their usage recommendations for natural fragrance (including essential oils) has become more and more strict.  What these data mean is that there are essential oils that I should no longer use to make soap for you.

While IFRA’s regulations are indeed research-based, there are many in the natural perfume industry who feel that they are entirely too harsh, and these people are actively protesting.  I remain carefully informed on this matter, and I am one of few soapmakers who has formal aromatherapy training.  I have my own opinions about this (I agree with many of them, and many I do not), but the fact remains that, whether I like it and whether I agree or not, I should not use the materials they are banning.

And in 2010, even more strict regulations are coming, further restricting what I can offer you.  And it will continue to become more limiting.  I expect to lose at least 25% of my product line this year as a result.

In an interview with my good friend Robert Stockham, I discussed the dilemma of which is truly more sustainable and environmentally friendly:  Using essential oils which can deplete our natural resources (and some of which, no matter what anyone tells you, are simply not skin-safe), or using synthetic fragrance oils which have the potential to affect our groundwater, soil, etc.  I am also acutely aware of the sensitivities some people have to fragrance oils.  Keep a secret?  I share these sensitivities myself.  I know how you feel.

I want to be completely clear:  I am a strong proponent of all things natural.  You might not find a stronger proponent!

There are already endangered natural fragrance materials:  Sandalwood is one, rosewood is but another.  (I use rosewood leaf in my formulations, which is a somewhat more sustainable alternative).   This is a very real concern.

So, you see, we have to use our resources intelligently.  Being a proponent of all things natural might involve a paradigm shift:  One may need to support decisions that sustain our environment, not deplete it.

I’ve meditated on this for several months, wondering if my potential solution is akin to selling out.  But I believe the intelligent choice is to look at true sustainability, expanding one’s mind beyond the “natural is always best” stance.  I see a middle way arising.  There is a growing movement around sustainable cosmetics, and I will continue to educate myself and you.  Consider: Sustainable architecture (ask any LEED-certified professional) is rarely restricted to solely natural materials; it is recognized that this too would deplete our resources (understanding, of course, we aren’t smearing building adhesives on our skin!).  We learn more every day about how to create safe and sustainable materials.  My opinion is that we need a LEED-like process for our industry.

So I have a proposal for you, and here’s where I want your feedback! I am considering introducing a limited range of what I’ll call “Nearly Naturals”.

• I will carefully choose fragrances which are superior quality, phthalate-free (phthalates are a petroleum-based additive in some fragrances) and as sustainable as possible, and appropriate to the spirit of Sarva. Not all fragrance oils are created equal!  Some are derivatives of natural substances.
• All will be clearly marked on packaging and on the web site.
• The Nearly Naturals soaps will be 95-97% natural, whereas our present soaps are 100% natural.
• I may more closely investigate the use of oxides to pigment some of these soaps.
• The main focus of Sarva will always be the 100% natural products you have come to love… the Nearly Naturals are simply a supplement.  You can then choose for yourself which side of the environmental fence you wish to stand on, and you can shop based on your principles, not mine.

Your feedback is the sole determining factor. Please share with me how you feel about this matter in the comments below. I want to create soaps that you love to use and feel good about using, and I want to feel good about making them.

Edit: To clarify, I am NOT ceasing production of essential oil soaps, nor is my hand being forced to do so.  They will always comprise the bulk of the product line, if not the whole product line.  I am asking if you do – or don’t – want increased choice in the form of any available sustainable fragrance oils.  As time passes and we learn more about natural as well as synthetic fragrance (or a hybrid thereof), we learn more about the impact our use of them has on our bodies and the environment.  And our available choices shift.  What do YOU want?

Thank you!