Less is More in ecostore Products
There are more than 80,000 chemicals in commercial use today and the problem is there is still so much we don’t know about how they affect our health. For example, the dangers of pre or post natal exposure to complex mixtures of chemicals has never been studied. Any research that has been done in this area has tended to focus on one toxin at a time, yet no one is ever exposed to just one toxin at a time and the toxicity of two toxins together is not just additive - combining one toxin with another may just potentiate the toxicity. (1)
Any potentially harmful effects of chemicals in the products we use is then further complicated by things like, how the product is used (whether it’s a soap you apply to your skin and rinse off or a moisturising product you leave on) and by how much of the chemical is used in the formulation.
That’s why, when it comes to making ecostore products, we not only live by the precautionary principle - if theres any doubt about the safety of an ingredient, we leave it out and find a safer one; we also live by the mantra “less is more”. Our goal is to use the least number of ingredients in the lowest possible concentrations without compromising performance.
Our plant-based shampoo is a good example of this. We recently compared the ingredients in our shampoo (for normal hair) to one of the most popular supermarket brands, using the Environmental Working Group’s Skin Deep Cosmetic Ingredients Database. The scores below were obtained by scoring individual ingredients and tallying the results. Basically the lower the score, the safer the product.
ecostore Normal Shampoo has just 9 ingredients with an overall safety ranking of 5 while the other supermarket brand had 19 ingredients and an overall safety ranking of 32.
So the next time you’re out shopping and trying to decide between two similar products, take a look at the list of ingredients and see how many there are. Have they all been listed and if so, are they all really necessary?
(1) Neurobehavioral Effects of Developmental Toxicity. Philippe Grandjean and Philip Landrigan http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laneur/article/PIIS1474-4422(13)70278-3/abstract