DMDM Hydantoin. Is it safe?

[MoonRabbit]

I've been seeing this ingredient in many products. Some states made it illegal to use in children hair and skin care and it's fully illegal to use in some countries. I know the FDA said it's safe in small amounts, but they say a lot of things. If we have the ability to use other preservatives to keep our products sanitary, why use a toxic chemical. I first noticed it in OGX, and again in Tio Nacho and Suave daily clarifying. I still use Suave once a month but I feel real sketchy about it every time. How do you feel about donor formaldehyde releasers in your shampoo? Is this an ingredient you try to avoid, should everyone try to avoid it? Are there any other chemicals in our products we should be educated about?

[Anje]

I feel that if you're not going to accept a water-based product having a short shelf life and probably needing to be refrigerated or frozen, you need to either use a product that doesn't have much water in it (shampoo bars, for example) or accept that your product will have to have preservatives in it that are toxic to microbes. Or else you'll need many sterilized packages that must be used in short order after opening, which results in large amounts of packaging waste. Formaldehyde in low concentrations isn't particularly bad for most humans (exceptions obviously for people with bad reactions to it, such as allergies) and I consider it an acceptable trade-off.

Qualification: I'm a microbiologist specialized in food safety.

ETA: I also think it's important to state that I believe scientists, not lawmakers, should be responsible for determining safety.

[lapushka]

I have no idea about EU regulations on this ingredient... I think I have seen it, though. I have to admit, I like my preservatives. ;) I like to keep my products around for a long time, so... I recently used up 2 bottles of a shampoo (Nivea) that was 10+ years old. And I am now using up my oldest conditioners, which are up there in age as well. They're still good and I hate waste. Consistency was still fine, smell was okay, products hadn't separated. Okidoki. Fine with me. ;) :)

I do have a few Shea Moisture products (stylers), and I am making sure I use those up first, before my other leave-ins & stylers with stronger preservatives.

[ravenreed]

I am also a big fan of preservatives keeping my products safe to use. Having mixed up a few homemade potions to put on my hair over the years, it is discouraging how quickly they go bad. There is a saying that the dose makes the poison. I would have to know a lot more about safety concerns in the amounts present in the ingredients.

[MoonRabbit]

I understand that preservatives are important in keeping products from spoiling and potentially causing an infection, which is very important. I'm not against them, just some that I've read about that have been linked to bad reactions and are causing more issues to the point they are discontinuing their use in my many places. My main concern is that if we have other options then why use this particular one when it's not very popular anymore. (I think it was a big ingredient in the 80's beauty industry). Not every non-organic product has dmdm H, others have another type preservative. But maybe they could be bad and I'm only introduced to what the media says...anything is possible. But as for me I find it hard to trust either scientists or lawmakers in situations like this, I mean there was a time when asbestos was used in almost everything. I guess every generation has to take one for the team.

[patchoulilove]

I share your concerns. I'll be watching this thread with interest.
:blossom:
patchoulilove

[Tosca]

MoonRabbit, where are you located? I'm in Australia, and have never seen this preservative used before.

I just looked up the msds for this product, and the only danger it mentions not related to working with it undiluted, is possible skin sensitisation, which can happen with just about any product, including linalool/limonene, soap or even peanuts.

[lapushka]

I understand that preservatives are important in keeping products from spoiling and potentially causing an infection, which is very important. I'm not against them, just some that I've read about that have been linked to bad reactions and are causing more issues to the point they are discontinuing their use in my many places. My main concern is that if we have other options then why use this particular one when it's not very popular anymore. (I think it was a big ingredient in the 80's beauty industry). Not every non-organic product has dmdm H, others have another type preservative. But maybe they could be bad and I'm only introduced to what the media says...anything is possible. But as for me I find it hard to trust either scientists or lawmakers in situations like this, I mean there was a time when asbestos was used in almost everything. I guess every generation has to take one for the team.

Once you start reading up on preservatives, virtually *any* are "bad". That's the problem. What are we supposed to put in products? Right? I mean what about parabens, for instance? Have you seen the controversy on that one yet?

[samanthaa]

It has a moderate-high hazard rating on this website (https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/ingredient/702196/DMDM_HYDANTOIN_(FORMALDEHYDE_RELEASER)/) (which is typically the one I use to check all ingredients); I'd avoid it personally.

[Anje]

Once you start reading up on preservatives, virtually *any* are "bad". That's the problem. What are we supposed to put in products? Right? I mean what about parabens, for instance? Have you seen the controversy on that one yet?
Seriously, if you don't want things to grow in your products, you kinda gotta put something that's a little toxic in them. Obviously, you want to use something that's more effective against spoilage organisms than against humans, and you don't want to promote antibiotic resistance or use something that will bioaccumulate or not break down in the environment. But ruling out things just because they are irritating at 100% concentrations or that damage cells in vitro (when that's what they're SUPPOSED to do) is counterproductive. Unless you would rather wash with soap, water, vinegar, eggs, and not much else.


It has a moderate-high hazard rating on this website (https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/ingredient/702196/DMDM_HYDANTOIN_(FORMALDEHYDE_RELEASER)/) (which is typically the one I use to check all ingredients); I'd avoid it personally.
Seems their main concern is that people can be allergic to it. Certainly it's wise to avoid things you personally are allergic to.

[Shorty89]

I'd never heard about this product/controversy until this thraed. I think what Anje says is valid. It's a conundrum for sure, but unless you go the shampoo bar route, I'm not sure if it can be solved.

[ravenreed]

Practically everything has a high hazard rating on that website. I do not consider them a reliable source for safety info.

Because the database only highlights the hazard of the ingredient, there is no possible way the consumer can know the actual risk involved in its presence in a cosmetic product... It may even be the case that high exposure to a product classified by Skin Deep as zero is less safe than low exposure to a product classified as 10 on this database. Therefore, the database offers no useful information on the safety of cosmetic products, and is misleading to consumers.
(http://personalcaretruth.com/2010/05/skin-deep-scratching-below-the-surface/)

For example, from that page on EWG:

"About DMDM HYDANTOIN (FORMALDEHYDE RELEASER): DMDM hydantoin is an antimicrobial formaldehyde releaser preservative. People exposed to such formaldehyde-releasing ingredients may develop a formaldehyde allergy or an allergy to the ingredient itself and its decomposition products. In the U.S., approximately 20% of cosmetics and personal care products contain a formaldehyde-releaser and the frequency of contact allergy to these ingredients is much higher among Americans compared to studies in Europe."

A simple search brought up this study (http://www.academia.edu/27640657/Formaldehyde-releasers_in_cosmetics_in_the_USA_and_in_Europe) says that skin care products they tested from Europe (35 out of 100 samples in Sweden) contained about the same rate of formaldehyde-releasers as American skin care products and they weren't sure what was causing the increased rate of sensitivity in Americans. Now I don't know what studies they referenced, or how old the data is, and that is exactly the problem with EWG, IMO.







It has a moderate-high hazard rating on this website (https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/ingredient/702196/DMDM_HYDANTOIN_(FORMALDEHYDE_RELEASER)/) (which is typically the one I use to check all ingredients); I'd avoid it personally.

[MoonRabbit]

MoonRabbit, where are you located? I'm in Australia, and have never seen this preservative used before.

I just looked up the msds for this product, and the only danger it mentions not related to working with it undiluted, is possible skin sensitisation, which can happen with just about any product, including linalool/limonene, soap or even peanuts.

I'm in the states

[MoonRabbit]

I feel that if you're not going to accept a water-based product having a short shelf life and probably needing to be refrigerated or frozen, you need to either use a product that doesn't have much water in it (shampoo bars, for example) or accept that your product will have to have preservatives in it that are toxic to microbes. Or else you'll need many sterilized packages that must be used in short order after opening, which results in large amounts of packaging waste. Formaldehyde in low concentrations isn't particularly bad for most humans (exceptions obviously for people with bad reactions to it, such as allergies) and I consider it an acceptable trade-off.

Qualification: I'm a microbiologist specialized in food safety.

ETA: I also think it's important to state that I believe scientists, not lawmakers, should be responsible for determining safety.

Thanks for the information, It's exactly what I was looking for.


Once you start reading up on preservatives, virtually *any* are "bad". That's the problem. What are we supposed to put in products? Right? I mean what about parabens, for instance? Have you seen the controversy on that one yet?

Yes I have, It seems like everything is getting bad reputations these days, I can't go a day without reading a new article that tries to say something is linked to cancer (like non organic apples). I was just curious because I know some hair smoothing treatments such as the Brazilian Blowout contains a form of formaldehyde and that blew up in the news. I was just taken back that in was in a daily shampoo but I'm sure it has it's reasons like explained above. I'll still be using my products, why waste it if I'm not having a bad reaction.

[Anje]

Yes I have, It seems like everything is getting bad reputations these days, I can't go a day without reading a new article that tries to say something is linked to cancer (like non organic apples). I was just curious because I know some hair smoothing treatments such as the Brazilian Blowout contains a form of formaldehyde and that blew up in the news. I was just taken back that in was in a daily shampoo but I'm sure it has it's reasons like explained above. I'll still be using my products, why waste it if I'm not having a bad reaction.
As I understand it, the Brazilian Blowout has a much higher concentration of formaldehyde. It's being used for a different purpose there, because it can denature the bonds in keratin to cause the hair to take on a different shape, or to bond to whatever is applied. That requires a much larger amount than when it's simply acting as a preservative. Probably not enough to be a problem for a consumer who isn't sensitive, but absolutely enough that it could be a problem for a stylist who is getting repeated and perhaps daily exposure to it.

[lapushka]

Yes, like Anje pointed out, it is about the *amount* that is in the product, and that is different for each & every formulation out there. If they don't hurry to pull things off of the market, I'm not worried about it, and I'm not gonna worry. I do find it odd that in the US, it can vary State to State! Aren't these rules more generalized? :hmm:

[MoonRabbit]

Yes, like Anje pointed out, it is about the *amount* that is in the product, and that is different for each & every formulation out there. If they don't hurry to pull things off of the market, I'm not worried about it, and I'm not gonna worry. I do find it odd that in the US, it can vary State to State! Aren't these rules more generalized? :hmm:

The States are more like 'separate' little countries. All of them have different laws and regulations.

[Janja]

My hair started to falling out in very big amounts. And i didn't know why. My hair was shiny, thick, healthy, straight, easy to comb, easy to manage, and i loved that shampoo. And i still love it, but, he has this ingredient. My granny uses it, and she is also thrilled, but, she has the same problem that started when she started using the same shampoo (it's local social shampoo in my country). So, when I changed it, after one month, i saw some progress, new little hair around mu hair line, and on the top of my head. And, there is so little amount of hair that falls out when i wash it, and my hair doesn't fall off and stay on my arms and back on my clothes. That was so frustrating for me, every day on my floor there was big amount of my hair, on my clothes also, on my pillow... I will buy other shampoo for my granny, and then, i will see is there some changes with her hair. Just to be sure.

[akurah]

But as for me I find it hard to trust either scientists or lawmakers in situations like this, I mean there was a time when asbestos was used in almost everything. I guess every generation has to take one for the team.

Science is, in the long game, self correcting. New data replaces old. New techniques. More studies. etc.

If I had to pick a group to trust? Scientists far and away. Lawmakers deliberately and explicitly ignore science in too many cases.

ETA:

Yes, like Anje pointed out, it is about the *amount* that is in the product, and that is different for each & every formulation out there. If they don't hurry to pull things off of the market, I'm not worried about it, and I'm not gonna worry. I do find it odd that in the US, it can vary State to State! Aren't these rules more generalized? :hmm:

and


The States are more like 'separate' little countries. All of them have different laws and regulations.

This answer is not as accurate as it would be nice for it to be. The Federal government was originally designed to mediate interstate commerce. It's a whole lot bigger and messier than that now. The states aren't really comparable to little countries anymore, federal overreach has seen to that. That said, there's still some pretty marked differences between the states:
California labels EVERYTHING (and every building) as "can cause cancer".
California requires recycling and composting more so than most other states
Gas here is about $3 give or take some change.
California has state income tax

To compare to Tennessee, for example
TN has no state income tax.
Gas in TN is about $2, give or take some change.
They don't recycle or compost in TN

[lapushka]

This answer is not as accurate as it would be nice for it to be. The Federal government was originally designed to mediate interstate commerce. It's a whole lot bigger and messier than that now. The states aren't really comparable to little countries anymore, federal overreach has seen to that. That said, there's still some pretty marked differences between the states:
California labels EVERYTHING (and every building) as "can cause cancer".
California requires recycling and composting more so than most other states
Gas here is about $3 give or take some change.
California has state income tax

To compare to Tennessee, for example
TN has no state income tax.
Gas in TN is about $2, give or take some change.
They don't recycle or compost in TN

It is so strange to me how this can vary so much. But then we have a dual-language country with 3 governments (Federal, Flemish & Walloon, and then the German community has their own rules and regulations as well). So yeah. I get how things can be different so much with you guys as the US is *vastly* bigger than little old Belgium is (and it's often not even regulated municipality to municipality here, recycling for instance).

They have decided now that starting 2019, there is going to be one bag to put all plastics in instead of 2 different ones here, 3 different ones somewhere else, etc. etc.

I get it! :)