Conservation
The mention “without parabenes” is often used with advertizing objectives. The parabenes are under fires of the slope and, with them, a particular aspect of the cosmetic products: conservation. In the conventional cosmetic products, the parabenes are the most used conservatives. Are they also most problematic? Which modes of conservation are the goods, which are doubtful for health?

In my books “the truth on the cosmetics” and “the truth on the natural cosmetics”, I allot the “passable” note to parabenes. A series of other conservatives received worse appreciations: “insufficient” and “disadvised”. These differences show that there are conservatives who are definitely more problematic than parabenes. And there is the opposite: modes of conservation better than those which use parabenes. As my product analyzes show it, the pallet of appreciations allotted to the conservatives goes from best “very well” to the least good “disadvised”.

“Without parabenes”: a very misleading advertizing argument sometimes for the consumer
The mention “without parabenes” can induce the consumer in error in a rather incongruous way. Thus, an Australian manufacturer makes it the publicity of a product packed in a package evoking nature and provided with the indication “Without parabenes nor sulfates”. But if this product does not contain indeed parabenes, it contains an organohalogen compound like conservative, Methyldibromo Glutaronitrile. This one is at the head list of the substances allergisantes and I gave him the bad mark: “disadvised”. To give up parabenes and to use in the place of the conservatives like Methyldibromo Glutaronitrile or Methylchloroisothiazolinone, it is to replace the devil by Belzébuth. Moreover, Methylchloroisothiazolinone is also an organohalogen compound to which I allotted the bad mark, and which has escaped little with a prohibition.

Conservation: a challenge, solved very different manners Each cosmetic product must be microbiologiquement stable. I.e. that for opening of the container, it is not necessary that there is proliferation of too many micro-organisms like bacteria, yeasts or moulds. These micro-organisms cannot live without water, but the majority of the cosmetics contain water. Thus it is necessary to choose a mode of conservation. By employing the great ways of chemistry, it is easy to ensure the conservation of a product. With one of the first conservatives employed, the formaldehyde, all went to wonder. Even with small amount, it is already extremely effective. But also extremely dangerous as it now is known. Meanwhile, it was classified in the category of the carcinogenic substances. As any qualified person in charge of a department of research and development knows it, there do not exist nonproblematic conservatives. The conservatives must destroy the micro-organisms. They fulfill their function thus. But each product which destroys the micro-organisms can prove to be aggressive for the skin and even dangerous for health, if it is not carefully proportioned and if it were not tested as for the undesirable side effects.

A specific know-how: the concept of conservation of the manufacturers of natural cosmetics and bio
For the pioneers of the natural cosmetics and bio, the question of the conservation was hardest of the challenges of years 60/70. A work of development of several years and much of experiment were necessary to arrive at good performances, and to be able to design even products without conservatives of synthesis.
What it is necessary to do to guarantee the microbiological stability of a product depends on a series of factors: element and its production, product formulation third - not of least - type of conditioning. To ensure the conservation without conservatives of synthesis requires a whole set of measures. It is with that worked during many years the companies of natural cosmetics and bio. Their concept is the following: to make so that less possible micro-organisms cannot develop during the production or of conditioning, or to penetrate in the product at the time of the use. The better one succeeds there, the less one needs conservatives and the means of conservation remaining in spite of very necessary could be softer.

Insufficient and disadvised: Conservatives with the potential of the highest risk
An appendix with the European directive on the Cosmetics indicates which conservatives are authorized. To put all in the same bag would be a negligence, because they are distinguished to a significant degree.
The manner of preserving a product and the conservatives used belong to the only responsibility of the manufacturer. It as falls on to him to guarantee as no undesirable conservative will be introduced into the product by raw materials having already been subjected to a preceding mode of conservation.
The manufacturers have the choice. In the conventional cosmetics, one generally uses a mixture of conservatives of synthesis.
In fact the organohalogen compounds have the highest potential of dangerosity.
The halogenous substances have a very important allergenic potential, they are reactive and can, while penetrating in fabrics, to break up, set and cause damage.
•   As nobody can know exactly what occurs on the skin from the user, the highly reactive matters represent a particular risk. In interaction with other reactive substances, they can start an unforeseeable reaction. These problems, called “cocktail effect”, still only are studied very little.  

Potential of dangerosity of the formaldehyde formaldehyde and liberators
The formaldehyde liberators as the DMDM Hydantoin are used to replace formaldehydes. Under certain conditions (a contact prolonged with water for example), they release from formaldehydes.
In June 2004, the International Research Center on Cancer (CIRC) announced that 26 scientists of 10 countries had concluded that the formaldehydes were carcinogenic for the man. In June 2006, the German Federal Institute of the Evaluation of the risks (Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung) informed: “Carcinogenic Effect of formaldehyde inhaled sufficiently proven”.  So the use of formaldehyde in the aerosols was prohibited. Besides that, the formaldehyde is authorized in the oral products (up to 0,10 %, either 1000 ppm) and in other cosmetic products (up to 20 %, or 2000 ppm).
For industry, the formaldehyde remains irreplaceable in the hardeners of conventional nails. There does not exist any substitute product having the same properties.
The German inter-profession concerned, the IKW (Industrieverband Körperpflege und Waschmittel) is anxious and prepares its members with a possible change of classification of formaldehyde in the German jurisdiction of the chemicals. In June 2006, the federation noted: “If the formaldehyde were classified carcinogenic of cat. 1 or cat. 2 in the jurisdiction on the chemicals, its use in the cosmetics will be formally prohibited. Conferences showed that the authorities were of agreement to make a difference between formaldehydes and the liberators of formaldehydes, i.e. that the formaldehyde liberators probably would not be directly touched by the regulation on formaldehydes.”

Up to what point are the formaldehyde liberators problematic?
As the examples below show it, the formaldehyde liberators are employed like conservatives in all kinds of cosmetic products. Does one have to or not treat them like pure formaldehydes? The experts are not agreement on this point.
The formaldehyde release is a process which one also meets in nature. In the case of stored fish for example, the formaldehyde comes from an enzymatic release starting from triméthylaminoxyde present in the flesh of fish. In certain vegetables like tomatos, the cabbage flower, the onions green or the spinaches, one find 3 to 60 ppm formaldehyde. One also finds some in a natural state in the fruits (grapes, apples, pears) or fish. Which conclusions does one have to draw some? There exist many data concerning the dangers of formaldehyde. The assertions concerning the harmlessness of released formaldehyde rest largely on deductions and assumptions.
No consumer who buys a product preserved with formaldehyde liberators knows how much formaldehyde this one contains. All the formaldehyde liberators do not release the same quantities, this is very variable. The cigarette smoke for example releases 57 to 115 formaldehyde ppm. The protection of the nonsmokers is precisely used so that the others do not breathe this smoke. And the cigarette packs carry a warning on the danger which they represent for health.  In the oral products, in comparison (which can easily be swallowed), the formaldehyde is authorized there up to 1000 ppm, in other cosmetic products up to 2000 ppm.
Taking into account the state of knowledge on pure formaldehyde, an comprehensive assessment of the style “the formaldehyde liberators are inoffensive” is not, in my opinion, justifiable. Is amount contained in product cosmetic really tiny (about that which one finds in certain food) or is it higher? As the consumer cannot know to which quantity of formaldehyde it will be confronted, I chose to continue to allot the ranking “insufficient” to the formaldehyde liberators.

Organohalogen compounds and formaldehyde liberators:

	Iodopropynyl Buthylcarbamate
	Chloroxylenol
	Methylchloroisothiazolinone
	Methyldibromo Glutaronitrile
	Diazolidinyl Urea
	Chlorphenesin
	Methylisothiazolinone
	Imidazolidinyl Urea
	DMDM Hydantoin
	MDM Hydantoin

Examples of mode of conservation of conventional products, care of the face
The conservation of a cosmetic product is not solely ensured by only one conservative but by a mixture. The organohalogen compounds and the formaldehyde liberators, in red here, belong still and always to the standard repertory of the conservatives, as the following examples show it.

L'Oreal: RevitaLift Doubles Face lift
	Methylparaben
	Diazolidinyl Urea
	Butylparaben
	Chlorphenesin
Vichy: Myokine
	Methylparaben
	Iodopropynyl Buthylcarbamate
	Butylparaben
Garnier: UltraLift
	Chlorphenesin
	Imidazolidinyl Urea
	Methylparaben
	Phenoxyethanol
	Propylparaben
Avene: Hydrating Cream-coloured Hydrance
	Chlorphenesin
	Phenoxyethanol
Baby mixed: Milk of very soft toilet
	Imidazolidinyl Urea
	Methylparaben
	Propylparaben

Parabenes
In my books, I always took the party to say that in case of doubt, the consumer was to choose safety, and I did not change an opinion. When in 2004, a study of British researchers did the one and left think that there could be a bond between parabenes employed in deodorants and breast cancer, it was necessary to check this assertion up to what point was scientifically proven.
On the basis of the principle that “in the doubt, it is the safety which precedes”, I had allotted to parabenes note 4 (passable). Previously, they had note 3 (satisfactory). Why go down from a notch? Because there was a doubt about the carcinogenic effect. It was necessary to weigh the importance of these doubts. According to my evaluation, the UK trial was not able to justify the suspicions concerning the carcinogenic effect. This is why I either did not equip parabenes with note 5 or 6. But the doubts not being dissipated, I maintained note 4.
This “passable” note should not however make forget that certain conservatives employed have a potential of dangerosity raised and even proven more. It is the case for example substances which denature proteins.
However, in the debate public, the parabenes became synonymous with problematic and potentially dangerous cosmetic substances for health. I deplore that one arrived from there there and I insist with vehemence for a more moderate glance. Only a moderate approach makes it possible to distinguish what is problematic of what is it less.

No the bond between parabenes and breast cancer From 2004 to 2006, the SCCP (committee of scientific advisers of the European commission/Scientific Committee one To consume products) actively leant on parabenes. What is it occurred of the doubts about parabenes?  The principal result indicates that the carcinogenic effect of parabenes could not be proven. The authors of the UK trial (Darbre and Harvey) distanciés conclusion according to which there would be a relation between parabenes and breast cancer. They clearly indicated that their study did not make it possible to establish such a bond. Other studies, such as for example, that of the Danish institute of food and veterinary research (Danish Institute off Food and Veterinary Research) also concluded that there was no correlation between parabenes and breast cancer. The German institute of evaluation of the risks, arrived, him also, with the same conclusion. The parabenes can start allergies but compared to other substances, the parabenes play a minor part in the frequency of release of allergies.

The mills of the SCCP turn slowly
When the SCCP get going, that can last of the years, even of the decades, before controls are not finished. However, methylparabene ethylparabene, a decision was made in 2005: a modification of the regulation currently in force is not justified.
With regard to the propyl-, the isopropyl-, the butyl- and the isobutylparabene, the SCCP required to gather additional data. The reason is the presupposition which industry would lay out of data that it would not have presented up to now. Consequently, it was decided into 2006 that the data presented up to now (for example two studies basing itself on experiments on the animals) presented too many gaps so that one can grant a scientific value to them. 
Is there a problem with the propyl-, the isopropyl-, the butyl- and isobutylparabene? Y-a-t' it a scientific problem of protocol of studies and their realization?  About what is it at the bottom? It is not a question to confirm or cancel concrete discoveries concerning a hypothetical danger of parabenes since such results do not exist.
The question that the SCCP is posed is: does the currently authorized maximum concentration have to be maintained or not? To make this decision is a difficult process. The fact that takes much time does not make it possible therefore to draw from great conclusions.
One of the main issues for the evaluation of the studies is the following: there does not exist result of only one block. The studies presented come from different laboratories and each study is not easily comparable with another. Research is made according to various methods, starting from other starting interrogations, on different animals, with different proportionings, and they relate once on such parabene, once to such other etc Consequently, the data collected can generally be interpreted very different manners. Certain studies raise more questions than they do not bring answers. It is the case for example when their results contradict those of other studies. At all events, with regard to quoted parabenes, there does not exist indication concerning of possible damage for health due to the chemical principles (such as for example the denaturation of proteins).

Paracelsus remains the guiding line
It is confirmed regularly that, like had said it celebrates it naturopathe/Paracelsus healer: „all is question of proportioning”. This is valid for all that we find delicious and good for health. Concerning the vitamins for example. If we eat in a balanced way, we absorb a healthy quantity of vitamin. If we call upon the food complements, which can be surdosés, that can become very dangerous. Especially for the vitamins which are stored in greases of the body (like the vitamin A). A permanent overdose is likely to start grave diseases such as for example problems of liver, and can increase the cancer risks. Even with regard to the vitamins, there thus exist consequent studies and others are in hand to be able to determine which are the amounts not to be exceeded.
To classify parabenes in the zone between “good” and “bad” does not mean however that the parabenes are the best mode of conservation. There exist alternatives. And of many certified natural cosmetic products do not contain even any conservative of synthesis.
One finds especially parabenes as conservatives in the marks wishing to give a look vegetable, natural, a “green” conscience, but which are not certified natural products bios. In all case of figure, as long as one threw a glance on the components of the product which interests us, one cannot never know if a mark really gives up in a consequent way the potentially dangerous conservatives.

My positions on the conservation
As the products which follow show it, inside even group of products (like here the products of shower and the shampoos), the modes of conservation vary considerably. The mixtures of conservatives are extremely different from one product to another. That comes between-others owing to the fact that the manufacturers use their usual “receipt”. If one wanted to try hard of it, one could modify it. But to change mode of conservation request of energy, has a cost and is accompanied by problems.
Universalization plays a central role here. If one wants to market products in all the countries of the world, it is necessary to take account of the regulations for cosmetics of the various countries, also as regards conservation. To be able to sell in the whole world, a common denominator should be found. When a product is developed, the concern is generally to know if one will be able to sell it with the international scales, and not to choose a mode of conservation the softest possible.

The pallet of appreciations goes from very bad „” to „very well”

Garnier: Neutralia freezing shower DMDM Hydantoin Chlorhexidine Digluconate Phenoxyethanol Methylparaben Appreciation on the conservation The conservation is ensured by the component DMDM Hydantoin (which can release from formaldehyde), by the organohalogen compound Chlorhexidine Digluconate, like by the phénoxyéthanol and methylparabene. The bad appreciation is justified by the presence of the organohalogen compound and the formaldehyde liberator.	Yves Rocher:  Phytum shampoo Methylchloroisothiazolinone Methylisothiazolinone Appreciation on the conservation Preserved using „mastodons”: an organohalogen compound, Methylchloroisothiazolinone, and Methylisothiazolinone which can release from formaldehyde.
Dessange: Shampoo ravivor of color Methylparaben sodium DMDM Hydantoin Phenoxyethanol Ethylparaben Propylparaben Isopropylparaben Methylparaben Butylparaben Appreciation on the conservation Preserved using DMDM Hydantoin which can release from formaldehyde. The phénoxyéthanol and six parabenes are added to it.	Garnier: Fructis protection color Methylparaben sodium DMDM Hydantoin Methylparaben Butylparaben Appreciation on the conservation Preserved using the component DMDM Hydantoin which can release from formaldehyde, and of three parabenes.
Sisley: Water of Countryside Phytogel Shower and Bain Benzoic Acid Phenoxyethanol Methylparaben Butylparaben Ethylparaben Propylparaben Appreciation on the conservation Preserved using benzoic acid, of phénoxyéthanol and parabenes.	The Body Shop: Freezing shower Vanilla Phenoxyethanol Sodium Benzoate Methylparaben Butylparaben Ethylparaben Isobutylparaben Propylparaben Appreciation on the conservation Preserved using Sodium Benzoate, phénoxyéthanol and parabenes.
The Rock-Posay: Concentrated cream-coloured shower Cream concentrated shower Sorbate potassium Sodium Benzoate Methylparaben Appreciation on the conservation It is about a mode of rather soft conservation with potassium sorbate and sodium benzoate, also authorized in the food products. A parabene (methylparabene) is added to it.	Nivea: Milk of shower Lotus & Beauty Sodium Benzoate Sodium Salicylate Methylparaben Appreciation on the conservation A mode of rather soft conservation composed of benzoate of sodium, salicylate of sodium and a parabene (methylparabene).
Sanoflore: Freezing shower apricot and melissa Sorbate potassium Benzoic Acid Appreciation on the conservation Only soft components like the benzoic acid and the potassium sorbate.	Florame: Freezing shower with the biological essential oil of mint sheets Sodium Benzoate Sorbate potassium Appreciation on the conservation Mode of soft conservation with sodium benzoate and potassium sorbate (also authorized in the food products).
Health: Freezing shower Sun Wave This product is free from conservatives of synthesis. Appreciation on the conservation Probably with substances which fulfill several functions, like essential oils for example.	Occitane: Freezing shower with the essential oil of Lavender This product is free from conservatives of synthesis. Appreciation on the conservation Probably with substances which fulfill several functions like essential oils for example.

Conservation of the certified cosmetics bios With regard to the cosmetics bios or natural certified, a thing is certain: none of them is authorized to contain conservatives of the group of the problematic conservatives introduced above. •   The certification (German) of the BDIH also excludes parabenes. •   Ecocert/Cosmébio certification authorizes a low level of parabenes, but certification also excludes a mode from conservation by parabenes. The parabenes can at most be in the raw materials as a conservative. In the various schedules of conditions from certification the conservatives who can be used are clearly indicated. They are those “identical to natural products” like the benzoic acids, salicylic or sorbic. In fact, they are also conservatives of synthesis, but they are softest which the appendix of the réglementaton on the cosmetics contains. Which know-how a manufacturer of cosmetics as regards conservation has, depends on his experiment and a long work of development. •   For the natural cosmetics and bio, a coherent system of conservation relates to the whole of the manufacturing process: product formulation, while passing by the production, to arrive at adequate conditioning (tubes or sprays, for example). Thus containers which guarantee that less possible germs do not penetrate in the product at the time of the use.

 

“Without is conservatives of synthesis”, how that possible?
Even the certified cosmetics bios all are not preserved in the same way.
•   First case of figure: The product contains one of the conservatives authorized in by the schedules of conditions of cosmetics bio. Benzyl Alcohol, Sorbate Potassium or Benzyl Salicylate, for example. If one of the authorized conservatives is used, certification BDIH imposes that the mention `is added preserved with…' [name of the conservative]. For the certified products Ecocert/Cosmebio, this is not obligatory.
•   Second case of figure: none the conservatives, even those authorized, is employed. The product can thus be marked “without conservatives of synthesis”.
One often puts the question to know how the conservation can be assured without resorting to conservatives of synthesis. That is possible by a coherent synergy of all the fields concerned: design of the product, quality of the raw materials, manufacture, conditioning in adequate containers and under sterile conditions (for example by bringing purified air). If one gives up the whole of the conservatives of synthesis, the product is generally designed so that it contains components having preserving properties, like alcohol or essential oils.

A length in advance thanks to research and the experiment
The great success of the cosmetics bios attracts many manufacturers of cosmetics of planet, which would like to benefit from it. The range of manufacturers of natural cosmetics and bio goes from companies which are since decades on the market and have their own departments of research and from development, to marks resembling rather agencies of marketing, which make develop their products by others and themselves do not produce them.
A manufacturer wishing to put on the market a product range coherent, modern and complete, will not leave himself there without an excellent know-how as regards conservation. Many are those which fail in this field and do not obtain the certification of their products. Because if they is true that the raw material manufacturers of cosmetics on a world level often present innovations, an extreme vigilance is of rigor as regards conservatives.  The “substance miracle” making it possible to obtain a soft and sure conservation does not exist. Products presented like able to solve all the problems of conservation in a natural way, appeared problematic, even dangerous, during the thorough tests. To make to confidence with the dires raw material manufacturers can prove extremely risky, as the experiment already showed it.

This is why the serious companies developed a series of means to study and evaluate raw materials upstream. The decisive authority remains the experiment and the quality of the department of research and development. Even if many precautions were taken upstream, the new conservatives must be tested basic in roof before being used. They is when certain data challenge us that the experiment plays a big role. The need for dissipating all the doubts is essential then. If it is needed, one will set up chemical analyzes pushed to discover the true nature of the substance.