I would be thrilled if Greenworks would get rid of the SLS in their products. I love the effectiveness of the products, but I would really rather have less sudsing action and eliminate the SLS, and I know a lot of parents that feel the same way. Just something to look into! :)
Comment
I just looked up SLS:
Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS) is a surfactant that cuts grease and dirt, generates copious suds, and biodegrades quickly and completely. SLS is made by combining a sulfate group with lauryl alcohol from coconut oil, then attaching sodium. If improperly formulated, SLS can irritate skin.
What I found in some of the links posted...
The most damaging claim against SLS is that it is carcinogenic, because it supposedly creates nitrosamines. However, since it contains neither a nitrogen nor an amino group, this is chemically impossible.
Is this true?
Be the first to like this
|
Sign in to "Like"
I've always been warned against produsts that contain SLS by various natural and "green" sites, so I naturally assume that they know what they are talking about. Found on Care2.com: SLS is regulated as a pesticide(!). It isn't a carcinogen per se, but when combined with some of the other ingredients it is usually found with, it can be, as the COMBINATION creates the nitrosamines. Since it is also found in some shampoos for the same reason you describe, I wonder if I really need it?
Be the first to like this
|
Sign in to "Like"
Dear valgate -- Greg again!
There is an excellent summary on the issue on TreeHugger.com -- see http://www.treehugger.com/style/common-eco-myth-sodium-lauryl-sulfate-sls-causes-cancer.html. The confusion with nitrosamines is not that it is responsible for causing the cancer, but that it is used to solubilize the chemicals used in cancer experiments (because it is a good surfactant). It's not the combination that causes the cancer, any more than water (that is undoubtedly present) would cause the cancer.
As far as being regulated as a pesticide, anything that claims to kill germs is regulated under pesticide regulations (it's an EPA thing); if the manufacturer does not claim that it is a sanitizer or disinfectant, it is not regulated. It does turn out that SLS has been used, mostly in laboratories I believe, to reduce bacteria -- if that claim is made for such a product, you have to go through the pesticide regulations of the EPA (bacteria are considered pests).
As a last thought, one of the reasons that we looked into using SLS was not only due to its excellent detergency and biodegradability, but also that it is one of the very few surfactants we could find that was totally bio-based (i.e., no petrochemical contribution). Not all SLS is 100% bio-based, but ours is!
Hope that sheds a little more light on the subject!
Be the first to like this
|
Sign in to "Like"
I've heard about the carcinogenic theory before (and I would agree that it is definitely the most damaging of the SLS claims), but I haven't actually read enough about it to form an opinion. My issue is definitely more with the fact that SLS and SLES can enter the bloodstream, can stay in the body up to five days and are used in testing labs as a standard ingredient to irritate skin. My otherwise hearty family has some allergy issues, and my poor little niece has horrible exzema that has caused her problems almost since birth. I expect that there will be chemical irritation issues from most cleaning products, but I hate to see it in something that is marketed as "green" because most people will look to such products as gentler alternatives to traditional cleaners. Those with sensitivities need to know that there may be issues with using Greenworks cleaners, and most of those reactions would be because of SLS
1 other person liked this
|
Sign in to "Like"
Thanks MommyKat,
We look forward to more informative posts.
; ) Maria-
Be the first to like this
|
Sign in to "Like"
1 other person liked this
|
Sign in to "Like"
I have read that combining SLS with some ingredients can reduce it's risk as well. Thanks for corroborating that.
Be the first to like this
|
Sign in to "Like"
Hi Greg,
Thanks for taking the time to respond to us. This is very helpful information. I am sure others will agree.
Be the first to like this
|
Sign in to "Like"
Very informative, Greg, thanks so much! I had no idea that the irritation potential of SLS could be reduced by combining it with other ingredients. This is really my biggest concern with SLS, because, as I said, my family (like so many others) has problems with allergic reactions and skin conditions, and often it is incredibly difficult to pinpoint what caused them.
I agree that there is a big difference between the way one uses personal care products and cleaning products, and theoretically, there should be no reason for a dish soap to, for example, come into contact with the eyes or face. That being said, children can be notoriously unpredictable and I can quite clearly a time when I was five or six years old and helping wash dishes and, for some reason, decided I had to scoop up a handful of bubbles and eat it. I didn't find the taste horrific and went through a phase where I was often found with my mouth full of bubbles. It may not be the proper use of the product, but having watched my sons in a bubble bath I also know that it is by no means uncommon behavior! :) As a mother, I feel that the gentler and safer a product (even a cleaning product) can be made, the better. Knowing that the risk of irritation can be minimized is a load off my mind!
P.S. I agree, the amount of misinformation on the internet can occasionally make life harder instead of easier. Sorting through the jumble is difficult, but a small price to pay overall. With great power comes great responsibility... :)
Be the first to like this
|
Sign in to "Like"
Be the first to like this
|
Sign in to "Like"