“The doctor put in a needle all through the skin under my abdomen (and a) greenish liquid poured out of me into six one-litre bottles,” says Shaeda Farooqi. “What did I do mistaken?” voices one other woman. Each women are speaking about their experiences affected by symptoms of ovarian cancer – an epidemic that’s been increasingly linked to the usage of talc, an ingredient present in talcum powder (think Johnson & Johnson’s famous baby powder) and other beauty products. 

These stories are two of many shared in a latest documentary called Toxic Beauty, the brainchild of Toronto-based sustainability consultant Sarah Jay and director Phyllis Ellis, which raises issues in regards to the lack of testing and regulation surrounding the 1000’s of chemicals in common products we use on our bodies on a regular basis. This includes ingredients like parabens and phthalates, which have been scientifically proven to be hormone disruptors that cause a number of health issues including preterm birth, endocrine disruption, mercury poisoning, and breast cancer, along with ovarian cancer.

The documentary, which is released in theatres across the United States from December 11, combines research from doctors and scientists with different testimonials from a gaggle of girls, including Mymy Nguyen, a Boston University medical student. The 24-year-old Asian woman grew up in California and had a mother who taught her that girls should all the time “look pretty” as “people will judge you for the way you look”. Nguyen learned that you must put creams and sunscreens in your face to stop anti-aging and have lighter skin. The media also played a component on this narrative as she recalls seeing advertisements and celebrities who were mostly white and looked a certain way. 

“I used to be never completely satisfied with how I look,” she says in a voiceover while doing her make-up. As a result of this, the scholar has spent loads of time and cash chasing beauty ideals, applying common makeup products like cover-up and mascara, while doing other relatively normal things including getting her hair bleached and receiving eyelash extensions. Within the film, Nguyen has her chemical body burden measured from the usage of over 27 different products and scientists reveal shocking results, so she has to come back to terms with the impact her lifestyle – something that has been fed to her as a necessity to be seen as worthy or enough – has had on her body. 

Woven throughout the film, Nguyen’s personal narrative is a harrowing reminder of the lasting impact the media has on young people and the unhealthy expectations they are sometimes fed from an early age. This is very true for ladies of color because the film reveals that skin lightening products are still used across the globe yet contain ingredients which are incredibly harmful to the body. With women of color being marketed to in a really specific way, this connection can also be linked with the difficulty of environmental racism by which brown and black individuals are often forced to live in areas which are subject to more pollution, and due to this fact, are more vulnerable to its harmful impacts. “In Northern Ontario, there’s a extremely high rate of ovarian cancer (amongst indigenous people) there because talcum powder is one in every of the few products available to them,” says Jay.

Beyond this, the scholar’s experience bolsters the film’s larger message of highlighting the severe lack of health regulation surrounding today’s average beauty products. That is something the film presents as a “chemical disaster happening within us” – it’s an enormous problem scientists and doctors within the documentary claim is just as deadly as climate change, but as an alternative of polluting the earth we’re literally polluting our bodies with poison. It’s a tough pill to swallow, but one which hopefully will gain more attention due to the film.

The origin story of the film is noteworthy since it’s a deeply personal one. Jay began researching the subject around 10 years ago after a lifetime of treating her pimples with topical and oral antibiotics. Chlorine overexposure, as she was a competitive swimmer, and bingeing on personal care products – she was a “rainbow vibrant kid” who consistently dyed her hair different colors – ultimately caused her to develop a chronic illness called Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (a medical condition that makes her sensitive to fragrances and other chemicals) that continues to get progressively worse.

“When every other industry is regulated, why is something that we’re using literally 10 times a day not regulated? It makes absolutely no sense. It’s idiotic and really unbelievable” – Phyllis Ellis, director, Toxic Beauty 

Eventually, Jay began working with a Canadian organisation called Environmental Defence on The Just Beautiful campaign that sought to coach consumers on these issues. This connected her to the work of Dr Rick Smith, a world-renowned environmentalist and toxins expert who oversees Nguyen’s chemical body burden testing within the film. Smith has conducted self-experiments testing out the toxicity of chemicals in products, which is the topic of his book Slow Death By Rubber Duck.

The book, which is referenced throughout Toxic Beauty, was a serious inspiration for Jay, who conceived, developed, and associate-produced the film, with Ellis on the helm because the documentary’s director. With a background in making documentaries about different women’s issues, the filmmaker dove into the subject headfirst and wound up becoming a staunch advocate for the myriad risks of chemical overexposure through personal care.

With little governmental backing and supervision, consumers remain mostly unaware of the impact products can have on their bodies. Scientists also lack the correct support they should make further connections and develop solutions. “When every other industry is regulated, why is something that we’re using literally 10 times a day not regulated? It makes absolutely no sense. It’s idiotic and really unbelievable,” says Ellis.

In line with the film, the European Union has banned 1328 chemicals from getting used while the USA has banned a measly 11. Furthermore, Europe abides by a “precautionary principle” by which ingredients are proven protected pre-formulation whereas, in the USA, products are protected until proven otherwise. Which means beauty and body-care products will be immediately put in the marketplace without adequate testing for safety and little is thought about their long run impact. “You and I could make a product today in my kitchen, put it in a extremely pretty bottle, call it ‘Thursday’, take it to CVS or a spot where they sell cosmetics and they might put it on the shelf without even testing it,” says Ellis.

This can also be alarming considering Generation Z’s close relationship with beauty as a type of self-expression, meaning that we don’t really understand how their use of products at a young age might impact their health afterward. Accordingly, scientists within the film say that young people and pregnant individuals (and their fetuses) are at a greater risk once they use products since their bodies are developing. As the patron goods industry currently stands, beauty products are designed to grab our attention and make a profit, making consumers think they need things that may actually harm them.

Organic ingredients like lavender oil have their very own problems – the essential oil, which today is usually present in so-called “wellness” products, has been found to disrupt the hormones of young boys causing things like abnormal breast growth. “There may be also no legal definition of the words organic, natural, vegan, cruelty-free, non-toxic. What’s more discouraging is that related trademarks don’t depend on third-party lab testing to ‘certify’ their products,” explains Jay. So, even the products that claim to be healthy, i.e. lavender oil, can actually be detrimental to our health. 

Beyond consumers, hairstylists, nail technicians, and make-up artists are at a fair higher risk on account of exaggerated exposure. So, what’s the answer here? And the way can consumers avoid these issues? “The onus shouldn’t be on the patron, the onus ought to be on the federal government and the regulators and the businesses to ensure that what we’re putting on our youngsters and ourselves is protected,” says Ellis. “We’re coming to some extent now where regulations in the USA haven’t modified since 1938 and the indisputable fact that brands and huge pharmaceuticals corporations mainly regulate themselves is disturbing,” adds Jay. 

Ellis also poses a sentiment one doctor shared together with her: “We’ve to vary these beauty norms so women don’t have to choose from their health and attempting to look beautiful based on these arbitrary standards.” In these ways, the filmmakers hope consumers will start holding brands more accountable by refusing to purchase their products, which can start a bigger conversation in an effort to spur real lasting change. “Collectively, we must come to know that private care products are designed to perform,” says Jay. “It’s quite a bit for individual consumers to navigate and it has to come back from government down.”

On the subject of learning what ingredients to avoid, the film has a piece on its site dedicated to giving consumers advice. “My first rule of thumb is to avoid the word fragrance or perfume. That’s one word that represents, lots of, even 1000’s of individual ingredients that brands use to disguise harmful preservatives,” says Jay. Beyond this, there are some helpful apps and databases people can use to look up ingredients including Think Dirty and Skin Deep Database. “There’s a movement and things are really changing, which is coming from consumer demand and awareness.”