Wow ! I’ve been gone a long, long time! Had a rough pregnancy and then a wonderful baby. He has kept me quite busy. I’m ready to return to the blogosphere and hope to get this blog up and going again!

In the search for natural and/or organic toothpaste, the store does not hold a lot of options. You’ve got Burt’s Bee’s  or Tom’s of Maine. As I’ve now tried both, you will get a two for one review today!

My Background:

For the last several years, my husband and I have remained strangely loyal to Colgate Total 12 Hour Protection Toothpaste. It tasted nice and fresh and my teeth felt really clean afterwards. I had also bought a bulk six pack so was in no real hurry to transition to a more natural toothpaste. However, it scores a pretty high 6 in the EWG site so I feel it’s necessary. The top offending chemicals in the Colgate toothpaste include the following:

Sodium Fluoride (9):

• Developmental/Reproductive Toxicity
• Endocrine Disruption
• Cancer (tumor formation)
• Neurotoxicity

Triclosan (7):

• Endocrine Disruptions
• Bioaccumulation
• Organ System Toxicity

Wait! Fluoride is bad?? Unfortunately, I did not read about that before selecting my “natural” toothpastes, but found out later that both offer fluoride and fluoride-free versions.

Burt’s Bee’s Natural Toothpaste-Multicare-Fluoride Formula:

There are a number of formulas of Burt’s toothpaste; however this is the only one I’ve found at my local Target or grocery store. I’ve seen a lot of Burt’s ads recently that tout the use of Cranberry extract to help prevent plague formulation. Learn more here. The rest of the ingredient list includes:

Active Ingredients: Sodium monofluorophosphate 0.77% (0.14% w/v fluoride ion)
Inactive Ingredients: glycerin, hydrated silica, xylitol, calcium sodium phosphosilicate, sodium cocoyl glutamate, titanium dioxide, vaccinium macrocarpon (cranberry) fruit powder, chondrus crispus (carrageenan), stevia rebaudiana extract, xanthan gum, silica, flavor*, lecithin, maltodextrin *natural flavor

All ingredients scored below a 4 in EWG with the exception of Sodium Monoflurophosphate, which scored a 6 for cancer, developmental/reproductive toxicity, and neurotoxicity

I have never been a huge fan of Burt’s Bees. I love their packaging, the ease in finding the product and their wide range of products, however, it usually seems a bit overpriced and there has never been one product I’ve been real crazy about. Like all “natural” or organic brands, you have to read labels carefully because Burt’s products can rank as high as 7 in EWG.

Application: The toothpaste comes in a 4 oz tube that is designed to sit on its cap. I found this to be quite problematic in that if the cap is not shut all the way (ahem, my dear husband) a great amount of toothpaste will flow out onto the counter, leaving a very sticky mess for said writer to clean up. As for using the paste, it’s white, creamy and thick. It goes on your toothbrush and you brush. I don’t really think that there is a huge difference in how many toothpastes are applied…The taste is very mild, not real minty, which is fine in my book. I don’t like a real overpowering mint anyway.

Wear/Effectiveness: My teeth never felt quite clean when using this toothpaste. I almost felt like the toothpaste itself had some “grit” that was left on my teeth. While I had no complaints, I did not feel like my breath was its freshest either.

Removal: It rinsed fine except for the gritty feeling.

Cost: I purchased the 4 oz tube from Target for $4.50, but coupons can be requested on the Burt’s site.

Verdict: With its toxic fluoride, I would pass on this toothpaste again. However, here are some more reviews on the Burt’s Bees site that seem to be more positive.

Up next: Tom’s of Maine Simply White-Fluoride Formula

Wow ! I've been gone a long, long time! Had a rough pregnancy and then a wonderful baby. He has kept me quite busy. I'm ready to return to the blogosphere and hope to get this blog up and going again! In the search for natural and/or organic toothpaste, the store does not hold a ...

I found this collection of images (and other assorted information) on the website Dirty Oil Sands. They have a lot of great information including other videos, blogs and action resources. Check them out.

Dirty Oil Sands – A Threat to the New Energy Economy.

I found this collection of images (and other assorted information) on the website Dirty Oil Sands. They have a lot of great information including other videos, blogs and action resources. Check them out. Dirty Oil Sands - A Threat to the New Energy Economy.

The Keystone XL Pipeline is a proposed $12 billion dollar, 1,980 mile-long project with the capacity to carry up to 900,000 barrels a day of tar sands oil from Canada to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast. A great number of states would obviously be affected, including my home state of Nebraska.

It is scheduled to come through Nebraska, crossing through the Sandhills, where my husband’s family’s ranch is located, and over the Ogallala Aquifer on its way from Alberta, Canada. Because the Sandhills are literally made up of sand, which is much more porous than soil and the water table often is close to the surface, this means that the Ogallala Aquifer, which supplies drinking water to 2 million people in 8 states, could easily become contaminated. Hence, I’ve been following this project closely and am so disturbed at not only the environmental impact but also the tactics and dirty “politics” that seem to go hand in hand with this pipeline. However, a number of states are stepping up and at least asking questions.

Image taken from kvnonews.com

Because the pipeline crosses an international border, the project can’t begin until the State Department determines if the pipeline is in the U.S. national interest. However, that hasn’t stopped Keystone from already implementing key figure heads in many states to drum up support, attempt to “purchase” land from local farmers and ranchers and proceed as if the project were already well under way.

What is Tar Sands?

Now for the details on what tar sand is (I had no idea) and why many think it is a bad, bad idea. The pipeline will provide a conduit for tar sands oil of northeastern Alberta to reach United States markets. Tar sands oil is the dirtiest kind of oil currently available on the market — both because of its climate change impacts, and because of its local environmental impacts.

According to Earthworks, there are two primary ways to extract oil from tar sands:

1. The deposits are mined, the oil removed, and the sands returned to the pit or discarded elsewhere.
2. In situ recovery is used for deeper deposits — usually more than 250 feet, and frequently more 1,000 feet below the surface. In-place recovery involves injecting substances to heat up the sands, making the bitumen fluid enough to be pumped out of the ground.

After the heavy oils and bitumen are extracted, they are thinned using another petroleum product, enabling the final product to flow through a pipeline. Further processing also occurs in order to produce a higher quality crude oil.

Who is Against the Pipeline?

For once, it’s not just environmental activities that are concerned about this pipeline project, but landowners, community groups and some politicians have all expressed concerns about the impact of the Keystone XL Pipeline as well. Many ranchers and farmers worry about damage to the land as well as wildlife, but also future property values.

More than 75 Environmental groups have signed a petition asking the US and Canada to halt the production of tar sands and stop future projects. They have expressed concerns about water quality, and that the processing of the oil from  poses will create a large amount of greenhouse gases as well as contribute to the destruction of the Boreal Forest, which serves as a natural carbon sink. They cite other pipeline ruptures, such as the one in Michigan that spilled one million gallons of toxic crude into the Kalamazoo River and Lake Michigan watershed that could take years to resolve.

For more information, check out the Environmental Defence report. Here are a couple of sad facts from the report:

• Oil sands mining is licensed to use twice the amount of fresh water that the entire city of Calgary uses in a year.
• At least 90% of the fresh water used in the oil sands ends up in ends up in tailing ponds so toxic that propane cannons are used to keep ducks from landing.
• Processing the oil sands uses enough natural gas in a day to heat 3 million homes.
• The toxic tailing ponds are considered one of the largest human-made structures in the world. -The ponds span 50 square kilometers and can be seen from space.
• Producing a barrel of oil from the oil sands produces three times more greenhouse gas emissions than a barrel of conventional oil.

Will the White House Stop the Project?

However, the White House does not seem to be fazed by these concerns.  TreeHugger wrote, “that both Canada and the United States are aware of the dreadful impact of the Alberta tar sands — roundly dubbed the ‘most destructive project on earth’. Yet, the public statements from both parties differ significantly from the private cables.” Hillary Clinton seems to support to project, but is now less inclined to admit this publicly as she was last fall.

TransCanada’s also has a pending application before the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation, seeking exemption from current federal standards regulating pipeline thickness and the pressure. TransCanada is asking that they be allowed to operate at higher pressures than standard pipelines. This would allow them to use thinner pipe as well, which, of course increases the risk of failure. They hope to use this thinner material in rural areas where they claim there is a lower risk.

Links to other news articles about the planned pipeline:

• TransCanada Takes Oil Sands Heat In Stride
• Clinton Ties to Pipeline Lobbyist Obscured by Questionable FOIA Denial
• In 2010, Canada’s Oil Became a Contentious American Energy Issue
• Nebraska Senator Asks State Department to Reroute Oil Sands Pipeline
• Oil and Water in Nebraska: In Congress, Cornhuskers Take Wait-and-See Approach to Pipeline
• EPA Slams State Department on Proposed Oil Pipeline
• 50 Members of Congress Warn State Dept Against Rubberstamping 2,000-Mile Oil Sands Pipeline

If you are interested in doing your part to learn more about the project or to show your disapproval, check out their Facebook page.

Part II of my report on the pipeline will look into alternative ways to spend the $12 billion dollars on alternative energy sources.

The Keystone XL Pipeline is a proposed $12 billion dollar, 1,980 mile-long project with the capacity to carry up to 900,000 barrels a day of tar sands oil from Canada to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast. A great number of states would obviously be affected, including my home state of Nebraska. It is ...

I briefly talked about the concept behind 350.org in a prior blog post. The 350.org team has named 10-10-10 the  “Global Work Day”. As of today, there are 5,127 events scheduled in over 174 countries. The general idea of this globalized work day is to have groups across the world united in a common goal-combating global warming. Here are the top 10 ideas for events according to 350.org:

• Organize a Tree Planting
• Go Solar
• Work on a Community Garden or an Organic Farm
• Go For a Bike Ride
• Harness the Wind
• Get Efficient
• Do a trash cleanup

Within 60 miles of my home are two events : The Solarize Shakori Hills Projectin in Pittsboro, NC & the Energy and Community Resilience Fair in Carrboro-Chapel Hill, NC.

The 350.org team hopes that the ideas, community-building and activism behind the work day will send a message LOUD and CLEAR to politicians that we care about our world. If small groups all around the world can unite in their passion for change and taking action, we certainly expect our politicians to not only talk about the issues, but to DO SOMETHING!

Check out what is going on in your area!

I briefly talked about the concept behind 350.org in a prior blog post. The 350.org team has named 10-10-10 the  "Global Work Day". As of today, there are 5,127 events scheduled in over 174 countries. The general idea of this globalized work day is to have groups across the world united in a common ...

Sunscreen #2 (Devita Solar Protective Moisturizer SPF 30+):

This facial sunblock/moisturizer scores a 1 in EWG! The Devita site is all about increasing the knowledge of the consumer – which I love! It has wonderful, detailed sections that provides information about all ingredients they use in their products, including formulas and what the ingredients actually DO. They also have a great list of ingredients they avoid. In addition, they are 100% vegan. They use recycled materials and have a program in place in which users can send in their used containers for points. Devita will recycle the containers but does not reuse them.

Ingredients: ACTIVE: Micronized Zinc oxide 19%**. INACTIVE: Aloe barbadensis (organic aloe vera gel), Purified Water (aqua), Capric/caprylic triglycerides (derived from coconut oil), Glycerin (vegetable), Hyaluronic acid (vegan source), Glyceryl stearate SE (derived from vegetable oil), Stearic acid, Lecithin phospholipid, Tocopherol (vitamin E), Allantoin, Vitis vinifera (grape) seed extract. Ingredient labeling adheres to international INCI standards.

** Their site notes that this is “Not a nanotechnology product. Average paritcal size is 250 nm.” I will have to do some more research to understand this fully and will report back.

Application: I have applied this lotion to my face over my acne medication (a thick cream) every day. The texture iis light, creamy and wonderful. It seems like a very small amount covers my face,ears and neck.

Wear: I have been using this now for over two months. I wear this all day every day.  I have been in the very hot sun daily and have not burnt. My skin in naturally oily and it does have a shine after a few hours. However, I do not think this is due to the lotion, but rather my bothersome skin. It has not caused any breakouts and has been highly recommended by others online who suffer from acne.

Cost: I purchased the 1.7 oz bottle from Sun Harvest in Austin for $25.00. I prefer to buy locally, but have been unable to find it in my new hometown of Burlington, NC. However, it can also be found at VitaCost for $15.79.

Verdict: After this trial, I can say that I love this sunscreen. In the past, even with the oil-free facial sunscreens, putting it on my face has been more like a chore. Since this feels just like a moisturizer and unlike a greasy or thick cream, I am definitely more inclined to continue using it daily for everyday protection.

Sunscreen #2 (Devita Solar Protective Moisturizer SPF 30+): This facial sunblock/moisturizer scores a 1 in EWG! The Devita site is all about increasing the knowledge of the consumer – which I love! It has wonderful, detailed sections that provides information about all ingredients they use in their products, including formulas and what the ingredients ...

Last night, we drove to Chapel Hill to hear Ken Cook, founder and President of EWG, present findings from their “10 Americans” study. The presentation was part of the 1st North Carolina statewide Science Festival -a group effort between Duke & UNC-Chapel Hill which began this week. First, let me say-what an awesome idea! They had the guys from Myth Busters and Ira Flatow from NPR’s Science Friday (love him!). Sadly, I heard absolutely nothing about this festival until EWG posted a Facebook update about Ken’s talk yesterday afternoon. I was kind of dismayed at that lack of marketing over such an awesome event. We live in a University town only about 45 minutes away, so we should have at least heard something big was going down. Anyway, back to the presentation….

Background

Ken Cook founded EWG in 1993, and has tirelessly sought to improve the health of the environment and our bodies through scientific discovery. His group has sought to influence legislation through countless campaigns and has been influential in a number of environmental/health care related victories. Currently, they are working on getting Congress to pass the Safe Chemicals Act-a law that would amend the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 and would keep toxic chemicals out of consumer products.  Anytime laws and amendments are involved, the discussion can get infinitely more complicated. This post could become an epic saga if I’m not brief. Hence, I have linked to both Acts so you can review if you’d like. Basically, it boils down to this: The 1976 Act is a joke. Chemicals companies keep much information secret. It does not cover any chemicals that are in personal care products, clothing, furniture, foods and pesticides. In addition, the chemical manufacturers don’t have to prove that chemicals are safe-it’s up to us to prove they are not. How do you do that? Well, many men, women and children must get very sick, die and then prove that it was the fault of the chemical.

10 Americans

Ken’s presentation highlighted one day in which 10 Americans had their blood taken and tested for 413 toxic chemicals. They found 287 present, some of which had been banned in the U.S. 30 years ago. They only had $10,000 to spend for each individual and could have easily tested for another 400 chemicals if money was not an issue. Ken spent some time during the presentation reviewing how these toxins can enter our system: air, water, food, personal care products, working environment, etc…We later learn that these 10 Americans did not become polluted from any of these methods,  but rather through umbilical cord blood. These chemicals were found in babies while in utero. Of course, the crowd was shocked and appalled. It appears that over the years when we were fighting to clean up the air, land, lakes and streams, our bodies were continuing to take on these toxic chemicals. Even with all the reading I’ve done on the subject, it was still an eye-opening presentation. Without legislation, there is no way to avoid being inundated with toxins. EWG does have a “To Do List” of how to avoid as many as you can. Honestly, I’ve done well on all of these with the exception of buying organic food. I’m working on that. Just get me my own home with greenhouse and I will be set!

To Do List

• Buy organic food –this will limit your exposure to pesticides
• Use stainless or cast iron instead of non-stick–this will limit your exposure to PFOA which causes cancer
• Use “safe” personal care products (use the EWG Skin Deep Database to see what’s in your products)–this will limit your exposure to neurotoxins, hormone disruptors and carcinogens
• Use glass instead of plastic containers–this will limit your exposure to BPA, hormone disruption chemical
• Avoid fish high in mercury (check out your tuna calculator)

Making the Change

It sounds like a lot-believe me, I know! But, honestly, once you make the decision to do just one of these, it just becomes part of your life. I used to use plastic containers for everything. I started by switching my “food storage” containers with the glass pyrex. Then I got stainless steel water bottles. Now, I make every effort to limit any other plastic container that comes into my home: shampoo bar instead of bottle, refillable containers, reusable bottles, bulk items, for fountain drinks, etc…Once you’ve done it for a few weeks, it becomes a habit and not a chore. So much of our failure to change is fear of “how hard it will be” or how much we will “suffer”, but I made the decision that I would rather do a bit more effort now than deal with horrible health and environment consequences later on. I’m as lazy as they come, so I guarantee you can do it too!

Take a look at the video. There’s both a long and short version.

While we left horrified and bit stunned. I was still thrilled to see Ken in person. Ken, and countless others like him, are the ones that will <hopefully> save us from ourselves! I am hopeful that our current administration will continue to look to EWG for research, information and advising on these issues and will take note of the extreme importance of making these changes sooner rather than later.

What can you do?

PLEASE CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE PETITION TO SUPPORT FEDERAL REGULATION OF CHEMICALS IN CONSUMER PRODUCTS!

Last night, we drove to Chapel Hill to hear Ken Cook, founder and President of EWG, present findings from their "10 Americans" study. The presentation was part of the 1st North Carolina statewide Science Festival -a group effort between Duke & UNC-Chapel Hill which began this week. First, let me say-what an awesome ...

My Background:

My mom is usually full of wisdom. And while during my teenage years, I fought against all her advice, unfortunately the one one tip I took to heart was the wrong one: using iodine and baby oil (along with a silver screen) can really help get that wonderful, tan glow. I supplemented this summer past-time with tanning beds as well.  As a very fair, freckled lass, I had numerous burns and blistered. Thankfully, tanning eventually lost favor (unfortunately the news has not reached the Jersey Shore cast yet).

I have endured the removal and biopsy of many suspicious moles over the years. While all have been benign, I recently have one removed from my foot (worst place in the world to be cut into!) which did demonstrate cellular changes. Further cutting ensued, which thankfully removed all of the offending spot for the time being. I had begun daily sunscreen wear about two years ago, but upon moving to lovely, sunny Austin, knew that I would need to be much more diligent with my use. I used several drugstore brands and thought I had good results-no burning, no greasy skin, no breakouts.

Sunscreen Info:

Earlier this year, I learned that most of the sunscreens I used in the past had three main problems:  they were full of toxic chemicals, they were hormone disruptors and they can create free radicals. Not only were these chemicals harmful to the environment, but it is unknown the effect these have on the development of cancer due to their free radical generating properties. While I assumed (as due most) that sunscreens were protecting me from skin cancer, they may actually be a contributing factor.

While I adore the sun, and moderate amounts are necessary for many reasons including getting enough vitamin D-it can also be deadly. About a year ago, a friend of mine died of metastatic melanoma. He was young (30s), in great health (ran marathons) and had a wonderful wife and family. It is time that skin cancer be taken seriously. The media makes it all so confusing: UVA vs UVB rays, chemical vs physical protection, SPF level. Until the FDA regulates the use of these chemical ingredients, we need to be informed about what products we are putting on our bodies. I thought it would be helpful if I would break down some of the definitions of the major players in sunscreen protection.

Chemical Blockers: Most sunscreens on the market today are chemical sunscreens. The chemicals are absorbed into the skin and “protect” your skin from sunburn by absorbing the UV light. They include compounds such as:

Avobenzone

• Synthetic ingredient (also known as Parsol 1789 & butyl methoxydibenzoylmethane
• Protects against all UVA rays (UVA 1 and UVA 2) but not UVB
• Concentrations from 1% – 10%
• In sunlight, is broken down which reduces effectiveness and may increase toxicity
• Free radical generator
• Absorbed through skin

Benzophenones

• Organic compound (includes dixoybenzone & oxybenzone)
• First used in sunscreens in the 1950s
• Protect against UVA 2 and UVB
• Studies have shown irritation effects, including eczema
• Free radical generator
• Does not degrade in sunlight
• Absorbed through the skin and stored for up to five days
• Also used as a preservative

Cinnamates

• Includes cinoxate, ethylhexyl p-methoxycinnamate, octocrylene, octyl methoxycinnamateoctyl methoxycinnimate
• Protects against UVB rays (most frequently used in sunscreens)
• Often used in combination with benzophenones
• Breaks down in sunlight
• Estrogenic effects
• Absorbed into the skin
• Fee radical generator

PABA & PABA Esters

• Also known as para-aminobenzoic acid
• Protects against UVB rays
• Causes allergic reactions
• Waterproof

Salicylates

• Includes homomenthyl salicylate, ocyl salicylate, & trienthanolamine salicylate
• First sunscreen used in the US
• Protects against UVB rays
• Breaks down in sunlight
• Weak UVB absorber and must be used with other UV filters

Physical Blockers: usually finely powdered minerals. They block UV rays by reflecting the rays (instead of absorbing them like chemical blocks do).

Zinc oxide

• Broadest range of protection of any physical and chemical filter
• Protects against UVA (both UVA 1 and UVA 2) and UVB rays
• Stable under sunlight
• Zinc oxide nanoparticals are more reactive (may promote free radicals) than zinc oxide power
• Anti-irritant
• May leave white film

Titanium Dioxide

• Protects against UVA (UVA 1 and UVA 2) and UVB rays
• Stable and does not break down in sunlight
• May promote reactions with other chemicals in sunlight
• Titanium dioxide nanoparticals have great reactivity and may create free radicals
• Not irritating
• Whitish tint

Product Review:

After extensively reading EWG’s sunscreen lists as well as countless other articles and personal reviews I decided to go with a mineral formula. As an acne sufferer, I had always used an oil-free sunscreen/lotion for my face and a separate sunscreen for my body. I had hoped in moving towards a mineral product that I could use one on both face and body, but this did not happen. Even amongst organic and natural brands, their labels are often misleading. It took several tries and trips to the store, searching online and rereading articles before I even could read the label of the bottle. Price was also a big factor. While you can’t put a price on health, I was not going to pay $30 to try a bottle out. Here are the three products I ended up selecting:

• Jason Sunbrella’s Mineral Based Sunblock SPF 30
• Devita Solar Protective Moisturizer SPF 30+
• Devita Solar Body Block SPF 30+

Sunscreen #1 (Jason Sunbrella’s Mineral Based Sunblock SPF 30): This sunblock is rated a 3 in the EWG database. Jason is a reasonably priced organic brand. However, like all products, you really have to read the labels as their “natural” products aren’t always that natural. Based on other reviews, this sunblock was decent, did not irritate skin and worked well. I was hesitant as it was only 30 SPF, but according to many reports, anything over 50 is really irrelevant. For daily use I was prepared to try 30, but for swimming and such I would prefer a higher SPF.

Ingredients: ACTIVE: Titanium Dioxide 8.0%, Zinc Oxidide 2.5%, INACTIVE: Aqua (Purified Water),    C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Vegetable Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Sorbitan Isostearate, Sorbitan Sesquioleate, Ethylhexyl Palmitate, Calcium Starch Octenylsuccinate, Ethyl Macadamiate, Dimethicone, Gyceryl Laurate, Stearalkonium Hectorite, Triethoxcaprylysilane, Anthemus Nobilus (Chamomile) Extract*, Castor Oil Phosphate, Calendula Officinalis (Marigold) Flower Extract*, Propylene Carbonate, Magnesium Sulphate, Benzyl Alcohol, Potassium Sorbate And Sodium Benzoate. *Certified Organic

Application: Mineral sunscreens are usually tough to rub in. This was no exception. It was very sticky and I had to really work to get it into my face and body. It left a whitish tint that did disappear pretty quickly. It seemed to have a bit of shimmer on my body.

Wear: After using this sunscreen once on my face, I suffered a horrible breakout on both my face and neck. I decided to never use in anywhere except my body again. I used this sunscreen on my body for about 2-3 weeks. During this time I was hiking all day one day in the sun and did not get burnt. I did reapply once after getting a bit sweaty. While I never burnt wearing this, my skin often felt tight and itchy. I was very surprised as many reviews talked about how they used this on their children due to the anti-irritant properties. Unfortunately, I was not one of them.

Removal: Even after wearing all day (and night), I would have to scrub it off in the shower the next morning.

Verdict: I left the rest of the sunscreen for my husband to use. I would forcefully remind him daily that he needed some sunblock so that he would use it up for me.  He did not have problems with itching, breakouts or tight skin so it seems that my sensitive skin was probably at fault and not the product. I would not buy again, but it’s probably acceptable for a moderately-priced safe sunblock.

See follow up post for Devita reviews!

Check out these other articles about sunscreens:

• SkinBiology
• EWG 2010 Sunscreen Guide
• EWG Sunscreen Hall of Shame
• Senator Urges Release of Sunscreen Chemical Data
• Is Your Sunscreen Safe?

My Background: My mom is usually full of wisdom. And while during my teenage years, I fought against all her advice, unfortunately the one one tip I took to heart was the wrong one: using iodine and baby oil (along with a silver screen) can really help get that wonderful, tan glow. I supplemented this ...

….I’m back. I had to take a long break from the blog due to my utterly and completely, intense and overwhelming, all-consuming schedule over the last several months. Word of advice : Never take four summer classes! I’ve now completed my Master of Science in Information Studies (yeah!), have moved to North Carolina (yeah!), and have started to settle into my new home. I’ve had a lot of ideas about refining this blog over the break.

I love reading others blogs and had done so for awhile; casually skimming through each post in google reader. When I started this blog, I never anticipated the time and energy that goes into each entry. Blogs are hard work. I also know that people often don’t have the time to read such incredibly lengthy posts as I have been known to create! In the interest of having an exciting, fun to read and informative blog, I’ve decided to have 2-3 posts per week of a shorter length.

Mondays will be product review posts, Wednesdays will be health related and Fridays will be focused on the “winners” I’ve found related to eco, green, progressive design or innovation. Down the road, I would like to become more involved in local environmental issues, but until I learn more about the community I’m living in, I don’t feel that I am informed enough yet. So, without further adieu…here is my follow-up post on changes I’ve made in the arena of personal  care (aka: makeup, hair, skin).

Personal Care:

• Shampoo: I decided to go “no poo” (it really is a term used in certain circles) about 6 months ago. I tried the baking soda for a few months, and have recently been using an all natural shampoo-body bar (reviews to come). I am overall pleased with the results of both methods and will not be going back to regular shampooing.
• Body wash: Having tried a few different options, I am somewhat content. I do miss the lathering, sudsy washes but as long as those around me are fine with my natural scent as opposed to a chemical-laden floral number-I’ll stick with the all natural forumulas.
• Face: This has been my most challenging change! I struggle with acne and have tried many, many things to get it under control. Unfortunately, the only thing that somewhat works for me is a prescription wash and cream that is a full 10 on the EWG scale.  I am not pleased with this and hope that I can change it in the near future, but I know that I cannot live with a face full of acne either.
• Makeup: I have gone to full-on all natural make-up (foundation, eye shadow, mascara, blush, lip gloss and eyeliner). Have many, many reviews to come.
• Perfume: I have not work perfume for quite awhile. After working in an office full of women with competing scents, I let go of my daily habit. However, for those occasions when I really want to impress, I pull out the patchouli oil. Many comment that I smell like dirt, but that is a good thing right?
• Lotion: I have given up body lotion, but do miss it. I have tried different oils, but do hope to find a decent-priced body lotion that I can use on my dry legs.
• Sunscreen: After many attempts, I am pleased with my mineral sunscreen that I now use. I use both a facial and a separate body formula. While they are only 30 spf, I have not suffered a sunburn and have been in the sun daily in Texas.
• Deodorant: I now make my own deodorant and am happy to report that it’s the best I’ve tried.

Future Goals:

• Hair color
• Lotion
• Homemade soap

What about you? What changes have you made? Has you been able to stick with it?

....I’m back. I had to take a long break from the blog due to my utterly and completely, intense and overwhelming, all-consuming schedule over the last several months. Word of advice : Never take four summer classes! I’ve now completed my Master of Science in Information Studies (yeah!), have moved to North Carolina (yeah!), ...

I am still here and have not abandoned this blog! Over the summer, I have been trying to finish my graduate program and plan for a cross country move. (We are moving the day after my final project presentation!). Expect more fascinating news and reviews after August 20!

I am still here and have not abandoned this blog! Over the summer, I have been trying to finish my graduate program and plan for a cross country move. (We are moving the day after my final project presentation!). Expect more fascinating news and reviews after August 20!

Flickr photo by dawngrace.com

Getting tattoos is addictive. Once you’ve crossed that threshold, it’s too easy to go back and get just one more. Having one or two tattoos myself, I’ve often wanted to add a few more, or at least do some touch ups (after 18 years, the birds aren’t looking so hot anymore!), but a few things have kept me from getting them: money and the fear of having an unknown inky substance injected into my skin.

Being all natural and organic doesn’t seem to mesh with getting inked. However, I just heard the greatest tattoo tale ever today–tattoos that monitor blood sugar levels for diabetics! Apparently, nanoparticles are injected into the skin and seek out the glucose in the blood. When high levels are detected, it would send a message to a special watch with the readings. After about six months, the tattoo fades and you can get a new one! No more pricking fingers several times of day, no more setting timers to check your blood-just some cool ink!

Getting tattoos is addictive. Once you've crossed that threshold, it's too easy to go back and get just one more. Having one or two tattoos myself, I've often wanted to add a few more, or at least do some touch ups (after 18 years, the birds aren't looking so hot anymore!), but a few ...