What the news means for the cosmetics already in your cupboard.
The ongoing investigation into how our bodies absorb the ingredients contained within cosmetics increased in momentum this week, off the back of Tuesday’s announcement that the Environmental Protection Authority has banned the use of PFAs in cosmetics from
This new legislation governs the import and manufacture of products containing PFAs, with a one-year grace period extended to December 31, 2027. By June 30, 2028, all cosmetic products must be disposed of.
Aotearoa is among the first countries to adopt such a stance on PFAs in a bid to protect both consumers and the environment.
PFAs, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, is a collective term used to describe more than 10,000 compounds known as “forever chemicals” — ones that don’t break down safely in the environment or the human body.
The moniker “forever chemicals” is fitting, considering the way in which the EPA explains how these chemicals persist for years when they enter the human body or the environment.
They don’t break down, but they do accumulate, and ongoing exposure to such substances has been linked to several chronic illnesses and diseases, including various cancers, hormonal and reproductive issues, developmental delays, compromised immunity and more.
Skincare founder and entrepreneur Emma Lewisham says the research into the potential harm and health impacts of PFAs is ongoing, but cites the work of Abhishek Gautam, senior scientist risk assessor at New Zealand’s Institute of Environmental Science and Research.
“In 2018, Denmark’s Environmental Protection Agency conducted a risk assessment of five different PFAs unintentionally present in high concentrations in cosmetics (body lotion, foundation and concealer),” Abhishek says.
“It was concluded that the levels at which PFAs identified in the individual products tested was unlikely to pose a health risk for consumers.”
Advertisement
Advertise with NZME.That said, their cumulative effects are well-documented, and a study on PFAs present in human blood in the US revealed that 99 per cent of participants had PFAs in their blood.
I hear you ask: if they’re known to be harmful, then why use them? PFAs are added to cosmetics to increase both their durability, spreadability and water resistance and are sometimes formulated in nail polish, foundation, lipstick and mascara.
A 2021 study conducted by the Environmental Science & Technology Journal found that of the 231 products tested, the cosmetics labelled as waterproof or long-lasting (including foundations, liquid lipsticks and waterproof mascaras) showed high levels of organic fluorine, which suggests the presence of PFAs.
But it isn’t just makeup and nail polish that’s to blame. Other items that commonly harbour PFAs include menstrual care products, hair care and dental floss.
Below, we spoke to four of the country’s top beauty authorities on their reaction to the new legislation and what it will mean for the future of the industry.
Emma Peters, founder of Aleph Beauty
Relief was the first emotion Emma Peters of local makeup brand Aleph Beauty felt after hearing the news of the EPA’s ban.
“It’s great they finally put a stop to this [PFAs]. And now with the publicity around it, people will be looking into it and refusing to purchase products that contain forever chemicals,” she says.
“I’m glad about all the science behind the effects of PFAs, but 2026 is too far down the track. As soon as the research started to come out around the safety or lack of safety around these products, that’s when brands should’ve stopped using them.”
Advertisement
Advertise with NZME.Emma believes that while it’s important for consumers to be aware of PFAs, they shouldn’t be bogged down about knowing exactly what does and doesn’t contain forever chemicals.
“Consumers don’t have to know how to avoid them in terms of each and every product ingredient to look out for, but they do need to know they are out there in cosmetics, home care products and cookware, and start to choose products that support the health of themselves, their family and the planet,” she says.
“Once we start thinking about these things, we are far more likely to make the alignment with a conscious decision a lot easier than it does when you’re in the dark about it all.”
PFAs are most common in colour cosmetics, and Emma warns consumers to take a closer look at products that promise 24-hour wear or are labelled as waterproof.
“If something claims to last 24 hours, you’ve got to wonder what’s wrong with it. Makeup is meant to be put on then washed off — it’s not something that should be sticking around for 24 hours,” she says.
“Same with waterproof mascara — it’s likely got chemicals which will adhere to the lash to make it stay.”
Such claims drive desirability, Emma says, something that feeds brands’ motivation to formulate with forever chemicals, but adds the new legislation acts as a cut-off point and may result in some products or brands being pulled from shelves if they can’t adhere to the new rules.
“If brands are smart, they will already have things underway to be able to shift over their formulations,” she says.
“It might be a case of pulling products that aren’t ready to transition to a cleaner formulation. A lot of big brands have different versions of products, so pulling a product off the shelf here and there won’t be of much consequence to them. I feel like smaller brands who probably would be more at risk of regulation changes are probably the ones already formulating things in a much cleaner from the get-go.”
Aleph’s range of people-, animal- and planet-friendly cosmetics extends to a mascara (non-waterproof, of course) and a concealer-foundation hybrid that Emma says is sweat-proof thanks to its highly concentrated, water free formula.
Formulating with PFAs was never on the cards for Emma when she first launched her makeup line in 2019.
“I’ve always chosen to work with ingredients that are clean, close to nature and science-backed. I looked at everything from a base level and where all the materials and ingredients came from. I’ve never been in a realm where I’ve had to sidestep PFAs, because they haven’t been on my radar as anything to use,” she says.
Emma Lewisham, skincare founder
In July 2020, Emma Lewisham and her team penned an open letter to the Environmental Protection Authority urging them to update their list of banned ingredients to align New Zealand with best international practices.
Her mission was clear: to create meaningful change in the beauty industry by protecting consumers from 25 different unregulated ingredients used in cosmetics. This included the likes of hydroquinone, four types of formaldehyde, some toxic parabens and phthalates, and fluorinated compounds known as PFAs.
Emma’s request outlined how women use an average of 12 cosmetics products per day, meaning they can be exposed to upwards of 168 chemicals.
And while the EPA’s Group Standard plays a vital role in ensuring ingredients are safe or used in safe volumes, Emma says the research surrounding many ingredients remains inconclusive and ingredients remain unregulated.
Now, Emma says the new regulations will see brands and companies grow and adapt to accommodate the new rules — and those that don’t will be left behind.
“It has been proven that nature is the most powerful bioengineer there is, so I believe more companies will move in this direction,” she says.
This ethos formed the basis of the Emma Lewisham brand, and Emma believes this is the reason why her skincare line has accrued countless loyalists the world over in the five years since its launch in 2019.
“Before founding Emma Lewisham, I was using a cosmetic product that unbeknown to me contained an ingredient now known to have adverse health implications (hydroquinone). Upon discovering this through my doctor, I went looking for a natural and science-backed solution, only to find that it did not exist,” she says.
“So, I set out to create it, ensuring other women wouldn’t need to go down the same path I did. Today, our products are scientifically proven to outperform some of the most recognised and luxurious synthetic products on the market.”
Lucy Vincent, founder of Sans Ceuticals
“It’s freaking great,” Lucy Vincent, founder of Sans Ceuticals, exclaimed down the phone when I called her to discuss the ban.
“It’s about time, actually. It’s a great stance for New Zealand to make.”
Lucy, who first launched her line of multifunctional hair, skin and body products in 2009, has witnessed significant changes in the beauty industry since then, especially over the last decade.
Together with a biotech scientist who was a client at Lucy’s hair salon at the time, the pair researched different classes of ingredients that eventually wound up as cornerstones in Sans’ products, including what she terms as the “heavyweights of dermatology” — vitamin A, B and C.
Through the lens of body care, PFAs help to enhance the texture of cream-based products — lending a smooth post-application feel. However, Lucy adds that with the developments coming through in the green science space, newer, superior ingredients can offer these sorts of textural and visual qualities to products.
Lucy says it’s not solely up to the consumer to know which ingredients are deemed as “safe” and adds there’s a lot of misinformation online which only adds to the confusion.
“There’s so much scaremongering out there. But there are websites out there that provide solid information backed by very good scientific data — like the Environmental Working Group website,” she says.
“Most people think natural is good and synthetic is bad, but that’s absolutely not the case. There are things [that are] not as black and white as that. Online resources that have strong data are a great place the consumer can go to, and I think that’s where founders of cosmetic companies should be drawing their information from as well.”
After hearing about the ban on Tuesday, Lucy reached out to three cosmetic scientists to ask how widely PFAs were used — all of whom said they don’t believe they’re as prolific as most people think, especially given the current consumer appetite for clean formulas.
“It’s encouraging that consumer demand for clean beauty products has done what it set out to do — which is set about change. The industry has undergone quite a radical transformation in the last 10 years, which has been brought on by consumer demand and the media taking a focus on it,” Lucy says.
“There’s now a wide array of clean products available as a result of this consumer demand. It’s super-encouraging to think that if we push for these things, and vote with our wallets, then it can happen.”
Tanne Snowden, founder of Tronque
For Tanne Snowden, founder of eco-luxe body care line Tronque, side-stepping harmful ingredients like PFAs was a conscious decision from the inception of her brand.
“We wanted to create a safe haven of products and ingredients that set a standard for what should be acceptable and safe for daily use,” she explains. “This standard means Tronque formulas include the cleanest ingredients with the highest efficacy, while creating a luxurious self-care experience.”
“With the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA) in the US and now New Zealand’s ban on PFAs, it is significant to see global regulation within an industry that had decades-long stagnant governance.”
The EPA’s decision to ban PFAs from use in Aotearoa reinforces Tanne’s decision to formulate with ingredients that help, not harm. Her own health journey motivated Tanne to develop a range of body care without endocrine-disrupting ingredients — or those that disrupt the body’s delicate hormone system.
She says it’s the shake-up the industry needed. “The industry will be deeply affected through the importing of larger global brands which will either have to change their formulas completely or not sell into New Zealand,” Tanne says.
“This will create a huge demand and gap in the market, which will allow clean New Zealand beauty brands to shine.”
While a large proportion of New Zealand beauty brands prioritise ingredients that highlight green science, countless others continue to use unregulated ingredients for their durability and low cost, Tanne says, meaning they can make a better profit off a formula that requires less work.
“In an ideal world, all cosmetic products would be safe and healthy for our bodies, however, this isn’t the case. I don’t believe we can rely on others to educate us, and much like the approach to nutritional panels with food, consumers should hold the responsibility to educate themselves on what they’re putting on their skin and ensure it aligns with their ethos,” she says.
In future, Tanne says she’d love to see the same level of regulation be extended to cookware and the food industry — given that non-stick pans are one of the worst offenders when it comes to PFAs.
More on beauty
From the best new launches to the products we swear by.
The beauty trends, ingredients and treatments set to dominate in 2024. This year’s answer to retinol, the hottest hair hues to try now, martini makeup and more.
9 beauty editor-approved office essentials to stash at your desk. The office beauty staples to ensure you look fresh, no matter what your 9-5 throws at you.
Yes, you can undo two weeks’ worth of hair damage from your summer holidays. Issue an apology to hair ravaged by sun, sea and salt with our expert-approved tips.
Too many products can stress out your skin. Here’s how to scale back. Multistep routines can cause breakouts and other issues, experts say.
Supercharged serums and hair heroes: These were NZ’s best beauty launches for 2023. Local beauty brands brought their A-game this year. Here’s what really stood out.
