-Caveat Lector- Alamaine Ratliff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -Caveat Lector- <snip> > : > : Dear family and friends: > : Check the ingredients listed on your shampoo bottle, and see if they > : have a substance by the name of Sodium Laureth Sulfate, or simply > : SLS. > : > : This substance is found in most shampoos, and the manufacturers > : use it because it produces a lot of foam and it is cheap. BUT the fact > : is that SLS is used to scrub garage floors, and it is very strong. It is > : also proven that it can cause cancer in the long run, and this is no > : joke. I went home and checked my shampoo (Vidal Sasoon); it > : doesn't contain it; however, others such as Vo5, Palmolive, Paul > : Mitchell, the new Hemp Shampoo, contains this substance. The first > : ingredient listed (which means it is the single most prevalent > : ingredient) in Clairol's Herbal Essences is Sodium Laureth Sulfate. > : So I called one company, and I told them their product contains a > : substance that will cause people to have cancer. They said, "Yeah, > : we knew about it but there is nothing we can do about it because we > : need that substance to produce foam. > : > : By the way, Colgate toothpaste also contains the same substance to > : produce the "bubbles." They said they are going to send me some > : information. > : > : Research has shown that in the 1980s, the chance of getting cancer > : is 1 out of 8000 and now, in the 1990s, the chances of getting cancer > : is 1 out of 3, which is very serious. > : > : So, I hope that you will take this seriously and pass this on to all the > : people you know, and hopefully, we can stop "giving" ourselves the > : cancer virus (I hate wrong information! Cancer is not caused by a virus! > : See Part X of my series to understand. - David). This is serious. After > : you have read this, pass it on to as many people as possible, this is not > : a chain letter, but it concerns our health. > : > : Michelle Hailey > : Executive Secretary > : University of Pennsylvania Health System Office of Legal Affairs > : (215) 662-2546 > : <snip> According to the Mining Co.-- (http://urbanlegends.miningco.com/library/weekly/aa090998.htm?pid=2733&cob=home) What is sodium laureth sulfate ...and why are people saying those awful things about it? Dateline: 09/09/98 The latest dire health warning to circulate by email claims that sodium laureth sulfate, a synthetic chemical commonly found in brand-name shampoos, causes cancer. As is typical of such warnings, the message is unsigned and cites no references to support its claims. "This is not a chain letter," the message concludes, but it is one. As you shall see, its purpose is not to inform, but to frighten: Subject: FW: SHAMPOO ALERT!!! MUST READ!!! Importance: High Check the ingredients listed on your shampoo bottle, and see if they have this substance by the name of Sodium Laureth Sulfate or simply SLS. This substance is found in most shampoo, the manufactures use it because it produces a lot of foam and it is cheap. BUT the fact is that SLS is used to scrub garage floors, and it is very strong. It is also proven that it can cause cancer in the long run, and this is no joke. Well, I went home and check my shampoo (Vidal Sasoon), it hasn't got it, but others such as Vo5, Palmolive etc..they've got this substance, so I've called up to one of the company (u must think I had nothing better to do, no, I am just concerned about our health) well, I told them their product contains a substance that will cause people to have cancer, and u know what they said, they said "Yeah.we knew about it but there is nothing we can do about it coz we need that substance to produce foam, oh, by the way the Colgate toothpaste also contains the same substance to produce the bubbles". Oh my God, I've been using the Colgate since when I was born, what the world is that, are we going to die very soon. They said they are going to send me some info. Research have shown that in the 1980s, the chance of getting cancer is 1 out of 8000 and now in the 1990s, the chances of getting cancer is 1 out of 3 which is very serious. So I hope that you will take this seriousness and pass on this to all the people you know, and hopefully, we can stop "giving" ourselves the cancer virus. This is serious, after you have read this, pass it on to as many people as possible, this is not a chain letter, but it concerns our health. Questions and answers: Q: Is sodium laureth sulfate commonly found in shampoos and toothpastes? A: Shampoos, yes; toothpastes, no. Q: Is sodium laureth sulfate known to cause cancer? A: No. The chemical does not appear on any official list of known or suspected carcinogens. Q: Is sodium laureth sulfate properly abbreviated as "SLS?" A: No. The correct abbreviation is "SLES." The chain letter confuses this compound with another: sodium lauryl sulfate, which is abbreviated "SLS." The two substances are related, but not the same. Q: Is sodium laureth sulfate used to scrub garage floors? A: No. Q: What about the other one – sodium lauryl sulfate – is it used to scrub garage floors? A: No doubt! SLS is a powerful surfactant (wetting agent) and detergent. It has industrial uses, but can also be commonly found in shampoos, toothpastes, shaving creams, etc. Q: Ah. Well, then, is SLS a known carcinogen? A: No. But it's not as harmless as SLES. Sodium lauryl sulfate is a skin and eye irritant and can cause dermatitis with prolonged contact. Results of some tests on animal tissues indicate that it can cause abnormal cell mutations, though I've seen conflicting evidence. Q: Would a manufacturer freely admit, as claimed in the message, that it knowingly uses a carcinogen in its products "because we need that substance to produce foam?" A: Are you kidding? Of course not. Q: Is it true that my chances of getting cancer are "1 out of 3" in the '90s? A: The short answer is no, but that shouldn't necessarily set your mind at ease. According to the most recent U.S. study, cancer strikes approximately 1 in 250 people. Of course, that's the incidence rate, which is not the same as someone's odds of getting cancer. The problem with stating probabilities in this case is that there's no way to generalize accurately. The reasons are: 1) cancer risks for individuals vary according to a host of factors, including gender, race, habits, and family history; and 2) the likelihood of any individual contracting cancer is also a function of their age. For example, if you're 20 years old, the odds are much greater that you'll contract cancer in your lifetime than they are if you're 50, simply because there's a longer time span involved. That said, the longer answer is: for an "average person" (that is, someone of no particular age or gender who lives nowhere in particular and inherited no genes from his or her parents), the chances of getting cancer over a lifetime work out to somewhere between 1 in 3 and 1 in 2, at present. Q: Were the chances of getting cancer in the 1980s "1 out of 8,000?" A: No, that's absurd. Cancer rates were approximately the same a decade ago as they are now; if anything, they were a bit higher. Q: Really? Aren't cancer rates rising? A: No, in the United States they're falling, though at a fractional rate and there's no telling if that trend will continue. Q: Is cancer a "virus?" A: No. Q: Is the chain letter a hoax? A: Yes. Q: Where did the misinformation come from? A: Well, if you're asking who started the chain letter, there's no way of knowing. But as to the misinformation itself, it turns out that there are many, many Web pages containing very similar statements. It's a good bet that it all came from the same source. Interestingly, all these Websites are maintained by "independent distributors" for various multi-level marketing companies hawking "natural personal care products," etc. As a matter of fact, the majority of URLs returned in a standard Web search on the keywords "sodium laureth sulfate" point to versions of the same propaganda. Assuming all the information did come from the same source, one thing that's clear is that the author of our chain letter and some of these Web entrepreneurs were very sloppy copyists and/or intent on slanting the "facts" to suit their purposes. In the chain letter, for example, "1 out of 8,000" is alleged to have been the cancer rate in the 1980s; the Web pages say it was the cancer rate in 1901. That sounds more reasonable, but it's no cause to assume the Websites are more accurate. On some of them, the figure cited for 1901 is not "1 out of 8,000," but "1 out of 80." Misinformation has a way of multiplying. Many of the pages I looked at were littered with inaccuracies, deceptive statements, and outright lies. One even alleges that "In 1993 it was documented that sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and sodium laureth sulfate (SLES) were the leading cause of blindness in children" – as if claiming they're carcinogens weren't enough! Another page features a link to a site vending quack cancer cures. In some cases, the authors refer to legitimate medical studies, but in a misleading way, making it appear as if the studies proved more than they really did. Small wonder that by the time this information made its way into chain letter form, virtually every statement in it was outrageously false. What's worse, as the chain letter circulates, the information degrades even further. One of the more recent variants gives the abbreviation of sodium laureth sulfate as "SLY," which is doubly wrong. Q: Do you think the chain letter may have been deliberately started to frighten people into using other products? A: I suspect it, but there's no way to know for sure, and I can't prove it. For all we know, someone came across this stuff by accident, believed it to be true, and innocently wanted to share it with others. Q: Do you really think that was the case? A: Nope. Postscript: The old adage, "Where there's smoke, there's fire," may apply here. While the "facts" stated in the sodium laureth sulfate warning are almost entirely false, there may be other potentially hazardous substances in name-brand personal care products. ... Sources: 8th Annual Report on Carcinogens (1998). National Toxicology Program. URL: http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/Main_pages/NTP_8RoC_pg.html (1 Sep. 1998). "Cancer Death Rates Dropping." ABCNews.com/Reuters, 12 Mar. 1998. URL: http://www.abcnews.com/sections/living/DailyNews/cancer0312.html (7 Sep. 1998). Clayton, R.M., et al. (1985). "The Penetration of Detergents into Adult and Infant Eyes." Food and Chemical Toxicology 23.2 (Feb. 1985): 239-246. Hope, J. "Absence of Chromosome Damage in the bone marrow of rats fed detergent actives for 90 days." Mutation Research 56.1 (Sep. 1977): 47-50. Material Safety Data Sheet for Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (Sodium Lauryl Sulfate). University of Utah. URL: http://www.chem.utah.edu/MSDS/S/SODIUM_DODECYL_SULFATE_(SDS) (1 Sep. 1998). "New Report on Declining Cancer Incidence and Death Rates..." National Cancer Institute Press Release, 12 Mar. 1998. URL: http://rex.nci.nih.gov/massmedia/pressreleases/deathrate.html (7 Sep. 1998). UMCP Partial List of Teratogens (1995). University of Maryland. URL: http://www.inform.umd.edu/DES/ch/terat.html (4 Sep. 1998). Winter, Ruth. A Consumer's Dictionary of Household, Yard and Office Chemicals. New York: Crown, 1992. ================================= Robert F. Tatman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Remove "nospam" from the address to reply. NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml POSTING THIS MESSAGE TO THE INTERNET DOES NOT IMPLY PERMISSION TO SEND UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL E-MAIL (SPAM) TO THIS OR ANY OTHER INTERNET ADDRESS. RECEIPT OF SPAM WILL RESULT IN IMMEDIATE NOTIFICATION OF THE SENDER'S ISP. ____________________________________________________________________ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
