Dr Dingle's Blog / antipersperant
Since the 1980's, there has been a growing amount of research toward the potential interaction between these environmental estrogens and wild animals, with a number of reports detailing the emergence of 'feminised wildlife’ around the world, and a range of adverse effects in humans including decreased sperm count, increased cases of testicular cancer and testicular abnormalities, increased breast cancer in men and women and premature or precocious puberty. Other adverse health outcomes linked with EDC’s include headache, migraine, depression, gastrointestinal disturbances, insomnia, changes in breast tissue and in vaginal bleeding. More chronic symptoms affect the cardiovascular system, the skin (itching, rash, abnormal pigmentation), the gallbladder, and tumours particularly of the breast but also uterus, cervix, vagina and liver. While other studies have shown increases in the organ weight of estrogen-sensitive tissues such as the uterus, and calcium and bone metabolism are all examples of the estrogenic effects. Even how we age and age at menopause can be affected by these chemicals. In support of this at least one professional and very conservative group, the Endocrine Society, has concluded that sufficient evidence now exists linking endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) to adverse human reproductive effects, including possible epigenetic and trans-generational effects.
Unfortunately, our babies are being born pre-polluted with chemicals detectable in their blood, in the placenta and in amniotic fluid because of exposure to these chemicals during pregnancy and throughout the mother’s life. The placental barrier has been shown to allow these chemicals to cross, as many of them have been measured in human fetal cord blood, fetal serum, human amniotic fluid and even newborn stools (meconium). Exposure to these chemicals before birth poses a serious health risks to developing fetus, infants and young children as shown by the increasing adverse effects including negative birth outcomes, childhood obesity and increasing intellectual disabilities. It is believed that current levels of environmental estrogen exposure results in lower birth weights, smaller head circumferences, poorer neuromuscular maturity and visual recognition, delays in psychomotor development, short term memory problems, and growth retardation in newborn babies. Fetal exposure to these environmental estrogens are suspected of disrupting thyroid functioning, sexual differentiation of the brain in foetal development and cognitive motor function and cause anxious behaviour. They are also able to bind to neurotransmitters such as epinephrine, neuroepinophrine and dopamine enabling estrogens to influence the body's central nervous system (CNS). Environmental estrogens have also been shown to effect the body’s immune system.
Studies have found strong links with exposure to excessive levels of estrogen in males with penis abnormalities, lower libido, congenital anomalies, failure of the testes to descend and testicular cancer, reduced penis size and increased embryo mortality.
What is most concerning regarding control of these chemicals is that there are no indications given or regulations set regarding the minimal age at which they should be used or exposed to them. Increasingly, pregnant mothers, infants, pre-pubescent and pubescent children are being exposed to a large number of products containing these chemicals, with no research to show that exposure is safe during these critical periods of development.
Equally strong is the evidence that these same chemicals can cause some of the most common cancers: prostate and testicular cancer in men and breast cancer in women. One of the most troubling is their association with breast cancer. Breast cancer is the major cancer affecting women in the Western world and one of the most disturbing and well documented current trends is the alarming increase in breast cancer incidence over the past few decades. Fifty years ago the risk rate was one woman in 20; today it is one in 8 and approximately two-thirds of breast tumors are estrogen receptive, and environmental estrogens like parabens, phthalates and BPA are known to bind to estrogen receptors. Estrogen-dependent cancers, such as breast cancer, are known to be highly responsive to estrogens for growth. Even more disturbing is the increase in numbers of young girls developing breast cancer.
Evidence from animal studies shows that prenatal exposure to bisphenol A (BPA), a ubiquitous endocrine-disrupting chemical, is associated with adverse reproductive outcomes in females and males. In females exposure during early gestation, a critical period for reproductive development, is of particular concern. The Anogenital distance (AGD) is a sensitive biomarker of the fetal hormonal balance and a measure of reproductive toxicity in animal studies. In some studies, the daughters of BPA-exposed dams have shorter AGD than controls.
The results of this study showed BPA was detectable in 94% of women. In analysis of the 381 eligible subjects, maternal BPA concentration was inversely associated with infant AGD-AC
In support of animal studies this human study shows that BPA may have toxic effects on the female reproductive system in humans, as it does in animal models. Higher first-trimester BPA exposure was associated with significantly shorter AGD in daughters, suggesting that BPA may alter the hormonal environment of the female fetus.
Bisphenol A (BPA) is a synthetic chemical widely used in consumer products, including food and drink containers, thermal receipts, medical equipment, and other plastic products. BPA is detectable in over 90% of the population in the United States, and may act on the endocrine system in numerous ways, including binding to and activating numerous nuclear and membrane endocrine receptors, and stimulating changes in estrogen, androgen, progesterone, and thyroid hormone activity.
Dozens of studies in humans have examined BPA exposure in relation to a wide range of health end points, including reproductive, perinatal, and pediatric outcomes. Many animal studies and in vitro studies show that many tissues and organ systems (including the mammary gland, prostate gland, adipose tissue, reproductive system, and brain) are sensitive to BPA. In animal and human studies, BPA can cross the placenta to enter fetal circulation. Because fetal development is a period of rapid cell proliferation and differentiation, tissue development, and organ growth, prenatal exposure to environmental chemicals such as BPA may be of particular concern.
Not only are probiotics considered beneficial to digestive health, and immune health but increasing evidence suggests direct and indirect interactions between gut microbiota (GM) and the central nervous system (CNS).
A large body of research has supported the presence of a pathway of communication between the gut and the brain, modulated by the gut microbiota, giving rise to the term “microbiota-gut-brain” axis. It is now thought that, through this pathway, microbiota can affect behaviour and modulate brain plasticity and cognitive function. In particular, studies have illustrated an association between the gut microbiota composition and cognitive processes such as learning and memory. Research has shown that the intestinal microbiota additionally contribute to the early development of normal social and cognitive behaviours 1. While probiotic and prebiotic supplementation can have a positive effect on mood and psychological symptoms such as depression and anxiety, stress as well as mental health issues including depression, Alzheimers and Parkinson’s diseases. This new area of research, called “psychobiotics” is where the beneficial bacteria (probiotics) or prebiotics that influence bacteria–brain relationships can exert positive emotional, cognitive, systemic, and neural benefits 2. This process is thought to occur primarily through the central nervous system (CNS) as well as through metabolic, hormonal and immune pathways.
Recent evidence indicates a clear association between changes in the microbiota and cognitive behaviors and there is increasing evidence on the effects of supplementing with probiotics on improving cognitive disorders 3. One of the earliest studies found that the wrong type of bacteria added to the gut of germ free animals (containing no microbiota), can cause stress related negative behavious while administration of probiotics can improve cognitive behaviors including learning and memory 1.
In a clinical trial conducted among 60 Alzheimer's patients where the probiotic supplemented group took 200 ml/day probiotic milk for 12 weeks, the probiotic group showed a significant improvement in the MMSE (Mini-mental state examination) which is a measure of cognitive function. In addition, they reported lower levels of oxidation and inflammation, blood fats (tryglicerides) and improved insulin resistance and Beta cell (pancreas) function which controls and stores insulin in the probiotic group compared to the control group 4. A pretty good reason to supplement with probiotics.
Growing research also shows probiotic supplements may be used therapeutically to modify stress responses and symptoms of anxiety and depression 5,6,7,8. One study found that a short 3-week intervention with probiotics-containing milk drink improved mood scores compared to participants who received a placebo. Although, improvement in mood was only observed for participants who showed elevated symptoms of depression at the beginning 9. A second study found that a month of probiotic supplementation significantly improved depression and anger 10. In a triple-blind study of 20 healthy participants without a current mood disorder over 4 weeks, probiotics significantly reduced negative thoughts associated with a sad mood compared to placebo. The positive effect was mostly because of reduced rumination and aggressive thoughts 11. While a study of people with chronic fatigue syndrome found that supplementing with probiotics for 2 months significantly reduced their anxiety scores 12.
Similar results have also been shown in animal studies. In a study of healthy mice researchers observed a reduction in anxious and depressive behavior after feeding healthy mice with probiotics 13. A similar result was shown in adult rats with a reduction in depressive-like behaviors after feeding them with Bifidobacterium species. The effect was comparable to the effects of administering the antidepressant citalopram 14.
Stress and anxiety disorders are two of the most common psychiatric illnesses worldwide, affecting both children and adults. Increasing numbers of studies have suggested that the gut microbiota is involved in the pathophysiology of stress-related disorders. For example, a number of studies have now shown that certain strains of bacteria increase anxious behaviour while others reduce it. One study found that participants who were given a mixture of probiotics containing Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium species showed significantly less psychological distress than matched controls 15. A recent (November 2016) meta-analysis of seven studies with around 300 participants showed that supplementation with probiotics resulted in a significant improvement in psychological symptoms of depression, anxiety, and perceived stress in healthy human volunteers 16.
However, probiotics and the effects on our moods appears to be a two way street. While the gut microbiome can alter moods, our moods can also alter our gut microbiome. Chronic stress can cause behavioral, cognitive, biochemical, and gut microbiota aberrations. In a study of 1002 cases and controls followed up for 12 years, those with gut disorders had elevated levels of anxiety and depression at baseline, but also those with higher levels of anxiety and depression were more likely to have gut disorders at follow-up 17.
Animal studies have also shown certain strains of Lactobacillus exert a positive effect on anxiety-related behavior and responses to stress 13,18. In a study on rats subjected to 21 days of stress the results showed that administration of probiotics improved the stress-induced behavioral (anxiety and depression) and cognitive dysfunction, showing an effect similar to and better than that of an antidepressant. It also resulted in lower stress hormones and improved blood parameters suggesting it was dealing with some of the underlying mechanisms 18.
Other studies have noted that microbiota have an important influence on the development of cognitive processes in young mice 1. Depletion of a normal gut microbiome in early life, especially during the post-weaning period, may affect cognitive and social behaviours in the brain through the alteration of neuropeptides (chemical messengers) such as vasopressin and oxytocin 19,20. In fact, the research suggests a strong role of the gut microbiota in autism spectrum disorder. Interestingly, treatment of mice with autism with probiotics has shown to ameliorate autism related traits 21. In another twist on this, a study of 75 pregnant women given probiotics 4 weeks before their due dates and then continued giving the probiotics to the infants, or to the mothers if they were breastfeeding for 6 months did not develop any ADHD or Asperger’s after being followed for 13 years. 17.1% of the children in the placebo group developed ADHD or Asperger’s. Not one child in the probiotic group did 22.
Importantly, studies have shown that multispecies probiotics (i.e., combining different strains of specific genera) can have increased effectiveness through an additive effect of specific strain properties such as colonization of different niches, enhanced adhesion and induction of an optimal pH range, as compared to mono-species supplements 23,24. So take a mixed species supplement for the best results.
- Gareau et al 2014
- Liang et al 2015
- Bhattacharjee and Lukiv, 2013
- Elmira Akbari1 et al 2016
- Logan and katzman 2005,
- Cryan and O’Mahony, 2011,
- Bruce-Keller et al 2015,
- Savignac et al 2015
- Benton et al 2006)
- Gut Microbes 2011
- Steenbergen L., et al. 2015
- Gut Pathology 2009;1:6-10
- Bravo et al 2011
- Desbonnet et al 2010
- Messaoudi et al 2011
- McKean et al. 2016
- Koloski et al, 2016
- Luo, J. et al. 2014
- Desbonnet L., et al. 2015,
- Sampson and Mazmanian. 2015
- Hsiao et al. Cell. 2013
- Pediatr Res 2015;77:823-8
- Timmerman et al 2004
- Chapman et al 2011
New research suggests that a 25% reduction in exposure to just 4 chemicals commonly found in the home would reduce diabetes cases by around 13% which could save billions of dollars in annual health costs.
Increasing evidence suggests that synthetic chemicals commonly found in the environment contribute to metabolic disorders, especially obesity and diabetes. Previous publications have associated prevalent diabetes with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), persistent chlorinated pesticides, phthalates and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). Separate studies found similar connections between diabetes and exposure to DDT, PCBs and perfluoroalkyl.
In this study of 1,016 participants they found significant connections between the four chemicals investigated and a number of different diseases and found reduced exposure to all four chemicals would lead to a likely reduction 13% in diabetes cases. This study confirms substantial contribution, especially of mixtures of endocrine-disrupting chemicals, to adult type 2 diabetes, and large annual costs of medical care. A previous reported a significant positive relationship between phthalates in the blood and lowered insulin secretion, increased insulin resistance or both.
While this study supports efforts to reduce chemical exposures to reduce the burden and costs of diabetes there are many other disease states including cardiovascular disease and cancer that would also likely be reduced.
Estrogens are a group of naturally occurring hormones present in both male testes and female ovaries, with females producing a considerably higher amount. They are particularly influential during puberty, menstruation and pregnancy; however they also assist in regulating the growth of bones, skin, liver and organs of the cardiovascular system. Estrogens, like all hormones, act as chemical signals and are important in helping cells in various organs to sense and respond to changing physiological conditions; therefore the right balance of hormones is critical in order to carry out the functions required of a healthy, strong body. Estrogen binds to a protein, or estrogen receptor, and the estrogen receptor complex can then bind to specific genes and by this, alter the way they are expressed, resulting in a change in cell programming 1.
Environmental estrogens, are now present in everyday products such as polycarbonate plastics, food packaging and cans. However the greatest source for many people is through cosmetics and personal care products and include chemicals such as triclosan, cyclosiloxanes, parabens and phthalates which are often left on the skin to absorb and accumulate 2. Women are disproportionately exposed to many environmental estrogens like paraben and phthalates because they use more personal care products on average than men 3 and teenage girls tend to use even more products than women, averaging 17 different products per day, compared with 12 for women 4.
Since the 1980's, there has been a growing amount of research toward the potential interaction between these environmental estrogens and wild animals, with a number of reports detailing the emergence of 'feminised wildlife’ around the world, and a range of adverse effects in humans including decreased sperm count, increased cases of testicular cancer and testicular abnormalities, increased breast cancer in men and women and premature or precocious puberty. Other adverse health include headache, migraine, depression, gastrointestinal disturbances, insomnia, mastopathia, changes in vaginal bleeding 5. More chronic symptoms affect the cardiovascular system, the skin (itching, rash, abnormal pigmentation), the gallbladder, and tumours, particularly of the breast but also uterus, cervix, vagina and liver 5.
One of the most troubling is their association with breast cancer 6,7,8. Breast cancer is the major cancer affecting women in the Western world 9 and one of the most disturbing and well documented current trends is the alarming increase in breast cancer incidence over the past few decades. Fifty years ago the risk rate was one woman in 20; today it is one in 8 and approximately two-thirds of breast tumors are estrogen receptive, and environmental estrogens like parabens are known to bind to estrogen receptors. Estrogen-dependent cancers, such as breast cancer, are known to be highly responsive to estrogens for growth. Even more disturbing is the increase in numbers of young girls developing breast cancer. Although many factors such as radiation, alcohol, smoking and diet, add to the risk of developing breast cancer, the predominant influencing factor has been identified as the exposure to estrogens throughout an individual's lifetime 9.
The breast is under hormonal control and a fine balance of hormones is what allows the cell to cell communication. Interaction between these cells and the surrounding fluid of the breast tissue is what controls differentiation and growth of the breast 9. If there is a disruption of those hormones, i.e. through the use of synthetic chemicals, the balance of hormonal control is thrown and the cells do not function normally which may lead to breast cancer. In support of this clinical studies show that estrogen has the capacity to drive breast tumours to grow in laboratory studies. Animal experimental studies have also shown the role of estrogen on the growth of breast cancer cells 9. While chemicals which mimic estrogen have been shown to promote and stimulate the proliferation of breast cancer cells 2,10,11, and activate other processes involved in breast cancer 2,11,12. Recent studies have also shown other factors can dramatically increase the the toxicity of Xenoestrogens and studies of individual estrogens may seriously underestimate their growth and spreading effects in breast tissue cells and their potency to promote breast cancer, particularly at lower doses 13.
Although the vast majority of studies on breast cancer are aimed towards women, men can also suffer from the disease, indicating that they have similar risk factors, with one case in a hundred diagnosed breast cancers being a male 14. Although this number is relatively small, the rate of incidence has increased by 25% in 25 years.
Sperm count of the average male in the US or Europe has been found to be declining continuously over the past four decades, dierectly linked with environmental estrogen exposure, and today it is less than 50% of what it was forty years ago15,16. One result of this lower count is the increased rate of male infertility; which is also the single most common cause of infertility. The rate of infertility has quadrupled in the past forty years, from 4% in 1965 to at least 16% today 15.
Other conditions including undescended testes caused by prenatal estrogen exposure to environmental estrogens have also been found in studies on mice and it has been suggested undescended testes increases the rate of testicular cancer 17. The incidence of testicular cancer, namely affecting males between the ages of 20 to 30, has also seen an increase worldwide. Studies have found strong links with exposure to excessive levels of estrogen with hypospadias (abnormal congenital opening of male urethra upon under surface of the penis) 18,19, lower libido 19, congenital anomalies, cryptorchidism and testicular cancer 20,21,22.
Environmental estrogens have also been linked to early puberty in girls and increasing number of girls experiencing precocious puberty in recent years 15. A study in the United States of 17, 000 girls indicated that 7% of white and 27% of black girls exhibited physical signs of puberty by age seven, and for girls aged 10 the percentages increased to 68 and 95 respectively 16. This trend for earlier puberty has been found to be widespread, with similar cases found in the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand (Trankina, M. V L., 2001).
Environmental estrogens are also suspected of disrupting thyroid functioning, sexual differentiation of the brain in foetal development and cognitive motor function 23. It is also believed that high levels of environmental estrogen exposure results in lower birth weights, smaller head circumferences, poorer neuromuscular maturity and visual recognition, delays in psychomotor development, short term memory problems, and growth retardation in newborn babies 24.
Prenatal exposure to environmental estrogens also poses a serious health risks to developing fetus and children as evidence of adverse effect on birth outcomes, childhood obesity, and intellectual disability are increasing 25. The placental barrier has been shown to allow these chemicals to cross as many of them have been measured in human fetal cord blood and tissue. More importantly, because organogenesis begins at the time when the fetus is solely dependent on maternal supply, early life exposure to environmental estrogens may lead to adverse short or long term health outcomes due to fetal reprogramming 26.
From testing on animals it has further been proposed that excessive estrogen levels could cause anxious behaviour 27,28, altered fecundency 29, reduced penis size 30 and increased embryo mortality 24. Environmental estrogens are not only capable of binding to estrogen receptors on cell membranes but are also able to bind to neurotransmitters such as epinephrine, neuroepinophrine and dopamine enabling estrogens to influence the body's central nervous system (CNS) 31. Environmental estrogens have also been shown to effect the body’s immune system 30. A large number of studies have also environmental estrogens to contributing to obesity and diabetes, independent of poor diet and physical inactivity; such chemicals including ingredients found in personal care products and cosmetics such as phthalates and phenols 32,33.
More recently studies have found effects of direct exposure to products instead of just individual chemicals. Extensive observational studies have indicated a relationship between certain hair product use and hormonally imbalances including early menache (puberty) 34,35 and uterine fibroids 36 as well as enlargement of breast tissue in boys and men 37.
However, estrogenic (or anti-estrogenic) effects of the personal care products as commercial mixtures have rarely ever been evaluated. In a study of eight commonly used hair and skin products four of the eight personal care products tested (Oil Hair Lotion, Extra-dry Skin Lotion, Intensive Skin Lotion and Petroleum Jelly demonstrated detectable estrogenic activity 38. The estrogenic activity of these products was not predictable by examining their listed ingredients. However, perhaps the most surprising finding about any one product was the estrogenic activity of SP4 (Petroleum Jelly). Petroleum jelly products are also often used on infants as low-cost therapies for common problems such as diaper rash and is manufactured by refinement of the crude petroleum product. While other studies have shown that hair oil use as a child was significantly associated with earlier menarche and hair relaxer use and uterine fibroids among participants in the 36. A third study found an elevated incidence of endometriosis and use of personal care products containing benzophenone-type UV filters 39.
Fortunately, studies have also shown it is relatively easy to reduce exposure by reducing personal care use or using safer products. In one study of around 100 girls they replaced their personal care products with safer alternatives for 3 days. The replacement products were chosen on the basis of whether their ingredient lists included triclosan, benzophenone-3, or parabens. Phthalates are not listed on ingredient lists, but they are often found in scented products. So the researchers avoided products that listed “fragrance” as an ingredient unless they were specifically labeled as phthalate free. More than 90% of the participants had detectible levels of phthalates, parabens, and benzophenone-3 before they started using the replacement products. After using the alternative products for 3 days urinary concentrations of methyl and propyl paraben decreased by 43.9% and 45.4%, respectively, mono-ethyl phthalate decreased by 27.4%, and triclosan decreased by 35.7%. However, there were increases in concentrations of butyl and ethyl paraben, which were detected in about half the girls. These chemicals might have been unintentional contaminants or unlabeled ingredients in replacement products, which they acknowledge they were unable to ensure were paraben free 40.
- McLachlan, J. A. & Arnold, S. F., 1996
- Darbre, 2003
- February 2015
- 24 September 2008
- Ternes et al 2004
- Darbre and Harvey 2008;
- Vandenberg et al. 2012;
- Zoeller et al. 2012
- Darbe 2006
- Okubo et al. 2001;
- Wróbel and Gregoraszczuk 2013
- Gomez et al. 2005
- Pan S, et al 2016
- Williams, R. M., 2004
- Sax, L., 2001,
- Trankina, M. L., 2001
- Christiansen et al, 1996
- Paulozzi 1999
- Calzolari et al, 1986
- MeLachian et al, 1984)
- Rapp, 1996
- Bernstein, 1988
- Ayotte and Bonefeld‑Jorgensen, 2003
- Trankina, 2003
- Godoy, et al. 2014
- Skinner M. K., et al. 2011
- Arabo et al, 2005
- Caston et al, 2001
- Vos et al, 2000),
- Brooks et al, 2007
- Fuentes et al, 2000
- Song Y, et al 2014;
- Carwile JL, et al 2011
- James-Todd. 2011
- Tiwary CM. 1998
- Wise LA, 2012
- Gottswinter JM, 1984
- Myers et al 2015
- Kunisue T, et al. 2012
- Harley KG, et al. 2016
In November 2008, a 12 year old boy, Daniel Hurley collapsed and died in his bathroom 'after using too much deodorant'. The hearing into his death found that “he was overcome by solvents in the Lynx Vice spray”. Unfortunately there were no repercussions for the company as the warnings are spelt out on the can. Despite the warning being there, my own research shows that around 1% of people actually read and understand the labels. However, this is not the first, nor is it the last. On July 12 1998, 10 years earlier a young boy in the UK, this time 16 years old who had an obsession with smelling nice died after months of spraying his entire body with deodorant. Jonathon Campbell had 10 times the lethal dose of propane and butane in his blood. While these are tragic outcomes, the real problems lies in the millions of kids (and adults) around the world who are slowly poisoning themselves. The warning signs on most cans reads something like “deliberately concentrating may be harmful or fatal” or for cans sold to kids “must be used in the presence of adults” and the company has no other responsibility to your health than these labels. If people really knew what was in these cans and read these labels closely I am sure they would have second thoughts about using them and giving them to their kids. Unfortunately, the ingredients are not listed and the warning is all in the small print on the back.
The problem with deodorants and antiperspirants is three fold. First the propellant gases like propane and butane are toxic and were implicated in the deaths of both boys. This associated with the fact that they are sprayed upward towards the armpit and headspace means you can’t help but breathe them in. The second is the long list of toxic ingredients used in the deodorants and antiperspirants which you don’t know about and which are absorbed through the skin and thirdly the blocking of our pores by the antiperspirants.
To highlight where the problem starts antiperspirants and deodorants are among the top six products causing adverse skin reactions, including itching, burning, dryness, irritant dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis. They have become one of the most frequently purchased products worldwide, surpassed in market share only by soaps and hair care products. Unfortunately, they are also one of the most widely marketed products constantly playing on kids’ emotional health, sex and relationships to sell their toxic products.
Deodorants act to reduce, cover up, or eliminate the odour that develops when bacteria break down perspiration. This is achieved by the use of anti-microbial agents and fragrances. Antiperspirants are distinguished from deodorants by the presence of sweat retarding agents. These agents are based on aluminium complexes and may include aluminium chlorohydrate (ACH), aluminium zirconium chlorohydrate glycine complexes (AZAP) or aluminium zirconium tetrachlorohydroxy glycine. While the connection between aluminium in antiperspirants and Alzheimer's disease and epilepsy continue to be explored and debated they seem highly unlikely. Other problems such as a link with breast cancer are much more likely. The action of these chemicals limits the levels of perspiration produced in the underarm and other areas, by slowing the action of the sweat glands. Sweat production is reduced due to the fact that the chemicals produce an obstructive hydroxide gel inside the sweat gland ducts, limiting the amount of perspiration that can be excreted. However, we were meant to sweat. Sweating provides a valuable service to our body by eliminating waste products, and cooling down the body. As a result antiperspirants may lead to a build up of toxins in this area just near the breast.
Antiperspirant and deodorant ingredients include anti-microbials such as chlorhexidine d-1-gluconate and triclosan, odour eliminators such as zinc ricitioleate and various perfumes. Other ingredients which may cause contact allergies include formaldehyde, atranorm, evernic acid, fumarprotocetraric acid, cetalkonium chloride, fenticlor, gluteraldehyde, zirconium and dibutyl phthalate. Many of the same chemicals you would find in toilet deodorants. Starting to sound a bit smelly isn’t it. Formaldehyde is a skin irritant and thought to be carcinogenic, and phthalates are suspected of producing endocrine (hormone)‑disrupting effects as they are able to mimic the action of oestrogen and upset our hormone balance. In one study diethyl phthalate, which is a solvent, was detected in 2 out of 8 deodorants. The breast, as a result, is also exposed to a range of these oestrogenic chemicals applied to the underarm and breast area. These cosmetics are left on the skin in the appropriate area, allowing a more direct dermal absorption route for breast exposure to oestrogenic chemicals and allowing absorbed chemicals to escape systemic metabolism. It is also worth noting that the large increase in breast cancer over the last 30 years has been a result of an increase in oestrogen receptive cancers.
Research has shown that repeated application of deodorants permeate the skin resulting in accumulation of some of these chemicals. According to one study butyl paraben was systemically absorbed, metabolized and excreted in urine following application to the skin in a cream preparation. The study conducted over 2 weeks showed concentration peaked in urine 8-12 hours after application. Isn’t it interesting to know that the chemicals you put on the outside of your body get in?
Then the problem is exacerbated even more when they are used in spray containers that we direct towards our face. If your lungs are a uniquely designed sponge for air, they are also a sponge for the contaminants that manage to evade all of your respiratory system’s defenses. All the ingredients and the propellants are rapidly absorbed into the body and detectable throughout the body within minutes to hours.
The safer option is to use roll on deodorant. Unfortunately, it does not look as sexy in the advertisements, but it is much safer. The next step is then to move toward natural products and organic when you can. We have evolved with natural plant products over millions of years and as a general rule they are much safer than synthetic products manufactured from petrol. I also think it is about time we stop overselling these products and teaching kids that too much fragrance can be toxic… and who would want to smell like a toilet block anyway?