 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response to JNJ Responses to Campaign for Safe Cosmetics This is my interpretation and response to the letter sent by Johnson and Johnson to the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics. Ladies, stop being nicey-nicey with these criminals. Understand what they are really sayin...read this response... JNJ to CFSC: Dated November 16, 2011 Our Chairman and CEO, Bill Weldon (2010 Salary: $22 million), asked me to respond to your letter on his behalf, as I am responsible for product stewardship at Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies. [ You and I have had several discussions over the past two years, so I think you know that our commitment to ensuring the safety of personal care products, especially those for babies, is at the core of everything we do and who we are as a company. For over 100 years, mothers, fathers and caregivers have relied on us to care for babies and children, and we work every day to maintain that trust.  [Translation: I've read the script so many times I say it in my sleep. It's designed by our marketing team to shut people like you up and it isn't working very well anymore. About that trust thing - costed us $60 million for our international bribery thing, or that little incident where Colleen Goggins, Worldwide Chairman, Consumer and Personal Care Group of Johnson and Johnson, (2010 Salary: $1.52 million) lied to the FDA during a hearing and you wouldn't know about any of the last 100 recalls if it weren't the FDA and freakin Twitter and FaceBook. Yeah, for over 100 years, the last 40 of which we dumped in a bunch of unknown, unstudied, potentially carcinogenic, known carcinogenic and some of them we don't even have to tell you about. Oh, just trust what I put in that marketing script above, okay?]While we would still disagree with the science and conclusions in your letter and report, we want you and those who count on our products every day to understand our commitment to safety, as well as some of the steps we are taking that go beyond considerations of safety alone to respond to changing consumer needs and values. [Look, we believe whatever we are told. We reps are drones, puppets and trained on JNJ materials. We believe whatever we are told without question. Occasionally, one or two stray from the pack and say really nasty things. We call them whistleblowers. This horrible group consists of such monsters as Scott Bartz, Gwen Olsen, Kathleen Slattery-Moschkau and others. So, if you ignore them, our products are safe. One of the steps is placating or flat out ignoring those who say anything against our Toxic Products for Pharma Gain business model. Since we've done extensive animal testing, our handlers, I mean managers, likely know what the rate of asthma, cancer, allergies, eczema and so on our products cause. From that, they could easily extrapolate future earnings for our shareholders since we are creating our own customer base with our toxic cosmetics line. However, the needs of the consumer have changed. For some strange reason they seem to think they need products without carcinogens for their miserable kids. Consumer values have also changed. Now that consumers are opening their eyes a bit, they realize that they do not want to rub carcinogens on their infants, and their children, and themselves.] When we develop a personal care product, our experts including doctors, toxicologists and biologists, carefully review safety data and the most recent scientific literature on the ingredients, and we thoroughly evaluate all our finished formulations for safety. [Notice that it's our experts. We simply disregard all of the scientific literature if it doesn't support our concoction. But then again, some we don't have to report and most we've never even studied. For example, formaldehyde was declared a carcinogen by the EPA at exposure levels above 2 ppm. However, our baby shampoo contains 210 ppm, and we have it really high in 'hundreds' of products.] We understand that babies' skin, hair, and eyes are different from adults' and we develop our products with this in mind, consulting with pediatricians, nurses and other professionals to ensure that all our baby products are safe, mild and gentle. ['Consulting with' usually means handing out samples for patients for free to be 'nice'. Considering we need the money, might as well provide toxins to these kids so they start spitting cash at us to help relieve the symptoms caused by using our products. For example, there are three chemicals used in our products that cause asthma symptoms such as wheezing and asthma attacks, then there's allergies, leukemia, cancer, and so on. We don't want this to end since we get gobs of cash on the medical equipment and pharmaceuticals your child will rely on for the rest of their lives.] In addition to our own high standards, our products always meet -- and often exceed -- the standards of the agencies around the world responsible for the safety of personal care products in the markets where they are sold. [The EPA cannot do anything and the FDA regulates on a very few of the chemicals used in cosmetics.] In your letter, you raised a question about repeated exposure to traces or ingredients. I want you to know that our standards assume repeated exposures, which is why we set very conservative limits when formulating our baby products. For example, the level of exposure to formaldehyde, released in tiny amounts by certain preservatives to keep the products safe from contamination by bacteria, is about the same in an entire bottle of baby shampoo as a person would be exposed to by eating an apple or pear, in which it occurs naturally. [ Repeated exposures include that addition of using other products that contain the same ingredients. For example, toxic shampoo used with toxic body wash used with toxic detangler used with toxic lotion and toxic butt creams. Has accumulated exposure from using numerous products ever been taken into consideration? I did think so.] I also want to point out that our own extensive research and the vast majority of published scientific research indicates that these preservatives are safe and mild, and they have been extensively studied and continue to be supported by regulatory agencies around the world, including the U.S. and European Union. [Remember, we do our own research and ignore the research done by others since it doesn't support our product.] It is disappointing that your report did not provide this kind of perspective, since it probably caused parents undue alarm. [Look, we think the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics should be doing like the rest of the globe - cover your eyes and ignore what we're doing while stating how great we are. Alarmed parents don't by products - the freakin investors are starting to drop us because our sales are declining.] Parents can rest assured that every JOHNSON'S® product they use today is safe. But we understand that the bond of trust we have with the people who use our products often means going beyond safety alone. We listen to consumers, and respond to their needs and values, and their desire for products that are more sustainable and gentle on both people and the environment. We are continually making changes as we seek the next generation of pure, mild and gentle ingredients that parents can continue to use with complete confidence and peace of mind. Over the years, we have gone beyond considerations of safety alone in introducing a number of changes to JOHNSON'S© Baby products that I know you'll be interested in. [Translated to: We've gone beyond the consideration of safety to increase pharma sales. That is where we make the big bucks. Over the years, we've added numerous unstudied or toxic chemicals in our products. For example, mineral oil, although shown to increase the risk of numerous cancers, we make sure to keep it in there since we've always had it in there. Certain phthalates which were finally also shown to cause asthma and cancers of the endocrine system. We still have parabens, which are banned in body care products in France and Denmark due to the increased risk of developing cancers and may even cause birth defects. Remember, studies that don't portray our point of view, we totally disregard.] For example, last year we completed the removal of phthalates, including phthalates in fragrances, from our baby products. [It was kind of hard not to since even Bush banned the use of certain phthalates in baby products. These are the same chemicals banned in young children's toys. We did remove phthalates from children's products. However, phthalates are still being used for fragrance in formulations intended for adults - even though the research shows that phthalates have a similar effect to cause asthma in adults. Look, the bottom line is that if don't have at least *some* sick people we will not be able to sell diagnostic equipment and drugs.] We also have begun providing new formulas with alternatives to formaldehyde-releasing preservatives and expect to finish this process in our hundreds of baby products around the world within about two years, and sooner for our baby shampoos. [The new formula is a lot more expensive and they don't sell it in the dollar store - where many consumers have switched to using to save money during this challenging economy.] We also are well along in work with our global suppliers to require them to use state-of-the-art technologies that reliably reduce traces of 1,4-dioxane to <1 to 4ppm, and most now meet this standard. [We had to meet these standards so we could continue to sell products in their country. Obviously, products are manufactured by natural companies that do not contain this residue and we make our more expensive line without this residue and we can make products that meet the standards set by other countries. We're not going to bother with that step in all countries because it cuts into our bottom line. If you don't like it, buy our natural line that doesn't contain the carcinogens.] Even as we complete this changeover, we continue to search for new alternatives that do not produce 1,4-dioxane during the manufacturing process, and this is our long-term goal. [We don't have the residue in the natural line (or maybe we're fibbing about that?) so we have actually have ways to create products that do not produce 1,4-dioxane. But, don't put that together, okay? We like keeping the toxic stuff in as long as we can - it's so profitable for our medical diagnostics and pharmaceutical sectors. So the U.S. can wait a few years or pay more for the safer stuff while we continue to poison those who choose to purchase our products for the next two years.] In your letter, you also raise the issue of disclosure of fragrance ingredients. [Look, we are not required to tell you everything that is in our products. Just, um, trust us since you "know that our commitment to ensuring the safety of personal care products, especially those for babies, is at the core of everything we do and who we are as a company. For over 100 years, mothers, fathers and caregivers have relied on us to care for babies and children, and we work every day to maintain that trust." Got that, right? Just trust us.] We and other companies are engaged in discussions with many stakeholders to better understand different points of view, and we are happy to discuss the issue further with you. [Try to understand, we're hiding the risks of the ingredients used for fragrances because well, it looks like we're trying to decide how to handle this situation. We are working with our shareholders and not one of us feels the public needs to be informed of all of the ingredients in our products.] Working together with others, we believe we all will be able to find solutions that meet the needs of consumers, and we will continue to work to find those solutions. We believe that it is important to keep the people who rely on our products informed, which is why we've shared the points in this letter on our JOHNSON'S® Baby website, along with more information about the steps we take to ensure that they can continue to use JOHNSON'S® products with complete confidence in their safety. [We want you to be informed, that's why we dragged our feet for more than two years on changing the formulation for at least our most commonly sold carcinogenic baby shampoo. We have made the changes for other countries because it was required to sell the products in their countries. We also sell a line without the carcinogens that costs too much for the poor or financially strapped.] In response to William Weldon's letter dated November 1, 2011 We have been phasing out the use of preservatives that release tiny amounts of formaldehyde to guard against bacterial contamination. These preservative technologies, which are used widely in our industry are all safe and approved in the countries where they are sold. [First - YO BILL - you are a freaking biologist! How can you possibly feel that 210 ppm is a 'tiny' amount? The cancer threshold set by the EPA is ONLY 2 ppm max. The point that is totally left out of here is that these products are not sold in the countries that they are banned. For example, you cannot sell the formulation for U.S. consumers in China because it's already banned there. They pulled their products from shelves in major stores until they could be tested to ensure that China did not get the toxic U.S. formulation. So, this statement, "are all safe and approved in the countries where they are sold" is very misleading. It neglects to mention that where these chemicals are not considered safe they are not approved and they are not sold with the ingredients that are allowed in other countries.] As part of the manufacturing process, we have extensive monitoring to ensure that the amount of a trace byproduct known as "1,4 dioxane" in any of our products is well below the level that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and regulatory agencies around the world consider safe. [Again, the FDA has set no standards so, while this statement is technically true, and the products do meet regulation that are considered safe in other countries - however, the formulation for the U.S. market contains chemicals and concentrations of known carcinogenic ingredients that cannot be sold in other countries due to their regulations.] We have introduced new product formulations for consumers who prefer natural products, such as JOHNSON'S® NATURAL®, a line that is 98% natural, and contains no formaldehyde releasing preservatives or traces of 1,4 dioxane. JOHNSON'S® NATURAL® is priced considerably below "boutique" natural baby products, and puts an all-natural line within the budget of most consumers. [Okay, let me try to understand all this. You are saying that you do have the technology to create products without formaldehyde releasing agents or traces of 1,4-dioxane, right? Then why is there any discussion above that you are working toward making these changes when you have proven that you can already produce a product without known or suspected carcinogens? The rest of the points in this were covered above. There are different formulations for different countries - and each meets standards in that country. Product formulations for the U.S. market cannot be sold in countries where the ingredients in the U.S. formulation are already banned due to risk or known toxicity. Studies that disagree with the findings of the doctors, researchers and pharmacologists trained and employed by JNJ are disregarded.] For more than 100 years, Johnson & Johnson Family of Consumer Companies have been providing parents with safe and effective products for their babies and young children. Our goal is to go beyond safety alone, to provide parents and their babies with pure, mild, and gentle, products that they can trust and use with confidence. Wait, didn't we see this in the letter above? For over 100 years, mothers, fathers and caregivers have relied on us to care for babies and children, and we work every day to maintain that trust. We develop our products with this in mind, consulting with pediatricians, nurses and other professionals to ensure that all our baby products are safe, mild and gentle. We are continually making changes as we seek the next generation of pure, mild and gentle ingredients that parents can continue to use with complete confidence and peace of mind. And many people will believe that this is all heartfelt and concerned for our concerns when it's simply regurgitation by a marketing team to placate us. RESOURCES: JNJ to CFSC: Dated November 16, 2011 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
Sunflower Naturals
Sunflower NaturalsInformation presented is of a general nature for educational and informational purposes only.
Products and information presented herein are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent disease.
Statements about products and health conditions have not been evaluated by the US Food and Drug Administration.
If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a physician or other healthcare professional.
1994-2012 Sunflower Naturals.
All rights reserved.