What about those lips?!

mamakatrien wrote:as far as covering your business behind legally goes, it is probably one of those things where one incident may have prompted this warning.

Like I once read on a microwave dinner "careful, hot when heated" in HUGE lettering too. Must be a lawsuit that triggered that warning, or would they just have a funny marketing dept?

I've seen bags of peanuts on an American flight with "WARNING: May Contain Nuts" on it.

I'd kinda hope so! That's why I bought them, after all!!

That's a good one too Kammy! could be closer to the truth than you think if thay were made in China. Remember the scam with the fake eggs?

BTW we both have red near the eyes in our avatars

Yup. Not to worry though:

1. The one that's actually AROUND my eyes is actually orange. It fades into TAG pearl red on the nose and above the eye.

2. I'm already blind in one, and not from paint. I reckon that halves my chances of damage, right?

hmmm.... could still swell up orange...

It'll just make my green eyes stand out more. I win.

Willoughby wrote:My thoughts are that the product is equal to the sum of it's ingredients. So if the ALL the ingredients are approved AND THE COMBINATION of those ingredients is approved, then I need to assume that the product is approved.

Yup, it's confusing. Part of that is because FDA "approval," safety, and such are all legal terms, not practical ones. The FDA can approve a drug, for example, with limited long-term testing only to have to recall that drug later on due to long-term side effects. Approval does not imply safe and lack of approval does not imply unsafe. Sorry, I know that's confusing.

Willoughby wrote:Unless what you're referring to is indeed the fact that the combination/interaction of these ingredients has not been tested/approved, only their stand-alone phase. In that case, it would be stupid to assume the product would be safe at all.

I know I've linked to the FDA page on cosmetic definitions and whatnot as they relate to our products. I didn't search for it, but you can use google search to see if you can bring it up. Again, it's a legal issue and a money issue. If a face painting company can't/won't pay the FDA to test their product as a whole, it's not going to get an FDA approval stamp, regardless of how safe the ingredients are.

Snazaroo, for example, uses parabens as preservatives in their products. Parabens are actually starting to be banned in stores in the UK. Methylparaben is also found naturally in some fruit. Methylparaben accumulates in estrogenic tissue. Parabens have been implicated in hormone disruption. Does that mean if you use the concentrations of parabens found in Snaz, the kids will end up with hormone-influenced cancers? Probably not? Do we know for sure? No.
The short story is that there isn't enough data, especially long-term data on how this preservative effects us. Is using face paint statistically safer than crossing a street in a major city? Yes. Risk is relative.

Wolfe/DFx/TAG products use sodium benzoate, a food-grade preservative in them. Is it inherently safer? Maybe, but I don't know. For me, saying that Snaz is inherently safer than any other paint is kind of misleading and I have yet to see any kind of categorical proof that it is.

Willoughby wrote:I just want to know if almost daily painting with face 'paint' is going to affect my childrens' skin in anyway... especially in 10 years time. It appears we're all having to 'guess', we have to read between the lines and assume an awful lot here. If there's nothing bad in the paints, then why would you need to 'cover your a$$ legally?'

Some of what we use to make judgements in life is all marketing baloney "all natural," for example has very limited legal coverage. "Organic" is a legal term as well and while there are some strict regulations as to what can be called organic, it doesn't take into account a lot of farming practices - this how you can have factory-farmed organic products.

This is all to say that you're 100% right - it's a decision you're going to have to make on your own using the information you have available to you, limited as it may be. You really can't rely on a company, or a government to provide a safe/not safe stamp on a product for a multitude of legal and liability reasons. It's terribly unfortunate, and if it keeps you up at night - then it's probably best to assume a different hobby. I think it's great to pressure companies into having their products tested, but there would have to be a huge financial incentive for a FP company to do so.

mamakatrien wrote:BTW we both have red near the eyes in our avatars

Help, I have cyanotic lips in my avatar! Martha, save me! And if you save me, can I wake up with one of your fabulous masks painted on my face? I think it will ease my recovery.

Thank you, Julie. You always have such great input!

Mamakatrien

I love reading these threads that start out serious and end up silly! Yes, we have to have the serious discussions, but having fun while we do is so totally an artistic thing!

I have wondered about the lip thing as well, but more along the lines of "how do they make it shiny?" and "how long will it stay like that if you don't move your lips for the entire night?" or "if you kiss someone will they have blue lips as well?" You know, the really serious stuff.

Julie, you are so great at boiling things down and I love your sense of humor Your lip color is way prettier than the purplish blue of someone with a compromised airway!

My 2 cents... You have to be very careful and know what you're doing.

But don't take it to far.... It'll take some time till they find out what's causing all those nasty diseases. I don't drink, don't smoke, love to cook so healthy food , I' m not overweight, I normally walk a lot and take my bike, normally don't take any medicines, and not using unhealthy products if I can avoid that.
Oh.... And my mum wasn't a facepainter and I never ever ate a rainbowcake! Wanted to eat a little cute ladybug when I was little, but my mum saw it just in time... Still have therapy for that!

All of that said, I do have cancer ( although I don't fit the statistics) which is hormone influenced.
No one can tell me why! What have they done with all the meat years and years? We do know there were scandals about adding hormons to that without people knowing. How many food is manupilated? No answers to that.

Back to my point... Be careful using products, but don't go against all odds. You can never ever bann everything.
And follow your inner feelings!

Girls love blue and green lips, so I buy green and blue lipstick and add a little bit of lips gloss, coastal scents sells a lipstick palette with 66 colors and they go very long.

Willoughby wrote:Y
Unless what you're referring to is indeed the fact that the combination/interaction of these ingredients has not been tested/approved, only their stand-alone phase. In that case, it would be stupid to assume the product would be safe at all.

I just want to know if almost daily painting with face 'paint' is going to affect my childrens' skin in anyway... especially in 10 years time. It appears we're all having to 'guess', we have to read between the lines and assume an awful lot here. If there's nothing bad in the paints, then why would you need to 'cover your a$$ legally?'
I am beginning to wonder if this was a good hobby to start with It is/was something I enjoyed doing with my little girl, but if nothing's really cut and dried regarding safety, then it sure does put a dampener on things (well for me anyway).

Out of curiosity, only Kammy has replied, but how many of you paint your own kids daily for practice?

Well...my daughter is the face of my company...and given how much I paid (in body and wallet) to bring her to this planet, I am not reckless in painty dealings with her. I have THE most sensitive skin in my family and any product that turned me into a dematological nightmare never made it to her face. See...I too value my kids...they both have promised me houses and fancy cars for feeding them and until they pay up...I'm being very careful with them...

That being said. I thnk the question of painting your kid...everyday... is somewhat an unrealistic one.
For one...unless you're made of free time...it doesn't pan out...at least not for me. When i paint my kids, it's usually over the course of a few hours once or twice a week and if I don't take a quick picture before turning around to rinse my brushes or even to put the darned thing down, they'll have it washed off within seconds.

The second reason why the question comes dangerously close to crossing over into the land of nonsensical is the fact that children will generally put the kabosh on any machinations we may have of using them as a daily practice mannequin. At least is they are anything like my daughter and/or haven't been raised in an oppressive environment that instilled in them the belief that they HAD to surrender their faces to mommy whenever she wanted to slap her brush on them. My daughter put up with my nonsense for a couple of days per week...that's it and at 4 years old she had no problem telling me to cool my jets if I dared to forget that she was a living breathing human and not a life like practice head.

Now if you ask if any of us paint our kids (or have painted our kids) a lot...I'd say yes, I have. Kammy isn't the only person to paint her kids excessively. Just because we do so doesn't make us less of parents or risky dare devils. We've investigated, applied critical thinking tools to fill in information gaps the best we could and even employed good old patch tests. I don't feel I've ever endangered my daughter with my painting.

Too much in this world is unknown...true. Does that mean we hide in our homes and stagnate while the rest of the world takes the chance that is required to live a life? There's nothing guaranteed other than death and taxes and the uncertainties will be ever present because we are none of us omnipotent. We do the best we can with what we have and try to live our lives without relying on guarantees (because guarantees do little more than instill a false sense of security). I know that potatoes are relatively safe...if you don't count my thighs as a recipient, but they don't carry any type of safety guarantee and as Dole found out years ago...the best layed safety plans can be waylaid by any indescriminate worker who answers nature's call while working the crops. I still eat salad and I still, unforutnately, eat 'taters. The only thing the potato has to recommend it is it's existential history and guidelines for commercial production...if I find out 5 years from now that the potato is the vehicle for the coming zombie apocalyse I still won't consider myself a bad person for eating them today or feeding them to my kids (we'll just be a family of zombies who loved french fries before we loved brains).

As to liability insurance. Believe it or not, of the few known claims that have been made against the policies, the vast majority of them have had to do with damage to personal property (i.e., dropping a drippy pot of black wolfe on a white carpet) and personal injury (i.e., chairs breaking when a child (or adult who THINKS she's a big kid) plops down in it, or a squirmy child getting poked in the eye.). We're not painting with solvents and if we were painting with anything that almost guaranteed a claim, none of us would be able to get an insurance company to cover us.

Think about it. The insurance companies aren't in the market to pay out claims, they're in the market to collect premiums and only in instances where the likelihood of payout is limited. I carry insurance not because I don't believe that I'm using safe products but because I can't guarantee that life won't get in the way in the course of my job as a painter and we live in a litigious society. The last thing I need is for a parent to sue me because her rabid crumb snatcher pulled something off of my table and got knocked on the head as a result of it.

The companies that manufacture our makeups have liability insurance because of the fact that everything can't be known about the affect of different substances and all of the unrealized variables that can affect the way the makeup behaves on different skin. Most of those companies have a history of experience in the cosmetics industry and face painting makeup is just a dog of a different breed. The fact that some other company decided to take a shortcut in an effort to bank on the popularity of this artform doesn't necessarily mean that all painting is bad. The fact that all is not known about the makeups we chose to use (the professional makeups) doesn't necessarily becry abstaining from all painting either. That some would rather stand on the name of the company that produces their products and the collective history of successful use of those products by other painters doesn't make them (us) irresposible. We all have to make an individual choice in how we go about our lives but just as we expect others to respect our choices, we should strive to be likewise respectful of those who chose not to follow the path we try to blaze. That's not saying that we should be supportive of someone knowingly using unsafe mediums...a look into the archives will reveal that we have pretty strong views here about acrylics and craft mediums.

In the short of it: You have to do what's best for you.

^^^ What she said. Everything that she said. ^^^

Particularly the bit about zombies and fries.

Though of course, in all seriousness....we do have to consider the known and proven risks of glitter toxicosis.

I like to put a darker color on the outer part of the lip & a lighter color on the inner part of the lip. While it's still wet I gently do "kissy lips" blending the colors. Then if I feel like it I'll add some details... dots, etc... Or I'll just ad some clear gloss over it.

Thanks for the tip Linda!

there was someone commented on another thread that one of her kids ate facepaint, and was fine lol, so, idk,

Linda, just so you know, that kissy face for blending worked wonderfully

ninaschau wrote:there was someone commented on another thread that one of her kids ate facepaint, and was fine lol, so, idk,

Gary Cole's kid ate almost a whole cake of Snazaroo when he was little...he's big now and Gary uses that story to attest to the child safe rating of his product.

I suspect that happens a lot. Perhaps they should add vitamins and get it approved as a beneficial food supplement.

I bit too chalky for my taste... If I wanted that, I'd just shove handfuls of antacids down my gullet...

Interesting...just this month I decided to start carrying the Kryolan party lipsticks. I ordered and they didn't send the blue ones...when I asked they said they are no longer selling it. So, I asked if they had the blue GLITTER lipsticks. No, no blue glitter lipstick either. I was told that they have not gone through FDA approval, yet were not banned, and that they do have their own testing. They DO still sell the UV-Dayglow lipsticks, but they have to call them "special effects cream sticks" and not "lip sticks." They are not supposed to be used on the lips, yet they are lipsticks in lipstick packaging! So there must be something with the blue color that made them remove it from the lipstick line all together.

The color blue gives the impression of a physical ailment...blood loss...oxygen loss. A paramedic's nightmare I'd suspect.