DFX Neon Split says "not for cosmetic use" What's up with that?

I just got a DFX Neon Rainbow split and the bottom says "FOR HAIR AND SPECIAL EFFECTS NOT INTENDED FOR COSMETIC APPLICATION"

Whoa, does that mean I shouldn't use it on the face?

All of the neons say that. Neons should be used more for adults, but from my understanding, it's all because of the pigments that are used in the neons and they aren't exactly harmful, but haven't been deemed that by the FDA because of cost to get them approved. Everyone please correct me if I've not understood correctly in the past.

from the Snazaroo site, they say that none of the neon pigments are approved for use on the face, that's why they don't make paints with those ingredients. I guess it's up to you to decide whether you want to take the risk... a lot of people do.

Well I look at it this way....neons/uv/dayglo have been around for a long time and have been used by some of the worlds best. There has not at least to my knowledge been a reported issue of a problem using them. So I am of the mind until there is a substantiated reason to not use them, I will continue to use them.

No sense worrying if there is not need to.

Should it ever become a major issue (not just the random isolated cases here and there), I will gladly remove them from my kit.

Metina brought up this issue here:
http://www.facepaintforum.com/t3292-new-neon-paint-labeling

When I saw the sticker, I picked it off the bottom of my DFX neon rainbow, for fear that a mother would pick it up and see it and freak out on me. But that made me feel guilty or criminal or something. So, now I'm using the TAG neon rainbow which says "manufactured with skin safe ingredients" and "keep away from eyes". I do feel a little better using that product, if only for the plausible deniability it affords.

ChangingFaceDesigns wrote:Well I look at it this way....neons/uv/dayglo have been around for a long time and have been used by some of the worlds best. There has not at least to my knowledge been a reported issue of a problem using them. So I am of the mind until there is a substantiated reason to not use them, I will continue to use them.

No sense worrying if there is not need to.

Should it ever become a major issue (not just the random isolated cases here and there), I will gladly remove them from my kit.

Just to play devil's advocate on this (not trying to start a war) but that's the same argument some of the acrylic painters are trying to use....

Perry, I see what you are saying, but at the same time, I know few people who are painted with acrylics and don't react, I don't know anyone who's been painted with neons and reacted.

Perry I don't think it is the same............The deal with the acrylics is substantiated by actually cases...........the thing with the neons is more speculative than anything else. More of a manufacturer doing a "CYA" "Covering Your A**

I have yet to come across any case with the neons.
But like I also said in my post if there was, I have no problem discontinuing my use of them unlike the acrylic users

The old Kryolan packaging said the same thing.

Funny, I had read that whole thread by Metina before. I just forgot about it because I didn't have any at the time.

Hello ,

I am sorry that my second post after my own introduction is about safety and not something funnier.

I have just discovered the existence of rainbow cakes (better late than never ) and I am going to order a few online, since they can be found nowhere in my neighbourhoods.

When I look at all your beautiful pictures here on the forum, it seems that the results with neon cakes is just gorgeous !

Still, I am really concerned with that safety issue with neons, especially after seeing on DFX's website that several colours have formaldehyde in them (which, I guess, is the case for all other brands). What Wikipedia says about it is really scary !

Since I am going to use it on kids, I really want to make sure it is safe for them. Especially on the long run, since some effects sometimes appear years later.
If anyone has further information about that, I'd love to read it (for instance, how long they have been in use - if it's a long time that would reassure me).

Thanks !

pepita,
how I love formaldahyde discussions (not really contributing to the neon debate though as I think it is a pigment issue)
Formaldahyde in cosmetic proseess is different to say that of acylics. cosmetics like shampoo conditioner, the list gose on all have a small amount of formaldahyde in them. less than .02%
another difference is that cosmetics also contain agents (catalyst) designed to relase formaldahyde in the manufacturing process (to get as much out as possible) where as say and acylic not ment to be used on skin can be manufactured cheaper as its formaldahyde is released in the drying process i.e.air.
please don't stress out about formaldahyde with face paint. unless you also stress out about conditioner,hairdye, body wash etc. the cosmetic application of formaldahyde is minute.

this thread contains info on formaldahyde in acylics, I also wrote I think how long they have been in use.
http://www.facepaintforum.com/t7586-help-anyone-have-a-letter-to-the-pto-about-not-using-acrylics

I BELIEVE, and I would have to search for the info, but I BELIEVE the reason that the FDA does not approve any of the UV pigments is because they absorb more UV light. Thus amplifying the effects of UV on the skin.

There are apparently only three FDA approved UV colors for cosemtic use (I THINK they were white, green and blue..) Was reading the Snazz article- and I did think THIS line might be an important consideration to those who have insurance:

"You would be personally liable should there be any allergic reaction or any other adverse reaction of any kind. You would be using these paints knowing that they use pigments banned by the FDA. You have no product liability since you use them on the skin versus the labeling stating "hair or special effects". Your own entertainer's insurance would also not protect you since you are using a product outside the labeling criteria."

Food for thought.

I used not to stress out about conditioner etc., but now ... .

Thanks for the information about composition and liability.
So apparently not that dangerous for the kid, but likely to be for the painter .
I'll have to make up my mind now. Thanks !

I did some reading on FDA approval last night, and I am unsure as to what they are thinking in general. There is some crazy stuff in there about pigments.
This doesn’t change liability issues addressed and honestly I would follow that for the cover your own @ss aspect. The blue used does not pass test for use on skin near lips.it is the only one I read as not enough time.
So Why, I looked at the animal experiments involved years ago, out of seven they did the one that did it in was…
When they feed rats 0. 23grams of raw pigment per Kg of bodyweight. So say 300gram rat 6.9 grams. They died. The cakes in general contain about 10% pigment (broad generalization here) they did the same ratios with dogs but the dogs threw it up no dogs died, but it made the experiment inconclusive.
So they referred to the rats.
So my toddler weighs 18 kg which means if she eats 4.14kg of the stuff she is dead, given the 10% fact that means she has to eat 920 (45gram cakes) to die. WTF??

No rats died at a lesser dose did get lethargic, so I think this is the magic number. Do not let toddlers eat more than say 600 - 45gram DFX cakes to be safe - LOL

Also the blue is approved for sutures as in medical stiches and some sort of bone device thing, but not for use on the lips.

Again the same toddler would need to eat 1500 (45 gram) paint cakes for formaldehyde to kill her(in any colour) an adult would have to eat 2250. But consumption of half this number would pose a serious health risk (this dose not reflective of those allergic to formaldahide obviously)

I now want to find out about why red can’t be used on the eyes but spent ages digging up the blue (5 hours).

Oh and DFX has white neon, FDA approved. And they recommend using that over regular colours, if you want absolute safety. And to use DFX But the glow is apparently slightly less.

I just have TAG. But thought that this may be interesting to some.

But please be aware that children should not eat more that 600 (45 gram) paints to be safe.

If my math is wrong tell me, or correct it. (The 0 . 23grams per KG is the right ratio)
Paint safely guys.

@Sue - love it. Thanks for digging into PubMed for us!

I ment to say children should not eat more than 600 blue 45gram face paints which in the case of my 18kg toddler means she should not consume more than 27kg woth of blue DFX face paint (and probebly tag and wolfe as well just to be sure)
As a responsible adult I will try to never have her around more than 599 of these paints.
and to put it in prospective

Interesting indeed.

I am not so much concerned about the risk of instant death than that of seeing those children developping cancer later because of formaldehyde (or other chemicals, whether it be in face paint or simply pieces of furniture, which sometimes contain some too).

Or the risk for the people working in the manufacture (possibly in countries where security norms are different from ours).

You sometimes do not have the choice (I mean, if you are painting dancers for a night club show for instance and you need the neon effect), but here, I feel a regular rainbow cake is pretty enough. To me, it's a good compromise between beautiful and safe for kids :-).

So I far as I am concerned, I finally decided on not buying neon. At least, to not encourage the production of those chemicals, when I am aware of their presence.

And thanks for the information you all provided .

darn it and I was planning on having 2500 45g neon split cakes for dinner, guess I'll have to eat food! lol!

Hi. check out this FDA link

http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ProductandIngredientSafety/ProductInformation/ucm143055.htm

and then check out your face paint

That would be one expensive dinner!!!!

I never did find out about red I got board reading the studies. I spent 5 hours plus I think it was finding out about blue. and have too many school projects in the works with the kids- sigh.

(Anyone needs to know about Saturn got that covered. they would pick the planet with 60 moons)

Beeja wrote:Hi. check out this FDA link

http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ProductandIngredientSafety/ProductInformation/ucm143055.htm

and then check out your face paint

I thought THIS was interesting: Henna(3) 1965 Coloring hair but not eyelashes, eyebrows, or eye area.

So, not approved for use on skin??

I have been amused by this for a long time seemed like a good place to post..

No Tattoo inks are FDA approved for injection into the skin (Basically tattooing) despite what places may say..

http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm048919.htm

although this site is right its particular ink has gone as high as possible and is approved for use on animals and plants.

http://www.crazychameleonbodyartsupply.com/crazy-chameleon-blacklight-tattoo-ink-faq-main.htm

Just when you think face painters and henna artists have problems...