Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This is an immensely informative website database listing thousands of products and detailing the level of harmful/toxic ingredients. They have a rating and colour coded system from 0-10. It may be worth a look. It is an American website though many product companies are international so their items are sold here. Here is the link: http://www.ewg.org/skindeep/


The other posters are right; water is sufficient, although our 'hard water' isn't ideal. Good luck mama!

In truth, many of the companies with the 'paraben free' 'no SLS' have simply replaced the well known chemicals with equally or more dangerous ones. Consider shampoo. You don't need 41896214 ingredients - I mean what do all those actually do to your scalp and hair? Surely you don't buy into the adverts? Personally, I use the no 'poo method. ;-)


My concern is the repeated exposure and the downplaying of the long term effects. Parabens are found in blueberries. That doesn't mean parabens isolated and then put together with other such ingredients will behave the same way. Even in nature, there are harmful chemicals. Don't forget that many claims or research/studies are paid for by companies to make them look above board; they won't publish the negative data. I believe we should investigate the source of any health claims; positive or negative. I also believe you should just follow the money (who paid for it/has something to gain from it?)...

I believe Mustela products are also very good. They are much cheaper in the US if you like them and has an opportunity to buy from there. We use its sun cream and face creams... I use earth friendly for bath as it is easier to find in supermarkets and like...
My son is 11 months old & I don't use any soaps on his skin either (I'm trying to avoid it for as long as possible. To combat the hard water battering his delicate skin I add organic castor oil & a couple of drops of lavender essential oil to his bath. This was suggested to me by Monica in Healthmatters & it works a treat, no sign of any eczema anymore! (I also use MooGoo cream after washing his face after food etc)
At the risk of sounding a bit minging I barely bath my kids! When I do (usually once a week after swimming) I use Weleda baby wash, and have also used Use More Carrots from healthmatters. It's simply to get rid of the chlorine smell (especially from their hair)! Other than that just water and a flannel twice a day! Is that bad? Found this method is a lot better for dry skin?

Thanks Chloe11.


EatLessBread, we (www.theworldofcreatures) agree to use only water initially (especially first few months), but for after that I'm happy to give you one of our mini washes to try it - it's a 50 ml but should last about 3 months.


M

I thought that might be the case. It's carried very extensively by pharmacies in Ireland where I initially came across it but not so widespread here yet. We use the shampoo too, good for cradle cap. Undiscovered we are an equally minging household. I use a bit of weleda calendula stuff for feet and suchlike but otherwise just water in the bath every other day and hair every 10 days. Those ads with newborn babies covered in bubbles freak me out.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...