Johnson & Johnson Baby Shampoo Cancer Risk: Group Calls For Massive Consumer Boycott
A coalition of health and environmental organizations has said that a U.S. version of Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Shampoo contains chemicals that may cause cancer, and have called for consumers to boycott the company.
Johnson & Johnson, who are the largest health care company in the world, have been facing the accusations from The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics for over two years now. In response, the company has come out with another baby shampoo product free of the harmful chemicals, and has said that they would be reducing the quantity in their other products – but has not pledged to remove them entirely.
According to the Associated Press, Lisa Archers, director of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, has met with representatives from the company numerous times, but is hoping that a report signed by 25 environmental and medical groups will finally raise national awareness for the issue. They want parents to be aware of the dangers they are putting their children in by using the shampoo, and they want to force the health care company to take the harmful product off the shelves.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
The chemicals in question include dioxane and formaldehyde, which are considered to be carcinogens and dangerous to a person’s health. The environmental groups say they are found in Johnson & Johnson's Baby Shampoo, Oatmeal Baby Wash, Moisture Care Baby Wash and Aveeno Baby Soothing Relief Creamy Wash.
Johnson & Johnson have admitted to the danger of the carcinogens, and have been selling versions of the Baby Shampoo that are free from the chemicals in certain countries, including the U.K, Japan, South Africa, and other European countries. However, the old versions of its product are still being sold in major countries, such as the U.S., Canada, Indonesia, China, and Australia.
One alternative for U.S. consumers is Johnson’s Naturals, which is a baby shampoo free of the dangerous chemicals, but it costs twice as much, and may push many parents towards choosing the cheaper version.
The health care company has argued that although the dangerous chemicals are present in the U.S. version of its baby shampoo product, the traces are too small to hold the risks the environmental groups are claiming.
Tracey J. Woodruff, director of the Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment at University of California-San Francisco, has countered the argument by warning that the skulls of very young children haven’t completely fused together yet, and even a small amount of the carcinogens can be very dangerous.
