Consumers Union and the Organic Consumers Association ask the Federal Trade Commission to investigate what they say are misleading organic personal care product claims.

The advocacy groups turn to FTC after filing a similar complaint with the Department of Agriculture, which did not act on the organic personal care front.

In a March 12 ¹ letter to David Vladeck, director of FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, CU and OCA urge the agency to address "blatantly deceptive labeling practices of several 'organic' personal care firms" that do not comply with standards under USDA's National Organic Program.

"An extremely confusing marketplace exists for consumers shopping for 'organic' personal care products," the letter says.

"Consumers can be deceived and misled by the misuse of the 'organic' label on personal care products," Urvashi Rangan, director of technical policy at Consumers Union, says in a release.

FTC "must act quickly and decisively to ensure consumers' ongoing trust in the 'organic' label for all products, including personal care," Rangan adds.

The appeal for FTC action comes two months after OCA contacted USDA. These firms joined OCA in the USDA ² complaint: Intelligent Nutrients, a manufacturer of Intellimune neutraceutical supplements and lines of skin and hair care products; Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps, which markets All-One organic products including lip balms; and Organic Essence, which includes lip balms in its product lines of the same name.

CU and OCA urge FTC to investigate specific cases of organic fraud in the personal care sector, explore a memorandum of understanding with USDA to address deceptive marketing practices and prohibit or ban from the personal care marketplace organic claims on products that do not satisfy NOP standards.

The groups voice their grievances emboldened by a November 2009 recommendation from a USDA advisory panel, the National Organic Standards Board, that the department begin policing the organic personal care marketplace with the same rigor it brings to organic food oversight (³ 'The Rose Sheet' Nov. 9, 2009, In Brief).

The complainants also were confident that leadership changes under President Obama would favor their mission as compared with "the hands-off regulatory approach ... during the Bush years" (⁴ Also see "Prevention Advocate Taylor Named FDA Deputy Commissioner For Foods" - Pink Sheet, 18 January, 2010.).

Further, Vladeck's statements about FTC's enforcement against unsubstantiated environmental claims could indicate the agency will act on the advocacy groups' concerns about organic claims. At an advertising law conference in October 2009, Vladeck said FTC is aware firms are attempting to capitalize on consumers' growing environmental concerns (⁵ 'The Tan Sheet' Oct. 19, 2009).

CU and OCA say USDA's response to their complaint left much to be desired.

"The USDA National Organic Program has irresponsibly allowed the market for organic personal care products to be overrun by false organic claims," says Ronnie Cummins, executive director of OCA.

"This kind of deception ends up eroding consumer confidence in all organic products, even food," he asserts. "Hopefully, the FTC can motivate the USDA to protect organic consumers."

The advocacy groups' problem with the current system centers on USDA's different expectations for - and level of involvement with - personal care versus food.

Currently, any food on the market positioned as organic must meet NOP standards, but the same does not hold true for personal care, which they say is "flooded with organic claims that are not labeled 'USDA-organic' and therefore are not required to be compliant with NOP."

"We believe the law to indicate that any organic claim (not just those labeled 'USDA-organic') on a personal-care product should have to comply with the NOP," the groups note, citing the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990.

USDA acknowledges that different criteria apply in its regulation of organic claims for food and personal care products.

According to the advocacy groups' letter to FTC, USDA responded to OCA's complaint in part with this comment: "The USDA regulates organic personal care products only if they are made up of agricultural ingredients. We have no standards for personal care products and have no plans to develop standards at this time."

In their letter to FTC, CU and OCA say "the pervasiveness of the problems with organic certification for personal care products" prohibits identifying all suspect items. Instead, the groups listed some examples of the most common labeling problems.

Some products have no organic ingredients but claim organic ingredients on front-of-product labeling, while others combine synthetic and conventional agricultural ingredients with actual organic substances while claiming to be organic.

Additionally, personal care products with less than 70 percent organic ingredients make the claim on their package front, although it would not be allowed for food products under USDA's NOP for food, the groups say.

OCA launched a boycott in September 2009 against brands that exploit the term "organic" without certification to NOP or NSF International standards (⁶ Also see "Countdown To Boycott: OCA Confronts Organic Firms, Retailers At Expo East" - HBW Insight, 28 September, 2009.).

CU and OCA's complaint recommends cases for FTC to look into, including Homs' Bite Blocker Organic Xtreme Insect Spray, which the groups say contains no organic ingredients but advertises itself as organic with its labeling.

The letter also calls out Organic Bath Company Lavender Vanilla Bubble Bath Petals, Avalon Organics Lemon Clarifying Shampoo and Nature's Gate Organics Body Lotion and Lucky Bronzer for containing synthetic ingredients and conventional agricultural ingredients.

[Editor's note: This story was contributed by ⁷ 'The Rose Sheet,' your source for cosmetics news. For more information call 1-800-332-2181.]

- Lauren Nardella ( ⁸ l.nardella@elsevier.com )

Groups Seek FTC Action On Organic Labeling For Personal Care Products

More from Archive

More from Pink Sheet