European Parliament

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
29 July 2013
E-009214-13
Question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 117
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

 Subject:  Cosmetics and consumer protection
 Answer(s) 

Consumer associations, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the media are issuing more frequent and more urgent warnings about harmful substances in cosmetics; this is becoming an explosive issue, especially in light of the new Cosmetics Regulation. These warnings mainly concern individual substances that are potentially harmful, such as parabens, allergy-triggering substances such as the preservative methylisothiazolinone (MIT) and endocrine disruptors.

1. Is a ban on the above substances being considered?

2. Are ways of avoiding certain substances being considered, such as alternative packaging designs that reduce contact with potential contaminants and can thus partly replace the biocidal effect of preservatives?

3. What is the Commission’s view on the so-called ‘cocktail effect’? How does it intend to address the fact that hardly any scientific investigations have been carried out into this phenomenon — which is hugely relevant to people’s daily lives — and thus the safety of interacting substances cannot be guaranteed?

4. How does the Commission intend to deal with endocrine disruptors? Is it considering a ban on these in children’s products (especially in light of possible side effects such as early onset of puberty)?

Original language of question: DEOJ C 88 E, 27/03/2014
Last updated: 12 August 2013Legal notice