Much has been made recently of Dr Elizabeth Brooks, a biological sciences professor at Jefferson Medical College in Pennsylvania, who reveals that makeup testers are riddled with germs, including e.coli: 'Wherever you can see e.coli, you should just think e.coli equals faeces."
Astonishingly, on a Saturday, 100% of the testers were contaminated with potentially hazardous germs.
I have been quite lackadaisical in my attitude towards makeup testers: a quick wipe, a dip in alcohol and I was perfectly satisfied. But, as the scientist continues, any attempts to sanitise makeup are limited: "They're not lab technicians and I'm not 100% sure about it. Viruses are so small in comparison to bacteria it's harder to get rid of a virus."
I think makeup tester packaging should be specifically designed: pumps in skincare testers should be mandatory; lipsticks and glosses should be sealed in individual tester packaging and requested on demand. I know it would be an added expense but it is nothing short of reckless to have this nest of potential disease, lurking. As consumers, especially in UK where we are unable to return beauty purchases, we should not lose our right to test a product - however, not at such great risk! In today's litigious society, where printing expiry dates on makeup is strictly adhered to, surely this is the next step?
What do you think? Do these results startle you, or was it obvious! - Or, is it exagerrated? After all, our bodies are designed to deal with germs on door handles and crowded tubes, so is a dip in alcohol perfectly adequate and no need to panic?!
No comments:
Post a Comment