My wife was kind enough to point me towards a news article (appearing from various news sources) today about a supposed connection between baby care products such as shampoos, lotions, and powders and a common — though marginally studied — group of chemicals known as phthalates. I started scanning some of these alarmist-style news reports and immediately was struck by the typical “ohmygods the sky is falling” reaction of some — many — of the articles.

For example, a Reuters Health credited article begins: “A new study suggests that baby lotion, baby powder, and baby shampoo may be exposing babies to potentially harmful chemicals called phthalates.”

Or the Associated Press (link no longer available) warns: “Baby shampoos, lotions and powders may expose infants to chemicals that have been linked with possible reproductive problems, a small study suggests.”

I went directly to the source, the full text of the article available online in the February 2008 issue of Pediatrics at http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/ and thought I would take the opportunity to pull some facts directly from said article — as follows. If my interpretations are incorrect, please comment and correct me.

Who was studied?

A small group of infants less than eight months of age who’s parents had agreed to routinely provide the researchers with a wet diaper and some general information about the care products they were using. Conclusions were drawn based on urine samples and some basic data about care product usage.

What was found?

Simply that infants whose parents used baby shampoos, baby lotions, and baby powders had higher levels of phthalates in their urine.

What are phthalates?

Phthalates are chemicals that are added to numerous consumer products and act as chemical stabilizers. They ensure that colors stay colors and scents don’t degrade too quickly. They are found in personal care products, food packaging, construction materials, plastics, and other common manufactured household objects. Also, it seems that phthalates are slowly released into the air from these products, meaning that most of us routinely ingest, inhale, or absorb through our skin these chemicals.

Why the fuss?

Some recent animal studies have shown that there might be a negative link associated between mammalian reproductive systems and exposure to phthalates. This is not a well understood risk and warrants more study, but nevertheless the researchers have pointed this out as an area of concern. And manufacturers are not required to list concentrations of these chemicals in their products.

Should we be skeptical?

Always. Though when we’re starting with a peer reviewed article from a reasonably trustworthy source that should give us a fair level of assurance of credibility and adherence to scientific methodology. I, admittedly, don’t have the credentials review this information for any deeper validity than what is presented, but I would note a few points to parents before I sent them to the garbage bin with their collection of baby care products:

1) The researchers did note that this is something that should be studied more thoroughly and with better context to a health issue: “Additional research should be conducted to determine specific sources of phthalate exposure for infants and specific phthalate concentrations in commonly used infant products. In the future, these findings should be used to assess potential health impacts to the infant’s developing endocrine and reproductive systems.” That said, there is still a large gap in the research between ‘chemicals in urine’ and ‘genuine health concern.’

2) There was no definite and direct link identified between the baby care products studied and the increased chemical in the urine. True, there was a stated correlation: “We found that mothers’ reported use of infant lotion, infant powder, and shampoo was significantly associated with MEP, MMP, and MiBP urinary concentrations. In addition, we found a relationship between phthalate concentrations and the number of products used.” But, there are other possible questions around this correlation, such as: Are parents who use an increased number of baby products also likely to use other chemicals in the home? Or, are mothers who use an increased number of baby products also likely to use products on themselves that could be transfered through breast milk? As mentioned previously, most of us routinely ingest, inhale, or absorb through our skin these chemicals and I’m not certain the study accounted for overall trends in family chemical use and potential for absorption from other sources.

This said, it is a reasonably fair study and I AM NOT A DOCTOR so parents should draw their own conclusions. True, time and further research will tell if there is any weight behind these conclusions, but skeptical parents shouldn’t be too quick to hop on the bandwagon and panic from a single research paper on a poorly understood group of chemicals. We personally have always tried to limit our own use of chemicals in the home by avoiding an abundance of air fresheners, fabric deodorizers, excess packaging on highly processed foods, and our own personal care products. My own simple (skeptical?) advice might be to look at your household chemical footprint in general if you are concerned about this as a risk for your kids — and not attempt blindly solve a loosely understood problem with a quick-fix trashing of a few demonized products. And if you really are worried, talk to your family doctor.

Thoughts?