April 18th, 2013. A woman who was a daughter, a wife, a mother, gave up her fight for her life after falling into a coma last October. She died not from breast cancer, not from heart disease, or a car accident. She died from coloring her hair. You did not read this wrong, SHE DIED FROM COLORING HER HAIR. She lived in the United Kingdom.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4663539/Tragic-mother-dies-after-year-long-coma-caused-by-hair-dye.html
Many people don't read the tiny note inside the box of hair color where it says, "WARNING, This product contains a chemical that might cause skin irritation. Do not use on eyelashes or eyebrows, to do so may cause blindness" If you did read that, would you think it could take your life? Would you assume that the skin irritation was an allergic reaction, and that along with that, could come anaphylactic shock, which in turn, can block your airway? You can't call 911, because you can't speak. You can't drive yourself to the emergency room, because without air, well, you most likely won't make it there. If you had proper warning, maybe you could take some benadryl, but it may not be strong enough. Basically, there needs to be a choice. We at least should be allowed to KNOW that this can happen. Yet, the warning label is still just a rash.
PPD, or PARA PHENYLENE DIAMINE has been the number one allergen in Europe since 2006. It is in the top 20 in the United States, yet I continue to get e-mails week after week from people that they are finding their own diagnosis, and can not find a doctor who has ever heard of it. How is it that a doctor can offer patch testing for allergies, yet not offer the FDA's most current list? I believe that in the U.S. the number of people that are allergic to hair color is sadly under reported. If doctors had the proper information, and hairdressers had the proper information, we would have a fighting chance.
Right now, the warning was put into effect in 1938 by Congress. We would have to fight congress to have this changed, and it would be a tough fight. We may be able to get the allergies on the label, but it might not make any difference. The FDA does not have ANY ruling over this, as I have been in contact with them. I am working with the state on how to educate, it's not looking good. I think the best solution might be through the truth in advertising, and the FCC.
So, that is going to be my next adventure. I am working with the FDA to collect more information. I am going to see how much "truth" there actually is in all of this. If I can prove that these companies know that there is more than a skin irritation, that will help. If I can prove that the TDS colors that claim to be "PPD FREE", are known to have higher cross allergies, and they know it, then we just might have a fight.
Wish me luck! - Gina xx
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4663539/Tragic-mother-dies-after-year-long-coma-caused-by-hair-dye.html
Many people don't read the tiny note inside the box of hair color where it says, "WARNING, This product contains a chemical that might cause skin irritation. Do not use on eyelashes or eyebrows, to do so may cause blindness" If you did read that, would you think it could take your life? Would you assume that the skin irritation was an allergic reaction, and that along with that, could come anaphylactic shock, which in turn, can block your airway? You can't call 911, because you can't speak. You can't drive yourself to the emergency room, because without air, well, you most likely won't make it there. If you had proper warning, maybe you could take some benadryl, but it may not be strong enough. Basically, there needs to be a choice. We at least should be allowed to KNOW that this can happen. Yet, the warning label is still just a rash.
PPD, or PARA PHENYLENE DIAMINE has been the number one allergen in Europe since 2006. It is in the top 20 in the United States, yet I continue to get e-mails week after week from people that they are finding their own diagnosis, and can not find a doctor who has ever heard of it. How is it that a doctor can offer patch testing for allergies, yet not offer the FDA's most current list? I believe that in the U.S. the number of people that are allergic to hair color is sadly under reported. If doctors had the proper information, and hairdressers had the proper information, we would have a fighting chance.
Right now, the warning was put into effect in 1938 by Congress. We would have to fight congress to have this changed, and it would be a tough fight. We may be able to get the allergies on the label, but it might not make any difference. The FDA does not have ANY ruling over this, as I have been in contact with them. I am working with the state on how to educate, it's not looking good. I think the best solution might be through the truth in advertising, and the FCC.
So, that is going to be my next adventure. I am working with the FDA to collect more information. I am going to see how much "truth" there actually is in all of this. If I can prove that these companies know that there is more than a skin irritation, that will help. If I can prove that the TDS colors that claim to be "PPD FREE", are known to have higher cross allergies, and they know it, then we just might have a fight.
Wish me luck! - Gina xx
