Illustrations by Sarah Muldoon
The Price of Beauty: Methacrylates in the Artificial Nail Industry
When we as consumers are concerned most with the final results of the products we use, we render ourselves blind to the true nature of what lies behind flashy, meretricious packaging. Many products, especially cosmetics, come packed with the potential to yield adverse health effects in users as a result of the noxious chemicals they contain. Two popular but dangerous examples are acrylic and gel nails, which are infused with ingredients including toluene, formaldehyde, DBP, and, most notably, methacrylates. The latter chemical group includes substances used for timely and efficient polymerization, referring to the temporary bonding of human nails to synthetic nails and polish (Rieder and Tosti, 2016). However, numerous studies have linked methacrylates to an array of uncomfortable allergic reactions in nail salon customers, as well as dangerous long-term health problems in nail technicians. Nonetheless, little action has been taken to reduce the use of these chemicals. Thus, as methacrylates continue to be applied to modern beauty techniques, we must decide which to prioritize: beauty or health.
In the nail industry, manicures continue to serve as a convenient, popular and progressively inexpensive means of beauty enhancement for a wide range of consumers, particularly those in the West. While a majority of clientele are women ages thirty and older, younger women and a rising number of men are going to nail salons as well to treat themselves. Some of the most popular types of nail services offered to customers, according to a survey conducted by Nail Magazine, are acrylic and gel manicures, the latter having increased in popularity by almost twenty-seven-percent within the past decade (?2016-2017 Industry Statistics?). In a separate analysis examining the total capital expenditure, or CAPEX, for the U.S. nail industry, it was shown that an estimated $6.16 billion was spent in 2007 (Industry Outlook) and another $8.53 billion almost ten years later (?2016-2017 Industry Statistics?). To put these numbers into perspective, the CAPEX for the nail industry in 2015 was projected to be more than half that of combined companies in arts, entertainment and recreation during the same year (?Census Bureau 2017?). With the rising commonplace of this practice, businesses offering nail services must continue to satisfy their customers. But if clients have a bad salon experience, not only will the profitability of nail salons dwindle, but so will the general health of clients and nail manicurists.
When cosmetics are tested for human use, the data may deem a product safe for the general public, but negative reactions can still occur in users with skin disorders or sensitive skin. The most prevalent short-term health condition induced by artificial nail products is Allergic Contact Dermatitis. ACD, as the condition is commonly termed, is a red, rash-like outbreak on the skin initiated by contact with a sensitizer, or a substance causing irritation to the skin. ACD is quite common amongst both nail technicians and their clients (Rieder and Tosti, 2016). In a clinical study published in the Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery, researchers S. Dekoven, J. Dekoven and D.L. Holness took patch tests on several manicurists who frequently performed photo bonded manicures. Their finding that three of four women identified to have ACD tested positive for two types of methacrylates on their skin (DeKoven et al., 2017) clearly illustrates the diversity of human sensitivity to the creeping dangers of these chemicals.
A gel-manicure kit can be purchased for a ballpark price of only $30, with polish, a UV lamp and hidden hazards included.
Unfortunately, the risks posed by methacrylates in nail products extend beyond the doors of the salon and into the consumers? homes. Products such as polishes, glues, and other acrylic-based polymerizing chemicals used by nail professionals are primarily marketed towards privately-owned shops; however, they are also accessible to customers at beauty supply and retail department stores. A gel-manicure kit can be purchased for a ballpark price of only $30, with polish, a UV lamp and hidden hazards included. Unbeknownst to a vast majority of buyers, gel polishes contain methacrylates harmful to their skin and nails. For example, OPI Gel Color and Shellac, two popular brands of lacquers, are made-up of compounds such as aliphatic urethane methacrylate oligomer and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate, or 2-HEMA (Rieder and Tosti, 2016). 2-HEMA, in particular, poses a risk to consumers, since the aforementioned clinical study of manicurists exhibiting signs of ACD identified 2-HEMA as one of the sensitizers causing their allergic reactions. Thus, caution should be taken by nail enthusiasts, even those who prefer at-home treatments to salon experiences. With a composition similar to those of stronger chemicals used in nail salon products, everyday nail products have the definite potential to harm individuals partaking in the self-application of nail treatments, especially users who are oblivious to the dangers of each manicure.
The effects of using methacrylates in nail products are not limited to short-term irritations: more detrimental, long-term health effects have been suffered by consumers too. A prime example is occupational asthma, a medical condition brought on by the working environment of a person with little or no previous history with asthma (Sauni et al., 2008). In a study conducted by the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, one nail technician experienced a loss of voice, rhinitis and recurrent sinusitis. Another technician showed progressed bronchial hyperresponsiveness and asthma of an occupational origin, which developed only a year into her work (Sauni et al., 2008). Before the onslaughts of respiratory illness, acrylic and gel manicures were well integrated into the nail technicians? daily work routine, alongside the manicures? respective ingredients. There are three substantial groups of substances used in the gel nail procedure: The bonding agents, sealing agents, and sculpture resins (Sauni et al., 2008), all of which contain multiple types of methacrylates. An article published by Dr. Riitta Sauni and her colleagues in The American Journal of Industrial Medicine reports the typical bonding agent to be at 12%, the sealing agent at 20.1% and the sculpture resin at 18.7% in cumulative methacrylate composition (Sauni et al., 2008), connecting the high concentrations of noxious chemicals to occupationally-induced respiratory illnesses. So if exposure to methacrylates is not reduced, will manicurists eventually be rendered physically incapable of working within their profession? That seems to be a possibility.
A serious health complication arising from prolonged and repetitive exposure to methacrylates is paresthesia, or the numbing of various parts of the body indicative of nerve damage, specifically in the hands and fingers
Not only do methacrylates damage the human respiratory system, but they also have the reputation of damaging the nervous system. A serious health complication arising from prolonged and repetitive exposure to methacrylates is paresthesia, or the numbing of various parts of the body indicative of nerve damage, specifically in the hands and fingers (?Sensorimotor polyneuropathy?). An example of this condition is documented in a case study by Donaghy, Rushworth and Jacobs, who examined a man who had been working as a dental prosthetic technician for over three decades and who had come to develop sensorimotor peripheral neuropathy. Researchers concluded that the degree of his neuropathy was extended by his daily exposure to methacrylates, such as methyl-methacrylate, or MMA, and 2-HEMA commonly used in dentistry to reduce the amount of pain felt by patients during procedures (?2-Hydroxypropyl methacrylate?). As a result of this exposure, his sense of touch was significantly weakened. Clearly, resin monomers in desensitizing dentin can adversely affect the functionality of the nervous system. Methacrylates have no place in cosmetics, for they act as a catalyst for neuropathy to pervade the nail industry.
A case examined by Dan Slodownik and Jasen D. Williams demonstrates the negative effects of exposure to methacrylates through the experience of a thirty-three-year-old woman who developed paresthesia in her fingers after receiving acrylic nail treatments (Slodownik et al., 2007). As explained by Donaghy, Rushworth and Jacobs, if applied directly to the hands over an extended period of time, methacrylates will cause nerve damage (M. Donaghy et al., 1991). People go to nail salons with intentions of self-pampering and relaxation, not mutilation or painful allergic reactions. Therefore, it does not make sense for strong polymerizing chemicals historically used in dentistry to be used in nail products.
Scientific data continually demonstrate the negative consequences of exposure to methacrylates. Despite a direct link from methacrylates to the assured deaths of laboratory animals, these chemicals are still being incorporated in products intended exclusively for our personal use. Amongst the toxicological studies accumulated by John Autian, one carried out by D.W. Fasset in 1967 showed that methacrylates are equally toxic through the skin as they are through direct ingestion. Fasset found that the minimum lethal oral dose of methyl methacrylate for rabbits ranges from four to ten milliliters per kilogram, which is exactly the same as the average lethal dermal dosage (Autian, 1975). Another study by Treon and associates involved a group of twenty-nine healthy rats that were exposed to acrylic monomer vapors. The concentration was set to 70 particles-per-million (Becker et al., 2011), or ppm, just 30 units behind the occupational limit of 100 ppm (Methyl methacrylate), and within a 30-hour period, two of the rats were pronounced dead. Nail technicians are working with stronger levels of these same chemicals for equal amounts of time during an average work week. How do we know that their health is not being affected as well
Health complications resulting from use of methacrylates are not recent news. Nearly fifty decades ago, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided to halt the circulation of nail products containing methyl-methacrylate, or MMA, after a series of injury reports (Kurtzweil, 1995). Nonetheless, its substitutes continue to be used as active ingredients in nail enhancing? substances. For example, polymethyl methacrylate, or PMMA, is the key ingredient in nail glue. During its polymerization, PMMA produces MMA as its residual monomer (Becker et al., 2011); it only seems logical that PMMA, a methacrylate generating the prohibited MMA, be discontinued in its direct usage in nail products as well. If PMMA-containing nail glues continue to be distributed to salons, consumers will be sent home with worn-down skin and nails in place of the manicures they deserve.
Although the FDA registered concerns about MMA, data have shown that other methacrylates, primarily ethyl methacrylate, can be even more harmful than MMA. In a study performed by the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel involving eleven people, seven experienced painful skin reactions upon contacting ethyl methacrylate in acrylic nails (Becker et al., 2011). Alarmingly, the conclusion drawn by the Panel deviates from their own previous test results, which found ethyl methacrylate to be safe as used when application is accompanied by directions to avoid skin contact because of the sensitizing potential of ethyl methacrylate,? at concentrations both typical in acrylic nail products and linked to dermatitis (Becker et al., 2011). John Bailey, Ph.D., the FDA?s acting director of the Office of Cosmetics and Colors, offers supplementary warning regarding its usage in cosmetics. He remarked that products containing ethyl methacrylate should be used only by trained nail technicians under conditions that minimize exposure and skin contact because of their potential to cause allergies? (Kurtzweil, 1995). While cases of ACD and occupational asthma continue to surface, these warnings still go unheard, or unread, by the consumers and technicians who are truly paying the price of beauty.
One reason for this ignorance is that although cosmetics must be thoroughly reviewed before they hit the shop shelves, the required labels lack sufficient warnings. If posing any danger, products should be properly labeled to advise consumers on their appropriate usage. The most common product symbols present on nail products are those related to product durability, the recyclability of packaging, and flammability, summarizing the overall adulterous nature of the product (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with amendments). According to U.S. Code 21, Subsection 361, a cosmetic is adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to users under the conditions of use prescribed in labeling thereof? (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with amendments). Common gel polish and nail glue bottles marketed to the public contain warning labels, but not to the extent at which they should.
A prime example lies in the packaging label on ORLY?s Brush-On Nail Glue. The back of the bottle reads, Avoid contact with skin and eyes. If swallowed, seek medical advice immediately? (Amazon). By the Federal Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FD&C Act, this label is insufficient because it fails to reveal material facts pertaining to consequences resulting from the glue?s intended use (Rehkopf and Davidson, 2013). While the bottle clearly advises against potential ingestion and contact of the glue with human skin and eyes, where on the label is the customer educated on possible outbreaks of ACD, or nail technicians on occupational asthma? Product warning labels should make buyers aware of the risk they automatically accept in using the cosmetic.
The active ingredients of cosmetics sold on a retail basis must also be adequately labeled for users. Under the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act, or FPLA, The net quantity of contents?shall be separately and accurately stated in a uniform location upon the principal display panel of that label? (?15 U.S. Code ? 1453?). By definition, many popular nail products, such as OPI?s Gel Color polish, do not conform to this act. The label on the back of the OPI gel polish bottle only states, Shake well before using,? and, For professional use only? (Gel-luv.blogspot). This label does not advertise any of the nail enamel?s active ingredients, such as 2-HEMA. It is true that the FDA does not have the power to approve the labeling of cosmetic products, as that responsibility is endowed solely upon the individual manufacturer. However, a product and its packaging do not have to be FDA approved to be FDA regulated. With the FDA regulating products on the basis of the FD&C Act and FPLA (Rehkopf and Davidson, 2013), cosmetic labels should be more clear and direct about the products? ingredients before mass-production is authorized. Why is the government, the primary entity dictating overall consumer safety, allowing these cosmetics to be sold to unsuspecting individuals? The explanation is simple?the government and the manufacturers it oversees are selfish.
The nail industry collects a considerable amount of revenue with popular services, namely acrylic and gel manicures. Motivated by an insatiable drive for profit rather than the goal of customer satisfaction and safety, the government has allowed the nail industry to continue its deceit and secrecy, failing to educate consumers on what they are putting into their bodies. Improper regulation of these chemicals is outright greedy; manufacturers can prioritize profit over health and fool salon owners into purchasing the products they believe customers love, when in fact, these goods are dangerous. As a result, methacrylate related injuries continue to taint the success of salons. If the true risk of a nail salon experience were to be made more widely known, surely customers would be discouraged from artificial nail treatments. On the other hand, creating a more trustworthy industry that works to reduce the known risk of painful nail salon experiences might give people a greater sense of security to frequent salons more often, bringing in more money. In either case, change starts with ridding acrylic products of methacrylates.
Finding alternatives to methacrylates in synthetic nail practices would promote both safety and security within an industry filled with untapped potential. Current polymerizing chemicals are too strong for human use; time after time, they have taken their toll on the well-being of manicure customers and technicians alike. If the FDA does not adjust rules promoting the safe and fair usage of polymerization chemicals in nail products, the production of methacrylate-containing nail glues and lacquers will only continue to hurt businesses by deterring clients and manicurists from receiving and performing nail services if they are unable, or unwilling, to hurdle the perverse health risks these chemicals pose. The next step forward is enforcing the production of products that are actually suitable for consumers. Manufacturers in the nail industry must be made to follow guidelines established by the FDA while raising awareness of the real ingredients used in widely-trusted products. In doing so, acrylic and gel products can be used safely, and the nail industry will be allowed to prosper. After all, everyone wants to look their best, without having to choose between beauty and health.
Author: Mya Soukaseum
During my English 110 class, I set out to be experimental with my writing to frame a style reflective of myself. Since my course instructor, Professor Michael Harris Peyton, strongly encouraged such an experimental mentality, so I took the opportunity with this research project to explore a curiosity that was instilled into me by Dr. John Burmeister, of the UD Department of Chemistry. His lectures on chemical diversity always caught my attention. When Dr. Burmeister mentioned that a single chemical can be used in products ranging from heat-resistant glass to eye drops (boric acid), I wondered if consumers should always assume the safety of these commercial chemicals. With this question as the premise for my research paper, I decided to investigate a popular realm of consumerism about which I knew nothing: acrylic and gel manicures.
Just walking into the haze of noxious fumes trapped in a salon would lead anyone to guess that there is something unhealthy in those freshly-painted, artificial nails. What I learned about the methacrylates in these nails through my research was far from reassuring and confirmed my suspicions about their potential dangers to human health. While a product might look safe, cute packaging cannot sugar coat the painful dermatitis or chemically induced nerve damage experienced by so many in the nail industry in the United States.
By questioning the things you use on a regular basis, you can pass better judgement on their true reliability. I wanted my research paper to expose the risks of the methacrylate-containing nail products consumers trust enough to bring into their own homes, but relying on scientific analysis to convey my message to a wide audience was not an easy task. I needed to develop an argument to guide my audience past the intro without losing sight of the science backing my claims. Peer review was extremely important and encouraging in this process. A simple raised eyebrow or glazed-over stare indicated when my explanations were insufficient, while also exposing me to helpful feedback and the writing techniques of other students.
By writing in my own style, I can articulate my interests and opinions more deeply and thoroughly than spoken word. I was so thrilled to write about chemistry that I nearly forgot that this essay was a homework assignment. Beyond providing knowledge and advice on acrylic chemistry and dangerously flawed regulation within the nail industry, I hope my paper encourages readers to be more curious about the world around them. You can learn the most interesting things from fleeting curiosity, as I did by researching this topic, so just be experimental!
Instructor: Professor Michael Harris-Peyton
The discussion in our E110 about researched essays focused on the practice of nerding out? on a topic: finding something you cared about or wanted to learn more about, and writing about an issue inside that interest, whatever it may be. With the right attention to audience, well-done arguments about a niche issue are more useful than poorly-done arguments about something of general interest.The process began with a research and proposal phase, a series of peer reviews and one-on-one meetings with me, and some work in the library. After several weeks of research, blog post updates, and a formal proposal with an annotated bibliography as a separate, graded assignment, students drafted their 3000-word papers, with two rounds of peer review.Mya has a talent for balancing accessibility and technical precision. I think this essay is a great example of her ability to present a very specific, and very deep, analysis of an issue to a non-specialist audience. It?s also an excellent example of how a well-researched, unconventional topic can make for a very impactful argument. Her description of the potential health dangers of methacrylates sticks with me, even now. In our meetings, and in peer review, I think she made all of us see the artificial nail industry?and nail salons?very differently.
Works Cited
15 U.S. Code ? 1453 – Requirements of labeling; placement, form, and contents of statement of quantity; supplemental statement of quantity. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1453 (accessed June 15, 2018).
2016-2017 Industry Statistics. Nails Magazine; pp 34-35.
2-Hydroxypropyl methacrylate. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/13539#section=Top (accessed Nov 21, 2017).
Amazon (2017). [image] Available at: https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81Q7BiirpbL._SL1500_.jpg [accessed 24 Nov. 2017].
Autian, J. Structure-Toxicity Relationships of Acrylic Monomers. Environmental Health Perspectives 1975, 11, 141-152.
Becker, L. C.; Bergfeld, W. F.; Belsito, D. V.; Hill, R. A.; Klaassen, C. D.; Liebler, D. C.; Marks, J. G.; Shank, R. C.; Slaga, T. J.; Snyder, P. W.; Andersen, F. A. Final Report of the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel Safety Assessment of Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA), Methyl Methacrylate Crosspolymer, and Methyl Methacrylate/Glycol Dimethacrylate Crosspolymer. International Journal of Toxicology 2011, 30, 65S.
Census Bureau 2017 Capital Spending Report: U.S. Capital Spending Patterns 2006-2015. Politics & Government Business 2017, 10.
DeKoven, S.; DeKoven, J.; Holness, D. L. (Meth)Acrylate Occupational Contact Dermatitis in Nail Salon Workers: A Case Series. Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery 2017, 21, 340-344.
Donaghy, M.; Rushworth, G.; Jacobs, J. M. Generalized peripheral neuropathy in a dental technician exposed to methyl methacrylate monomer. Neurology 1991, 41, 1112-1116.
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. United States, 1999; p.1.
Gel-luv.blogspot (2017). [image] Available at: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kzPtgQZ3G_A/UdUVR-hic8I/AAAAAAAAALE/XUl7WXxQapU/s711/gelcolor1.jpg [accessed 24 Nov. 2017].
Industry Outlook. 2012; pp 32, 48.
Kurtzweil, P. Fingernails looking good while playing safe. FDA Consumer 1995, 29, 20.
Methyl methacrylate. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0426.html (accessed Nov 20, 2017).
Rehkopf, L.; Davidson, T. Food and Drug Administration; 2013; Vol. 1, pp 2-3.
Rieder, E. A.; Tosti, A. Cosmetically Induced Disorders of the Nail with Update on Contemporary Nail Manicures. The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology 2016, 9, 39.
Sauni, R.; Kauppi, P.; Alanko, K.; Henriks-Eckerman, M.; Tuppurainen, M.; Hannu, T. Occupational asthma caused by sculptured nails containing methacrylates. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 2008, 51, 968-974.
Sensorimotor polyneuropathy. https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/000750.htm (accessed Nov 20, 2017).
Slodownik, D.; Williams, J. D.; Tate, B. J. Prolonged paresthesia due to sculptured acrylic nails. Contact Dermatitis 2007, 56, 298-299.
Paper Prompt
Topic: for our third assignment, I would like you to take the proposal and research that you have
articulated in P2, develop it further and construct a thesis-driven logical argument of 2500-3000 words
in which you defend your argument using scholarly research and evidence. Generally, good research
papers work on the following pattern?a brief introduction broaching the topic and its relevance, a section
discussing any background and discussion of the topic up to date, a lengthy articulation and defense of
your argument position, broken down into simple steps and defended against several counterarguments
with relevant evidence and logical conclusions, and a concluding section where you wrap up and discuss
the implications of your successfully defended position.
This assignment is the capstone of first year writing, and as such it will require many drafts, peer review
sessions, and a student teacher conference. Note that you cannot receive a grade higher than a C- in this
course without completing this paper with a passing grade. I will not accept papers on moral arguments
(like is the death penalty murder) or over-used issues, as we have discussed before, since I want you to
contribute significantly to a discourse, not just repeat or reiterate an ongoing argument.
Tips
? Contrary to popular belief, there is no mandatory section for concessions? or
acknowledging other arguments on the issue, and positioning it near the end is usually a
terrible idea. Instead, be aware of counterarguments and actively preempt them by
closing those gaps in your argument and acknowledging the limitations of the scope of
your argument.
? Do not inflate your word count by spending more than 20% of your essay on background
material?this is both obvious inflation and boring. If an argument runs out of content, be
sure it is easily defensible from counterarguments, as this is often overlooked and an
instrumental part of a good essay.
? If you find you are extremely motivated about your topic and that your essay is going
well, consider submitting it to next year?s Arak Anthology.
Format:
? The essay should be at least 2400 words, but definitely not more than 3000.
? Standard MLA format: 1 inch margins on all sides, Times New Roman size 12, doublespaced.
? Remember to include a works cited in a standardized citation format. MLA is the
standard format, but you may use APA or Chicago if it is more appropriate. Just be sure
to let me know first.
Introduction Plus Outline Due: November 5 at 11pm.
First Entire Draft Due: November 13 at 11pm.
(Bring copies to the following class day for peer review.)
Mandatory Conferences: November 7 and 9.
Final Copy Due: November 27 at 11pm.
Blog Conversion Due: December 4, on WordPress (500 words)