David Naulls

Last month we published a Natural cosmetics report that revealed several products aimed at mothers and babies from a company called Mahu contained a preservative called iodopropynyl butylcarbanate (IPBC).

In 2008 the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) strengthened the rules on the use of IPBC in cosmetics and gave companies 12 months to comply.

IPBC is allowed in some cosmetics, such as shampoos and deodorants, in low concentrations. What it’s not allowed in are any “leave-on” preparations for children under the age of three. It also can’t be used in body lotions or creams intended for use on a large part of the body and in any oral hygiene or lip care products.

Despite this, 12 months after the phase-out date we found IPBC listed as an ingredient in Mahu baby lotions, stretch mark lotions and nipple creams sold in Wellington pharmacies and health stores.

Following this story some readers wrote to us that they found IPBC listed as an ingredient in two products sold by a firm called NZ Nature.

The reaction of the NZ Nature and Mahu to these breaches couldn’t be more different. NZ Nature has assured us it’s recalled all “rogue stock” and is happy to refund any customer who has bought these products or provide a replacement product.

What has Mahu done? It's resorted to spin doctoring. A recent press release from it misrepresents our article and contains this italicised statement from ERMA’s Simon Buckland: “We do not have any concerns regarding mahu skincare and do not intend to follow anything up”.

ERMA tell us this statement is incorrect: it says it could not express a statement of "no concern" as it did not have information on the specific composition of Mahu's products. It asked for the media release to be taken off the Voxy website (where it was posted) and also asked Mahu to refrain from using ERMA's name to directly or indirectly endorse Mahu or its products.

Rather than continuing its "attack the messenger" stance, we suggest Mahu would do better focusing its efforts on ensuring non-compliant products are removed from shop shelves.

David Naulls
Editor
Consumer magazine

More from consumer.org.nz

• Natural cosmetics - our August report mentioning Mahu products
• NZ Nature cream withdrawn - our announcement of the withdrawal of NZ Nature products

Got a question or comment on this topic? Share your views and experiences with other Consumer members...