I don't know how many Canucks are paying close attention, but I like to keep an eye on this stuff for sure. What concerns me is pressure from what I'll call "extremists" like the EWG (who do put forth interesting information but I'm wary of groups that don't take economic realities into consideration and this one seems like one of those). My understanding is they had a hand in pushing for this Act?
I'm not super versed in the details of the Act and I suspect the "spirit" of it makes sense. However, it's one thing to want safer cosmetics/toiletries. It's another to create rules and regs few can afford to follow save for the cosmetic giants.
I still don't really understand how small biz soapers are impacted by SCA but my concern is if there will be extensive requirements for burdensome/expensive testing. Some bloggers feel it's waaaay over the top and will put them out of business. And will the burden of proof (of safety) be on the soaper or the suppliers or both? For example, how will they be able to regulate contaminants? i.e. stuff not listed in ingredients or product descriptions. (Not saying they shouldn't regulate them but ...)
And fragrance oils can contain dozens and dozens of chemicals ... regulating those is going to be tough. Not impossible and it
should be regulated to an extent, but I'm not convinced gov't representatives actually know what they're up against
Also, what does it mean if you don't have to register? That you don't have to abide by the new legislation? I'm still not clear on how it works (not on paper but in
reality which I'm not sure legislators have thought all the way through ... ).
I'm actually all for tougher laws around things like disclosure and ingredient hot lists (which we have in Canada). But it's the mechanics of it I worry about a little.
Edit: Here's an example of why some folks are so concerned. I don't share all this blogger's opinions but there are some compelling points for discussion to be sure:
http://personalcaretruth.com/2011/07/sa ... tion-fees/Karri