The Brazilian Blowout Hoax, Part 2: Fed OSHA Botches Study, Media Blames Company
by Lawrence MeyersContrary to recent media reports, the Brazilian Blowout hair treatment is safe for use.
You’d never know it, though, because the mainstream media has been perpetuating one myth after another about Brazilian Blowout while ignoring the facts. Last time, I wrote about a hatchet job made to appear as a legitimate study by Oregon OSHA [Note to Editor: Please link to Part 1] that was covered ad-nauseum by the media.
Yet, when a respected scientific association issued a balanced statement regarding Brazilian Blowout, the media spun it to make it appear that the company was fighting regulatory sampling of the product. To wit: The American Chemistry Council, which actually manufactures formaldehyde, released a statement ten days before Oregon OSHA unveiled its biased “report”.
“We encourage the company that makes the Brazilian Blowout to cooperate fully with government officials to ensure that the product meets federal and state standards for formaldehyde use”.
Brazilian Blowout fully cooperated and, as thanks, was subjected to a biased and editorialized government report from Liberal environmentalists at Oregon OSHA. Yet Time Magazine would have you believe that “The chemical industry is actually sort of coming down on the side of regulators and activist groups on the issue”, while quoting hack anti-capitalist enviro-wackos like Siobhan O’Connor. The company’s side of the story, however, was omitted.
So, with the house already stacking the odds against Brazilian Blowout, Federal OSHA entered the fray.
OSHA’s Big Boo-Boo
In air sampling data reports obtained exclusively by this reporter, I can confirm that OSHA did indeed conduct 24 air sample tests in several salons. Brazilian Blowout passed every single test in OSHA’s exposure limits, known as the Action Limit (AL – the level where OSHA regulations take effect) Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL – an 8-hour time-weighted average) and Short-Term Exposure Limit (STEL – a 15 minute exposure measurement).
But a funny thing happened during one of these short-term exposure tests. As the report below details, one sample was taken for 35 minutes instead of the 15 minutes required under OSHA regulations. One would expect that if you sample the air for more than twice the period you are supposed to, anything you find in that sample is going to be more than twice as concentrated as it otherwise would.
Sure enough, that sample yielded 2.5 parts per million (ppm) of formaldehyde, above OSHA’s limit of 2.0 ppm. Rather than discard this sample as protocol dictates, OSHA retained it. In fact, as the report indicates, the sample was received in OSHA’s laboratory by a functionary, who passed it on to an analyst, who analyzed the sample, who had another employee check his calculations, before the entire report was approved by a supervisor.
And none of them noticed the improper 35 minute sample, or if they did, they did nothing about it. How is it that a mistake that a high-school student would commit somehow made it all the way through OSHA’s internal controls? Are there any such controls? Why was it missed? What the heck is going on inside OSHA that this critical error wasn’t caught? And why is it that OSHA didn’t tell the public the truth — that all 24 samples passed the test, but that one faulty sample did not — and instead caused a firestorm by holding up that faulty sample as “proof” of Brazilian Blowout’s “danger”?
More Media Brilliance
On April 11, 2011, OSHA leapt into the media cistern with a press release. It’s a Hazard Alert! Included in this gaseous emission is the phrase, “During Federal OSHA investigations, air tests showed formaldehyde at levels above OSHA’s limits in salons using Brazilian Blowout Acai Professional Smoothing Solution…” in big bold letters.
I asked an OSHA spokesman via Email about this blatantly false statement. To date, they have not replied.
But never mind me. Did the media investigate OSHA’s results? Did anyone from the media ask to see the reports? If they did, would they even be able to interpret them? Did the media ask the company what their reaction was to the results?
Why didn’t anyone from the media discover OSHA’s enormous blunder that I found?
Because they were too busy “reporting”. Here’s a partial List of Shame — I want to nail some of the small-time folk, too, because they could’ve had a real story and really broken big time if they’d actually done the research:
Kathy Muldoon at The Oregonian
Amity Addrishi Bakersfield Eyewitness News
Independent Lab Confirms Safety of Brazilian Blowout
The other big story that the media ignored is that a company that routinely performs indoor air quality tests (Health Science Associates) tested Brazilian Blowout’s product. The results showed — again — that the product’s formaldehyde release came in far below all of OSHA’s limits. But you wouldn’t know it unless you knew A Mom In Red High Heels, who reported it in her blog. That’s it.
So at this point in the story, Brazilian Blowout is being attacked from all sides, thanks to a witch hunt solely the result of incompetent and/or biased government agencies. With OSHA now throwing pies, it was only a matter of time before a grandstanding Liberal politician entered the fray — and along with him, the FDA.
All for a product repeatedly proven to be safe, when used as directed.
Next time: Hardcore Liberal politican + FDA = business as usual.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
27 Comments
Some things go right over the top of my head, ( and I'm pretty tall).
At first I thought this was a spoof.
A knock off of the story over at Drudge, where the Transgendered Wacko was injecting women's buttocks with "Fix-a-Flat".
Truly, we are witnessing the end of our civilization.
And cement.
I'll give the author credit for one thing.
He provided a link for Deidre Imus and her "coverage" of the story.
One would be hard pressed, to find a larger, more rabid environmental lunatic than Deidre Imus.
I mentioned on Part 1 of this story that what the media is doing here is right in line with the story line in Atlas Shrugged regarding Rearden Metal……
A total and complete media blitz on falsehoods of a product, backed by polititians….
An here it is….happening in real life…..
A classic charlie foxtrot, government at its zenith, and people want these incompetents in charge of medical decisions? I'm bald and not inline for Brazilian Blowout benefits and can be reasonably neutral in my observation.
Based on the lack of quality education in our public school system and the growth of government regulatory agencies, it might be that minimally qualified folks are being accepted into the govt dole. After some experience with OSHA, I was left with the impression that it is an extremely inept organization. Kinda reminds me of the toddler and thief.
Nice axe – scary visual. Though perhaps not quite as scary as the latest accusations coming from the left's favorite author … http://bit.ly/qVdDUt
Combined with what Don said about Newt, they are a strange couple, Cowboy!
I missed whatever it was Dingie Don said about Newt.
I've been off the grid, for almost a month.
Wonder how safe products shall be used when they blow up the entire world economy. Regulation after regulation until nobody can legally sell anything, eat anything, think anything.WTF! Yeah yeah I know liberals never think about end game. Here and now, worry about consequences wtshtf. Or is it now a rotary oscillator?
Osha." My bad." I would expect the same apology we got from Chu on Solyandra.
Interesting that a troll should come through so soon to TD everyone on a story such as this! Oh well, who knows what goes on in their tiny minds. I put back what I could.
Good going, Lawrence!
OSHA is one of those alphabet agencies that really should have it's wings clipped anyway. It may have started out with a noble cause but, turned into the regulatory behemoth, as all government agencies tend to do, with their motto being, "We Gotta' Do Somethin'!"
As far as the EnviroNazis and the LSM are concerned, even a lie is good enough if it advances the CAUSE! Case in point http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/22/climategate...
This story may not be right up there with banning DDT, however, it's the point, isn't it?
By the way, got in on the Brazilian Blowout IPO did you, Lar?
Damn, I can't find a link for you! And it was just this morning, I think! Like you, I hit 10 or 15 websites with my first coffee.
It had something to do with fat pig or slob or something. I'm sure you'll run across it.
I just want my Corvair back, Hadit!
Excellent trolling for hits, Ombdz. I mean trolling in an entirely good way! I'm spotting you all over the place!
For those of you who have not visited, I highly recommend Ombdz site!
(and no, I haven't been offered a cookie!)
BTW, what have you got against Paul Anka. You just leave him alone mister!
This is like saying that you should not get a DUI because the cops gave you 2 breathalyzer tests when protocol dictates that only one breathalyzer test should be given.
It sure looks they failed air testing not over just one 15 minute period but for 2-15minute periods in a row and then some.
Just means we're running in the same circles … and thanks for the kind words. Actually heard some type of PA promo just as I was putting this together – apparently there's a new album, who knew??
Ignorance, laziness, and gullibility, the 'axis of stupidity', now dominates our politi-sphere and spells the end of our civilization. Alas, Babylon!
Thanks for the compliment, Nick.
The only way that 35 min sample would be acceptable is in the time weighted average(PEL) not for the STEL. The math works out to be 1.07 ppm for the 15 min STEL.
One of the things we don't know is the sampling methodology. If the test wasn't conducted properly in the first place (i.e. too long of time) then the tests are inconclusive. Also there multiple sources for formaldehyde (like the author mentioned in article one) including one's breath after a hard night of drinking. It's a standard by-product of one's liver on it's conversion of alcohol back to sugar.
This whole thing stinks of the same witchhunt that was done with BPA and Alar. Trivia: BPA is the main monomer for polycarbonate (bullet proof glass) which just happens to be polymerized with phosgene (which is a deadly gas, WWI chemical weapon) and was invented at the same time by Bayer and GE. No chemical is bad. It's simply a material. Without chemicals and the chemical industry we wouldn't have anything that is the modern world. So thank chlorine for making your water safe to drink without turning it into beer first and flourine so you don't have teeth like the Brits.
Just checked out your site, ombdz (on Nick's recommendation), and have to agree.
Good writing. Elegant but simple, uncluttered layout.
Very nice – bookmarked you.
Well, thank you very much. You hit the nail on the head with what we were trying to do. Happy to have you both aboard!
The STEL is nothing more than a short period time weighted average (TWA). Measuring the STEL for more time than minimum time will give you a lower bound estimate of the max 15 minute measurement.
If you are breathing out 2.5ppm formaldehyde after a night of hard drinking you are currently laying in the morgue being embalmed. At the very least we know your hair will likely be straight.
To the wise, truthful scientific facts will be enough, to the ignorant, no amount of facts or reason will make any difference as they wouldn’t understand a word you were saying anyway. Fear is for the ignorant, knowledge is for the wise.
I am sending this to everyone……having researched formaldehyde for hours myself.I chose science without a vested interest in the outcome.I hate to say I told you so instead I will share an opinion based on years of dealing with people (and I love people) …The Brazilian Blowout is a classic example,’people attack things they don’t understand” AND they really attack popular things they don’t understand…The Brazilian Blowout is the best breakthrough ever for those with overly curly frizzy hair and it is very popular! It is also SAFE, twice as safe according to OSHA’s facts. Their rumors are despicable.
It would have been a shame if a few super ignorant people and their gang of hysterical rumor mongers and irresponsible press had got away with destroying such a helpful service….. They didn’t and it’s more popular than ever.
Every doctor I or any of my clients asked about it, approved them to get a BB.
A local OSHA representative and I went over the Material Safety Data Sheet(MSDS) and we went over EVERY ingredient and when we finished he said ”Why is this controversial ?”
I showed him the Oregon Report and he shook his head sadly and said “This report says it’s twice as safe as required? …Well, that’s Oregon and we are California.” .My assistants and the salon owner were witnesses to this.
If you desire, I have saved a lot of my extensive research by far more credible scientists than can be found at OSHA.OSHA Oregon doesn’t recognize the difference between a liquid and a gas evidently. Their common confusion is covered here: http://www.ecu.edu/cs-admin/oehs/envmgmnt/Formali... Formalin and Methylene Glycol are liquids that are made by combining formaldehyde GAS,( which is ALWAYS a gas by the way) and water. Once combined they CEASE to be even related to formaldehyde. Methylene Glycol is more related to alcohol than formaldehyde.
The ONLY concern should have been ‘how much formaldehyde is released during the drying and flat ironing. All tests by OSHA showed the levels of actual formaldehyde to range between.006 to .335. The stringent safety margin set by OSHA is .75. So OSHA acknowledges the BB is TWICE as safe as required.
Here is an example of how hysterical rumor mongers government sociopaths operate.” Be careful with that water are you crazy!!’ Why? you might ask and the scare monger would respond “You DO know that one of the most explosive gasses on earth is Hydrogen/? You also know that it takes oxygen to make a big explosion?……Well, water is TWO parts Hydrogen and ONE part Oxygen…huh H2O(hands on hips) ..Well that’s sounds like a bomb to me…If it’s got feathers and quacks it’s a duck!…that bottle of water is a bomb!”
It’s about that stupid and the OSHA bullies count on the fact that almost no one will check the facts.
Michael D Shaw is one example of a competent scientist http://www.gasdetection.com/news2/health_news_dig...
Scaring people for fun and profit http://healthnewsdigest.com/news/contributing%20c...
Finally, it is OSHA that is liable for illnesses caused by their fear mongering false reports …from Harvard http://harvardmagazine.com/2005/05/the-nocebo-eff...
This is patently false. My suspicion is that you are a competitor seeking to discredit BB to enhance your own business, and I've found you trolling on several blogs where this article has been posted.
I have copies of all the OSHA air sample reports and BB passed every single one.
Please peddle your nonsense elsewhere.
Incorrect on that guess, I have not been paid by anyone in the hair smoothing industry. Has Brazilian Blowout paid you to write these articles? I have a science background and read your article and pointed out the errors.
On the OSHA website, http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_docu... the STEL is set as an exposure limit of 2 ppm which should not be exceeded when measured as a 15 minute STEL. Taking a sample that is longer than 15 minutes is a clear violation since the exposure limit was exceed for a period of time for 15 minutes and then some extra.
To answer your question: no.
The STEL was taken for 35 minutes. The proof is in the air sample report. The violation was OSHA's for exceeding the sample time.
You must be logged in to post a comment.