In the United States, consumers believe they can expect a certain level of safety in their purchases.
With rigorous testing from the Food and Drug Administration, products hitting the market are expected to be, if not good for our health, then at least not purposely toxic; certainly we can expect that our everyday essentials are free from carcinogenic ingredients.
That’s why when Johnson & Johnson announced the reformulation of some one hundred baby products to remove formaldehyde-releasing compounds, critics of the No More Tears maker responded with hearty, if hesitant, praise.
Formaldehyde was linked to cancer in government-run animal studies, but after a 2009 analysis conducted by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics found their products contained “safe” levels of the compounds, Johnson & Johnson chose not to alter the recipe.
The change finally came in 2012, when consumer pressure rose and the company announced plans to phase out the chemicals by the end of 2013.
Since then, the skincare behemoth has extended this promise to include more unpopular chemicals across all their brands, including Neutrogena and Clean & Clear. Still, the giant manufacturer has chosen to approach these reformulations with relatively little fanfare.
You might not ever know the change occurred if you didn’t religiously read ingredients lists: the advertisement amounted to little more than a small, somewhat inconspicuous “Improved Formula” label. For whatever reason, Johnson & Johnson goes just short of acknowledging that the ingredients might have been harmful, even as they pull them from the shelves.
Regardless, that little label represents a win for informed consumers, pointing to a shifting power dynamic in the store aisles.
