Beauty is what most, if not all, people want to have. In fact, billions of dollars are spent every year just to attain the elusive dream of physical perfection. Surgical procedures have been designed to improve and alter the nose, chin, mouth, and even the entire face and body of a person who would be willing to spend for it. Of course, not everyone can afford these highly expensive medical procedures.
Manufacturers of beauty products offer a cheaper alternative through the various brands and concoctions they feed to a large market. Beauty soaps, astringents, lotions and a host of other beauty products are packaged and sold to an eager army of customers. These products all ?promise? to make a woman's skin more soft, smooth, and silky.
These products are not only limited to toiletries and tabletop skin cleansing preparations. It extends to a wide range of pharmaceutical items as well. Some of these pharmaceutical products include acne pills, growth pills, and slimming pills.
While it is true that ?beauty is in the eye of the beholder? --- society has already set some standards on what constitutes beauty. People have differences in terms of what is beautiful in terms of skin, hair color, shape of the eyes, or the fullness of one's lips. Still, most people agree on one thing: the shape of a woman's body. For this reason, weight loss pills are among the most bought beauty products in the market.
Weight loss pills contain different chemicals and ingredients that either reduce a person's appetite or prevent the absorption of fat in the body. For example, ephedra is still being used as an ingredient in some weight loss pills. Ephedra is a botanical product widely used to enhance alertness and as a weight loss aid. It is actually a low stalky shrub with jointed green to brown stems and tiny unnoticeable leaves. It is the source of ephedrine alkaloids and has a long history of medical use in China. Reported adverse effects led the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ban ephedra-containing products in the United States in 2004, although it can still be legally sold as tea. Despite the ban, many ephedra products are still being sold over the Internet. The main slimming effect ephedra is appetite reduction. Possible side effects of long-term ephedra use include high blood pressure, heart rate irregularities, sleeplessness, seizures, heart attacks, strokes, and even death. Other weight loss pills uses different kinds of chemical contents. Some dietary pills block the absorption of dietary fat, which is relatively safe, but can cause constipation, bloating and other stomach ailments. Other weight loss pills reduce body fat and builds up muscles. These products are relatively safe.
Green tea extract is also used for slimming purposes. The extract increases calorie and fat metabolism and decreases appetite, although there is limited evidence to support the claim. However, long term use of green tea extract can cause vomiting, bloating, indigestion, and diarrhea.
With all these weight loss pills easily available on the market, one can easily think of a ?dieter's dream? where every single fat-burning product is within reach. Dietary supplements and weight loss aids are not subject to the same rigorous standards applied in the regulation of prescription drugs or medications sold over-the-counter. Thus, they can be marketed with limited proof of effectiveness and safety. Vendors can make health claims about products based on their own review and interpretation of the studies without the authorization of the FDA, however the FDA can pull a product off the market if its proven dangerous.
A persons scrutiny and curiosity would be their best protection. Reading labels and consulting doctors or pharmacists about the dietary supplement they are taking or considering taking is advised.
On Health And Beauty
Hypoallergenic cosmetics are products that manufacturers claim produce fewer allergic reactions than other cosmetic products. Consumers with hypersensitive skin, and even those with "normal" skin, may be led to believe that these products will be gentler to their skin than non-hypoallergenic cosmetics.
According to FDA, there are no Federal standards or definitions that govern the use of the term ?hypoallergenic?. The term means whatever a particular company wants it to mean. Manufacturers of cosmetics labeled as hypoallergenic are not required to submit substantiation of their hypoallergenicity claims to FDA. A Federal court has struck down an FDA regulation requiring cosmetic manufacturers to conduct tests to back up any claim that a product is "hypoallergenic."
For many years, companies have been producing products which they claim are "hypoallergenic" or "safe for sensitive skin" or "allergy tested." These statements imply that the products making the claims are less likely to cause allergic reactions than competing products. But there has been no assurance to consumers that this actually was the case.
For the past four years, the Food and Drug Administration has been working to clear up this confusion of claims by establishing testing requirements that would determine which products really are "hypoallergenic." The manufacturers of cosmetic products claiming to be "hypoallergenic" were to be responsible for carrying out the required tests.
Numerous comments on the proposal were received from consumers, consumer groups and cosmetic manufacturers. Some people urged a ban on the use of the term "hypoallergenic" on grounds that most consumers don't have allergies. Others suggested that the term be banned because allergic individuals cannot use "hypoallergenic" products with any assurance of safety. A number of cosmetic manufacturers complained about the requirement for product comparison tests to validate claims of hypoallergenicity. Among other things, they said the tests would pose an undue economic burden on them.
In responding to the comments, FDA pointed out that the proposed regulation was not intended to solve all problems concerning cosmetic safety. The primary purpose of the regulation, the Agency said, was to clear up confusion about the term "hypoallergenic" and to establish a definition that could be used uniformly by manufacturers and understood by consumers.
FDA issued its final regulation on "hypoallergenic" cosmetics on June 6, 1975. Although the final regulation did require comparative tests, procedures for carrying out the tests were changed to reduce the costs to the manufacturers.
The new regulation was quickly challenged in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Almay and Clinique, makers of "hypoallergenic" cosmetics. The two firms charged that FDA had no authority to issue the regulation, but the court upheld FDA.
The firms then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which ruled that the regulation was invalid. The appeals court held that FDA's definition of the term "hypoallergenic" was unreasonable because the Agency had not demonstrated that consumers perceive the term "hypoallergenic" in the way described in the regulation.
As a result of the decision, manufacturers may continue to label and advertise their cosmetics as "hypoallergenic" or make similar claims without any supporting evidence. Consumers will have no assurance that such claims are valid unless proper tests were conducted.
There are two clinical-pharmacological tests used to evaluate safety of products for topical application. They are Patch Test and Repeated Insult Patch Test. The Patch Test usually lasts 48 hours. The cellular turnover of the skin lasts 28 days. This means that products tested only for 2 days cannot be called hypoallergenic, because two days are not enough to really test the product. The Repeated Insult Patch Test lasts for 30 days, that is to say, two more days of the skin cellular turnover. This is why the product that managed to over come such a rigid test is certified as ?Incapable of causing irritation or allergic reactions?.
VB products have overcome the strictest clinical-pharmacological test in the University Laboratories for Maximum Safety in use: ?The Repeated Insult Patch Test?. All Villa Borghini products are certified as incapable of causing irritation or allergic reactions.
Up to today, VB is the unique whole range of products in the world that was able to overcome the hardest test for maximum safety in use.
Both Aseya & Katerina are contributors for EditorialToday. The above articles have been edited for relevancy and timeliness. All write-ups, reviews, tips and guides published by EditorialToday.com and its partners or affiliates are for informational purposes only. They should not be used for any legal or any other type of advice. We do not endorse any author, contributor, writer or article posted by our team.
Aseya has sinced written about articles on various topics from Health, Advertising Guide and Cure Anxiety. is a reputable online drug store. From sexual health to a woman's health, sleeping aids to weight loss pills, our online pharmacy offers convenient custom. Aseya's top article generates over 201000 views. to your Favourites.
Katerina has sinced written about articles on various topics from Fitness, Health. . Katerina's top article generates over 1600 views. to your Favourites.
A 2 Leather Jackets Why is the lambskin jacket higher priced than the pig leather jacket? Are you getting a great deal on a cheap leather jacket?