Connect with us

News

The FDA misses its deadline again to propose a ban on formaldehyde in hair products

Published

on

The FDA misses its deadline again to propose a ban on formaldehyde in hair products

A hairdresser straightens a woman’s hair by applying a hair product. A delayed proposal by the Food and Drug Administration would ban the use of formaldehyde as an ingredient in hair relaxers and hair straighteners.

Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Getty Images

The Food and Drug Administration’s proposal to ban the use of formaldehyde as an ingredient in hair relaxers and hair straighteners on the market in the U.S. has been pushed back yet again. The deadline for the agency’s proposal, at this time, still remains unclear.

The FDA’s proposed rule takes a large step in shedding light on the potential harm that formaldehyde — a highly toxic, colorless gas — can cause to the many Black women and other women of color who typically use straightening products.

In October, NPR reported that the federal agency proposed the ban and scheduled its implementation for April 2024. The first deadline for the scheduled ban implementation was missed and pushed back to July 2024. Most recently, the agency moved the target date to September 2024.

Advertisement

On April 3, the FDA told NPR in an email that the action date for the proposed ban was set for April 2024 and that officials were “still developing the proposed rule.”

At that time, a spokesperson declined to comment further about the timing or the ban’s detailed content.

But when pressed about the status of the ban to the federal agency in May and, most recently, this month, an FDA spokesperson told NPR that the proposed rule “continues to be a high priority.” They declined again to comment further about its timing or content.

When asked Friday for clarification about why there have been numerous delays in implementing the proposed ban, a spokesperson told NPR that the process for implementing proposed rules “takes time.”

“Before a proposed rule can be published in the Federal Register for public comment, it must be reviewed and approved within FDA and other parts of the Federal government,” the FDA spokesperson said in a statement.

Advertisement

Allison Stevenson, an attorney who represents product manufacturers and retailers, says that while we should expect to see a ban on formaldehyde, it’s no surprise that the FDA has delayed the proposed ban several times.

“There are a lot of moving parts … this all falls under legislation that is still relatively new, in almost all respects. And so it’s not uncommon to see things get delayed for one reason or the other,” she said.

Stevenson predicts that the ban will likely not occur until 2025. She says the proposed ban is necessary to protect the health and safety of communities of color.

“The regulation is necessary to protect the health and safety of communities of color, Stevenson said. “I certainly don’t believe that the delay should be indicative to anyone that the FDA is not making this issue a priority,” she added.

What are the health risks associated with formaldehyde?

Formaldehyde is a toxic, colorless and strong-smelling gas that presents health hazards when breathed into the lungs or when it comes into contact with the eyes or skin, according to the FDA.

Advertisement

In 2022, researchers at the National Institutes of Health released a study that showed an increased risk of hormone-related cancer in women who have used the chemicals in their hair. The findings in the report were especially concerning for Black women, who are far more likely to report using such products, including many kinds of chemical relaxers, Brazilian blowouts and keratin treatments.

“We estimated that 1.64% of women who never used hair straighteners would go on to develop uterine cancer by the age of 70; but for frequent users, that risk goes up to 4.05%,” lead author Alexandra White, the head of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Environment and Cancer Epidemiology group, told NPR in 2022.

Once the gas is present in the air at levels exceeding 0.1 parts per million, those in contact with it can experience harmful side effects such as watery eyes, burning in the eyes, nose, and throat, coughing, wheezing, nausea, and skin irritation. (Essentially, the more exposure one has to products containing formaldehyde — in terms of time and concentration — the higher the health risk.)

The long-term effects associated with the use of formaldehyde

The use of formaldehyde can have several long-term effects associated with it, which can include an increased number of headaches, asthma, contact dermatitis and possibly cancer.

Hair relaxers and hair straightening products have also been linked to risks associated with uterine cancer, breast cancer and even ovarian cancer — especially for Black women.

Advertisement

According to the New York State Department of Health, more than 150 hair-straightening products on store shelves contain formaldehyde. Investigators discovered that products that claimed to be “formaldehyde-free,” “organic,” or even “natural” actually contained the highly toxic chemical when tested.

Aside from hair straighteners and smoothers, formaldehyde is used in glues, resins, dyes, textiles, disinfectants, building materials, automobile parts, embalming, and laboratories, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

News

Former Olympian pleads not guilty in reflecting pool vandalism charges

Published

on

Former Olympian pleads not guilty in reflecting pool vandalism charges

Former U.S. Olympian David Hearn (left) walks with his attorney Norman Eisen to speak to reporters and protesters gathered after his arraignment at the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C. on Thursday.

Finn Gomez/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Finn Gomez/Getty Images

Former U.S. Olympic canoeist David Hearn pleaded not guilty to damaging the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in D.C. Superior Court Thursday morning.

Federal prosecutors charged Hearn with a single count of destruction of property causing more than $1,000 in damage to the pool.

Hearn has previously claimed, which his attorneys repeated during a short press conference outside the court, that he simply touched the water in the pool out of curiosity.

Advertisement

The Trump administration had just completed a $14 million renovation of the pool.

But shortly after the work finished, peeling paint and algae gathered in the water. The remodel has been largely criticized as a massive failure and waste of taxpayer dollars.

Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean released Hearn on his own recognizance. His next hearing is scheduled for Aug. 5.

Norm Eisen, one of Hearn’s attorneys, spoke to reporters outside of court following the hearing. He said the administration is using Hearn as a “scapegoat … for their own failures.”

“It is not a crime to touch the reflecting pool, to touch water in the United States of America,” he said.

Advertisement

Prosecutors say there is a host of evidence against Hearn.

This is a developing story.

Continue Reading

News

Three more people charged with damaging Reflecting Pool after Trump’s multimillion-dollar restoration | CNN Politics

Published

on

Three more people charged with damaging Reflecting Pool after Trump’s multimillion-dollar restoration | CNN Politics

Three more people have been criminally charged with destruction of property at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

Officers say they detained Cameron Thiers, Sophie Dennison-Gibby and Justin Carreno one Saturday afternoon in June and described in court documents witnessing them peeling and removing pieces of blue paint from the Reflecting Pool.

One officer “witnessed Carreno reach down into the reflecting pool and pull up a piece of the blue paint,” according to the court documents.

The officer who detained Dennison-Gibby “found 1 additional piece of the reflecting pool liner” in her purse, the documents said.

All three incidents were recorded on the officers’ body worn cameras, they said in the court documents.

Advertisement

Several “partnering law enforcement agencies assigned to the Reflecting Pool” working with US Park Police were involved in detaining the two men and one woman — including officers from Texas, Oklahoma, Montana and California.

One of the officers said in court documents that Thiers “admitted to removing a piece of blue sealant from the Reflecting Pool and still had it in his hand when I made contact with him.”

The three defendants were arraigned in court Wednesday and pleaded not guilty to the misdemeanor charges of destruction of property with a value less than $1,000. The judge ordered them to stay away from the Reflecting Pool.

Lawyers for Thiers and Dennison-Gibby declined to comment. CNN has reached out to Carreno’s attorney.

If found guilty of destruction of property, the defendants could be fined up to $1,000 and face a maximum of 180 days behind bars.

Advertisement

The New York Times first reported that three additional people had been charged with damaging the Reflecting Pool.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that vandals caused major damage to the pool by gashing the lining after his administration spent more than $14 million on renovations, though he has not provided evidence to support that claim. The officers who charged Carreno, Thiers and Dennison-Gibby did not accuse them of gashing the lining.

Former Olympic canoeist David Hearn was indicted by a grand jury in Washington, DC, last week for allegedly damaging the Reflecting Pool. Hearn — unlike Carreno, Thiers and Dennison-Gibby – was charged with destruction of property with a value of more than $1,000 which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, if convicted. He is set to be arraigned in court Thursday.

Crews began draining the Reflecting Pool over the weekend to make repairs, according to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, for the second time in three months.

The move comes after weeks of problems – algae blooms, green-hued water, a chipping bottom and the administration’s allegations of vandalism – that have plagued the iconic landmark, making its woes the subject of national interest.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court financial disclosures reveal how their books add to their income

Published

on

Supreme Court financial disclosures reveal how their books add to their income

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett speaks at the Reagan Library on Sept. 9, 2025, in Simi Valley, Calif. Barrett discussed and signed copies of her new book, Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution.

Mario Tama/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Mario Tama/Getty Images

Even as the Supreme Court was handing down one legal thunderbolt after another last week, the justices were quietly releasing their annual financial reports. Justice Samuel Alito was the only sitting justice to request an extension, which he has done for 15 years. The disclosures do not give a complete account of the justices’ total income and wealth, but they give insights into their concertgoing, guest professorships and even their involvement in youth sports.

In addition to their salaries, much of the justices’ reported income came from their book deals. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson led the pack earning more than $1.1 million last year for a total of roughly $4 million since her memoir, Lovely One, was published in 2024.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and retired Justice Anthony Kennedy also reported income from published books. Earnings from their books ranged from $849,000 for Barrett, to $300,000 for Gorsuch and $88,000 for Sotomayor, whose books include her 2013 autobiography and five children’s books. Justice Clarence Thomas, who previously earned $1.5 million for his 2007 memoir, listed no publisher payments last year, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, one of 13 co-authors of a 2016 legal treatise, also received no payments last year. Kavanaugh is said to be working on a memoir but he listed no payments for the anticipated book. Alito does have a book coming out in the fall, but with his financial report still outstanding, there is no data on how much he was paid for the work in 2025.

Advertisement

The only two sitting justices who have not written books are Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Elena Kagan.

Many justices also earned income from teaching at law schools. Roberts reported income from New England Law, located in Boston, and Gorsuch reported teaching income from George Mason University in Virginia. Thomas taught classes at Catholic University in Washington, D.C., and Barrett and Kavanaugh taught at Notre Dame Law School. Barrett graduated from the school and began teaching there 23 years ago; Kavanaugh has family connections to Notre Dame.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending