A laboratory analysis of 113 commonly used personal care and household products found unlisted chemicals in nearly every item tested, with researchers reporting that 85% contained at least one undisclosed substance associated with known or suspected health hazards.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
A laboratory analysis of more than 100 commonly used personal care and household products found chemicals that were not disclosed on product labels in 98% of the items tested, raising questions about how accurately ingredient lists reflect consumers’ actual chemical exposures.
Researchers examined 113 products spanning multiple categories, including sunscreens, baby lotions, shampoos, soaps and household cleaning products. About 85% contained at least one undisclosed chemical identified by researchers as having a known or suspected health hazard.
Rather than searching only for a predetermined group of substances, researchers used nontargeted chemical analysis, a testing method capable of screening simultaneously for thousands of chemical signals.
The approach detected more than 3,100 distinct chemical signals across the products. Researchers ultimately identified 303 compounds at confirmed, probable or tentative confidence levels.
Undisclosed substances were found across nearly every category examined, including products intended for babies and basic everyday products such as soap.
The findings suggest that an ingredient label alone may not reveal every chemical present in a finished product, particularly when substances enter formulations as contaminants, impurities or degradation products rather than intentionally declared ingredients.
Questions over cosmetic chemical safety and testing have persisted for years. An analysis published by Mercola.com stated that of nearly 13,000 chemicals used in cosmetics, roughly 10% had been tested for safety.
The new analysis also found discrepancies between some products’ marketing claims and their chemical contents.
Researchers reported that approximately one in four products contained at least one chemical that conflicted with a claim made on the packaging. Among the examples cited were products marketed as “phthalate-free” in which phthalates were nevertheless detected.
Phthalates are a family of chemicals used in numerous household and personal care products.
A scientific review published in September 2025 reported associations between phthalate exposure and processes involved in breast cancer development, growth and progression. Researchers involved in the new testing said several compounds they identified belonged to broader chemical families that previous research has associated with cancer, metabolic disorders and reproductive problems.
Those findings do not by themselves establish that using any particular product causes those conditions. Health risk depends on factors including the specific chemical, concentration, route and duration of exposure.
Concerns about intentionally used cosmetic ingredients have also appeared in earlier literature.
Samuel S. Epstein’s book “Toxic Beauty” identified preservatives as a major category of potentially hormone-disruptive ingredients in cosmetics and personal care products and highlighted parabens, triclosan and resorcinol among substances of concern.
Separately, testing conducted by Breast Cancer Prevention Partners in collaboration with Environmental Defence identified undisclosed fragrance ingredients in personal care and cleaning products sold by major Canadian retailers, according to a June 2023 report. That report argued that gaps in federal regulation in Canada and the United States could increase the possibility of consumer exposure to potentially harmful substances.
The latest findings place particular attention on what can enter a product without appearing on its ingredient label.
The Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 expanded the Food and Drug Administration’s authority over cosmetics, but the report noted that the law does not require routine laboratory screening of finished products specifically to identify every undisclosed chemical contaminant.
Manufacturing contaminants, impurities and compounds created as ingredients degrade can therefore be present without necessarily appearing individually on a product label.
The lead researcher said that limitation means consumers attempting to avoid particular substances can carefully scrutinize ingredient lists and still encounter chemicals they did not intend to use.
Concerns about the FDA’s authority over cosmetics predate the 2022 law.
“Toxic Beauty” described gaps in federal legal authority that can limit the FDA’s ability to address cosmetic risks, including issues involving products after they have entered the marketplace.
Epstein’s “The Politics of Cancer Revisited” similarly argued that consumers often lack information about carcinogenic contaminants and preservatives capable of releasing formaldehyde.
A May 2023 analysis noted that responsibility for ensuring cosmetic safety largely rests with the companies manufacturing and marketing the products.
Chemical disclosure can also become complicated as materials move between suppliers and manufacturers. A 2011 study published in Environmental Science & Policy examined difficulties in communicating chemical-safety information through supply chains, including adjustments required of businesses under the European Union’s REACH chemical regulatory system.
Researchers behind the new analysis offered several approaches for consumers who want to limit the number of potential undisclosed substances to which they are repeatedly exposed.
One recommendation was to select products with relatively simple formulations and fewer listed ingredients. The reasoning is that fewer components may reduce the number of opportunities for additional impurities or unlisted substances to enter a formulation.
Researchers also recommended placing greater weight on independent laboratory verification than on marketing terminology.
Terms including “clean,” “natural” and “non-toxic” do not by themselves guarantee that a finished product has undergone independent chemical testing, according to the report.
Another recommendation was to vary brands and products rather than repeatedly relying on a single formulation, with researchers suggesting that diversification could reduce sustained exposure to an undisclosed contaminant associated with one particular product.
Questions about undisclosed chemical formulations extend beyond cosmetics and household cleaners.
Kirsten McCulloc’s “Less Toxic Living” noted concerns surrounding some plastics marketed as BPA-free, including products for which complete ingredient information is unavailable and where validated testing for estrogenic activity may be limited.
Consumers seeking complete control over the ingredients in some personal care products may also choose to make them themselves. Doris J. Barnes’ “Organic Body Care,” for example, includes recipes for homemade products such as shea butter lip balm.
The researchers emphasized that nontargeted analysis also has limitations.
Although the method can detect thousands of chemical signatures, it can identify only substances that the laboratory’s analytical methods, reference databases and instrumentation are capable of recognizing. Chemicals outside those parameters may remain undetected.
That limitation means the analysis does not necessarily provide a complete inventory of every substance present in each product.
The findings nevertheless point to a potential information gap between the ingredients consumers see on packaging and all of the chemicals that may ultimately be present in products applied to skin and hair or used throughout homes.
Organizers of the Whole Body Detox Summit, hosted by Jonathan Landsman, cited the findings in advocating functional laboratory testing and what they describe as daily detoxification practices to address accumulated chemical exposure. Those recommendations represent the organizers’ interpretation of the findings and are separate from the chemical-testing results themselves.
Broader reporting on environmental chemical exposure has similarly examined the many ways people encounter substances through food, household environments, consumer products and daily routines.
The new laboratory analysis adds to that discussion by suggesting that, for many consumer products, the chemicals listed on the package may represent only part of what laboratory testing can detect in the finished formulation.
Explainer Infographic
Comments