Completely misleading headline. Is the Daily Mail a reliable source?
"The team at Environmental Working Group (EWG), a nonprofit health and environmental advocacy organization, noted that the remaining 80 percent of products were not deemed inherently dangerous.
Instead, they failed to meet EWG's standards because they contained ingredients of concern, offered insufficient UVA protection, used spray formulations or made protection claims the group believes are misleading."
If only they were regulated and tested to meet a particular standard...
Those in Australia with understand
Completely misleading headline. Is the Daily Mail a reliable source?
"The team at Environmental Working Group (EWG), a nonprofit health and environmental advocacy organization, noted that the remaining 80 percent of products were not deemed inherently dangerous.
Instead, they failed to meet EWG's standards because they contained ingredients of concern, offered insufficient UVA protection, used spray formulations or made protection claims the group believes are misleading."