Study Finds 'Clean' Beauty Products for Textured Hair Often Contain Hidden Hazards Despite Marketing Claims

‘Clean’ Beauty Labels Leave Consumers in the Dark, Study Finds

In the absence of federal regulation, ‘clean’ beauty labels often leave consumers guessing—particularly women of color. As demand for safer, non-toxic personal care products grows, the ‘clean beauty’ market has expanded rapidly. However, new research suggests that for consumers with textured hair (curly, coily, or wavy), the ‘clean’ label may not always equate to ‘chemical-free.’

“‘Clean’ is often nothing more than a marketing term.”

A study published in the Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology analyzed products marketed as ‘clean’ for textured hair at a major retailer. The findings reveal a significant regulatory gap: while retailers like Target have invested millions in sustainability and internal safety standards, the lack of a standardized federal definition for ‘clean’ leaves consumers navigating an opaque marketplace.

Study Methodology and Key Findings

The research, led by the University of California, Santa Barbara’s Environmental Studies Program and Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health—with partners Black Women for Wellness and Silent Spring Institute—used a Target store in South Los Angeles as a case study. Researchers web-scraped ingredient lists for 150 hair products labeled as ‘Target Clean’ and assessed their safety profiles using the Environmental Working Group’s (EWG) Skin Deep database.

While retailers have taken voluntary steps to restrict certain chemicals, the study found these efforts cannot fully replace federal regulation. Lead author Joaquín Madrid Larrañaga, a researcher at UC Santa Barbara, explains:

“As we looked at general products, there was a large range from safe to extremely hazardous. We were hoping that the ‘clean’ products would lean toward the safer side, but we were surprised to see that the majority were still moderate hazards. It shows that ‘clean’ is often nothing more than a marketing term.”

Hidden Hazards in ‘Clean’ Products

The analysis uncovered significant data gaps and potential risks even within the ‘clean’ aisle:

• 70% of products listed ‘fragrance’ or ‘parfum’ as an ingredient. This umbrella term can legally conceal undisclosed chemicals—some linked to endocrine disruption and allergic reactions—due to ‘trade secret’ protections.
• Only 41% of products were found in the EWG database. Of those listed, over 90% were classified as ‘moderate’ risk to human health (hazard scores between 3 and 6), not ‘low’ risk.
• Despite ‘free-from’ claims (e.g., ‘sulfate-free’), labeling practices were inconsistent. While 14.6% of products contained sulfates, only about half carried Target’s ‘Formulated without Sulfates’ badge, leaving over one-third inconsistently labeled.

Environmental Injustice in Beauty

The study focuses on textured hair products because they are disproportionately used by women of color, who already face higher exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Researchers describe this as the ‘environmental injustice of beauty’—where systemic inequities lead to unequal chemical exposures.

“It’s a no-win situation for women of color, particularly Black women,” the researchers note. “They are targeted with products that claim to be safer but may still contain hidden hazards.”

Why Federal Regulation Is Needed

The study underscores the limitations of voluntary retailer standards. While companies like Target have made strides in sustainability—including restricting certain chemicals and investing in green chemistry—the lack of federal oversight means consumers cannot reliably trust ‘clean’ labels. The researchers call for standardized definitions and stricter ingredient transparency to protect vulnerable populations.

What Consumers Can Do

Until federal regulations improve, experts recommend the following steps for consumers seeking safer products:

• Check ingredient lists for vague terms like ‘fragrance’ or ‘parfum,’ which may hide harmful chemicals.
• Use resources like the EWG Skin Deep database to verify product safety claims.
• Look for third-party certifications (e.g., EWG Verified, USDA Organic) beyond retailer-specific labels.
• Advocate for stronger federal regulations on cosmetic ingredient transparency and safety standards.

For more details, read the full study in the Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology.