A new analysis of 150 'clean' textured hair products sold at Target in South Los Angeles found that the majority still contain chemicals linked to reproductive harm, endocrine disruption, and other health concerns, despite being marketed as safer alternatives. The study, published in the Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, reveals a troubling disconnect between marketing claims and actual ingredient safety in the rapidly growing market for natural hair care products.

As more consumers, particularly Black women and women of color, transition away from chemically intensive straightening treatments toward natural hairstyles, they're turning to products labeled as "clean" or "non-toxic." But without federal standards defining what "clean" actually means, retailers like Target have created their own branded sections that may give a false sense of safety. The research shows this approach isn't protecting consumers from harmful exposures.

What Chemicals Are Hiding in 'Clean' Hair Products?

Researchers analyzed ingredient lists from 150 products in Target's "clean" beauty section and cross-referenced them with the Environmental Working Group's (EWG) Skin Deep database, which rates personal care products on a hazard scale from 1 (least hazardous) to 10 (most hazardous). The findings were striking: 70% of the products listed fragrance as an ingredient, a category of particular concern because fragrance formulations are not required to disclose their specific chemical components.

The chemicals of concern identified in these "clean" products include substances linked to serious health effects:

• Fragrance compounds: Often hide dozens of undisclosed chemicals; linked to allergic reactions and respiratory issues
• Phthalates: Chemicals used to make fragrances last longer; associated with reproductive harm and endocrine disruption
• Formaldehyde and formaldehyde releasers: Preservatives linked to cancer risk and skin sensitization
• Parabens: Preservatives that mimic hormones in the body and may interfere with reproductive health
• Cyclosiloxanes: Silicone-based chemicals that bioaccumulate (build up in the body over time) and may harm fertility

When researchers linked these products to EWG hazard scores, over 90% were classified as "moderate" risk to human health, with scores between 3 and 6 on the 10-point scale. This means that despite being marketed as "clean," the vast majority of these products still carry documented health risks.

Why Are 'Clean' Labels So Misleading?

The core problem is regulatory: the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) classifies hair care products as cosmetics and has historically exercised minimal oversight. While the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA) gave the FDA new powers to recall products and require ingredient disclosure, federal regulation of hazardous chemicals in cosmetics remains limited. This creates a vacuum that retailers fill with their own definitions of "clean."

Without a standardized definition, "clean" becomes a marketing term rather than a safety guarantee. A product can be labeled "clean" at Target while still containing chemicals that other jurisdictions have restricted. For example, California's Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005 requires manufacturers to label ingredients on state lists of chemicals that cause cancer or birth defects, and Washington state's Toxic Free Cosmetics Act restricts certain toxic chemicals outright. But these protections don't apply nationally.

The study also found that only 41% of the 150 "clean" products analyzed were even listed in the EWG's Skin Deep database, meaning consumers relying on that tool for guidance would miss nearly 60% of the products on the shelf. This creates a transparency gap that disproportionately affects communities of color.

Who Bears the Burden of Chemical Exposure?

The research applies what scholars call the "environmental injustice of beauty" framework, which recognizes that chemical exposures from beauty products are not equally distributed. Black women and women of color have historically been pressured to use chemically intensive hair straighteners and relaxers, and now face barriers when trying to switch to safer alternatives.

Studies have documented that chemicals commonly found in hair products, including formaldehyde, parabens, and phthalates, are linked to breast cancer, reproductive harm, metabolic health issues, and endocrine disruption. Black women bear a disproportionate burden of these health outcomes, yet they often have fewer genuinely safe product options available in their neighborhoods. A previous study in Boston found that stores in low-income communities of color stocked hair products with higher (more dangerous) EWG hazard scores compared to stores in wealthier areas.

How to Navigate the Textured Hair Product Marketplace Safely

Until federal standards catch up, consumers seeking safer hair products need practical strategies to evaluate what they're buying:

• Check the EWG Skin Deep database: Search for your product at www.ewg.org/skindeep to see its hazard score and which chemicals of concern it contains; aim for products scoring 1-3 rather than 3-6
• Scrutinize fragrance listings: If a product lists "fragrance" or "parfum" without specifying the individual components, assume it may contain phthalates or other undisclosed chemicals; look for products with essential oils or no fragrance
• Cross-reference state restrictions: If you live in California or Washington, check your state's restricted chemicals list; products compliant with these stricter standards are generally safer nationwide
• Demand ingredient transparency: Contact manufacturers directly and ask for full fragrance disclosure; consumer pressure has driven some brands to provide this information voluntarily
• Prioritize products with fewer ingredients: Simpler formulations with recognizable components (like oils, butters, and plant extracts) tend to have lower hazard scores than complex multi-ingredient products

What Needs to Change?

The researchers emphasize that individual consumer choices, while important, cannot solve a systemic problem. The study concludes that "harmonization of a definition of 'clean' should be integrated across industry, from manufacturing to retail given existing inconsistencies that can create challenges for consumers who try to avoid harmful ingredients".

This would require federal action. Policymakers could establish a standardized definition of "clean" that applies across all retailers, mandate full fragrance disclosure, and restrict chemicals of concern in cosmetics the way California and Washington have begun to do. Until then, the "clean" label remains a marketing tool rather than a meaningful safety guarantee, and consumers navigating the textured hair product landscape continue to face a confusing and largely unregulated marketplace.