Skip to content
Ch

Children's Makeup (ages 0-5)

Children’s Makeup (ages 0-5) Cosmetic makeup products marketed for ages 0-5 (eye shadow, blush, foundation, bronzer formulated and sold as children’s product).

Researched by
K. Pendergrass iD
Last updated: 2026-05-16
Page Snapshot
23 corpus sources
Reconstructable record

Children’s Makeup (ages 0-5)

Cosmetic makeup products marketed for ages 0-5 (eye shadow, blush, foundation, bronzer formulated and sold as children’s product). Whole-row platform — every commercial product in this row uses mineral cosmetic pigments (iron oxides, ultramarines, mica, bismuth oxychloride) which carry Pb/Ni/Cr platform load. No within-row split because no clean-counterpart variant exists in this row.

This page is a Step 0 lock scaffold for Cat 2 Row 13. Literature evidence will be populated as routed source pages accumulate per the synthesis workflow in CLAUDE.md Part 9. The Step 0 lock document at Category2_Clean_vs_Contaminated_Splits.md is the canonical reference for the row’s clean-vs-contaminated framing and platform attribution.

Who this page is for

Brand legal teams evaluating HMTc Cat 2 certification for the Children’s Makeup (ages 0-5) row need to know what the cited literature reports per panel metal, what the applicable regulatory caps are, and how this row relates to its clean-contaminated pair (when applicable). Retailer compliance teams stocking the children’s personal care aisle need the row-level assortment-eligibility view. HMT&C certification thresholds for products in this row are developed under the certification program at heavymetaltested.com, not on this page.

Methodology

This page reports what the cited sources say about heavy-metal concentrations in the Children’s Makeup (ages 0-5) row. Speciation is non-substitutable per CLAUDE.md Part 14 (iAs vs tAs, MeHg vs tHg, Cr-VI vs total Cr). Basis is preserved (finished-product as sold). Non-detect handling follows each source’s convention. Pooling avoided across LOD/LOQ, period, geography, and analytical-basis differences. HMT&C certification thresholds for products in this row are developed under the certification program at heavymetaltested.com, not on this page; this public page reports literature evidence only.

Cat 2 dose-pathway methodology supplement (per OPERATING.md Part 7 initiative 3.1) is documented at Cat 2 (Children Personal Care) non-ingestion exposure pathways. That supplement governs how dermal, inhalation, accidental-ingestion, and trans-placental exposure factors apply to this row.

Whole-row platform

The entire row inherits the platform load on Pb, Ni, Cr because every commercial product in this row uses ingredients in the platform class. There is no clean-counterpart variant on the commercial shelf within this row. The CC anchor for this row’s platform metals is drawn from outside Cat 2 (general cosmetic literature) or set by regulatory floor and lab achievability alone in the Standards Workbench Step 1 derivation.

Literature Evidence Summary

Literature Evidence Summary

The table below summarizes what the peer-reviewed and government literature cited on this page reports for heavy-metal concentrations in Children’s Makeup (ages 0-5). Values are pulled directly from cited sources without re-aggregation; pooling, percentile selection, and threshold math sit in the staff Standards Workbench rather than this public page.

Methodology rules for speciation, basis preservation, non-detect handling, and source pooling are stated in the Methodology section above and apply to every row below.

AnalyteSubcategoryReported concentration rangeDetection rateApplicable regulatory capSourcesConfidenceBasis
PbChildren’s Makeup (ages 0-5) (no contributing evidence loaded)No concentration data loaded for this analyteSample-level detection rate not reportedNo applicable cap loaded0data gapBasis not reported
NiChildren’s Makeup (ages 0-5) (no contributing evidence loaded)No concentration data loaded for this analyteSample-level detection rate not reportedNo applicable cap loaded0data gapBasis not reported
CrChildren’s Makeup (ages 0-5) (no contributing evidence loaded)No concentration data loaded for this analyteSample-level detection rate not reportedNo applicable cap loaded0data gapBasis not reported

Source Evidence Inventory

Hand-curated section. Populated by the synthesis pass as Cat 2 sources are ingested and route to this row. Initial scaffold state: zero contributing sources.

Broad Product Context: Author-Scope Index

Pending: regenerated by tools/evidence/apply-product-broad-context.mjs once broad-scope Cat 2 sources route to this page.

Federal/Regulatory Limits vs Field Findings

Pending. Cat 2 regulatory landscape is fragmented: cosmetics under FDA FD&C Act adulteration provisions (no binding finished-product heavy-metal limits); sunscreens under FDA OTC drug monograph; toothpaste under FDA cosmetic + OTC drug regulation; state-level cosmetic heavy-metal laws (Washington TFCA 2025, New York TCCP). EU 1223/2009 Annex II/III addresses cosmetic ingredient restrictions but not finished-product action levels. Awaiting agency-page ingest.

Levers to reduce contamination

The Cat 2 Step 0 lock framework distinguishes clean-formulation rows from contaminated-platform rows. For this row, the levers below are ordered by impact magnitude based on the literature evidence base and per the Step 0 lock attribution of platform-level metal load. Brand-legal teams evaluating HMTc Cat 2 certification eligibility for this row should treat the formulation/sourcing levers as the dominant compliance pathway.

  1. Sourcing levers on platform ingredients. Even without a clean alternative within the row, supplier-grade differences within the platform are material.
  2. Refining levers.
  3. Testing/QC levers: lot-level ICP-MS on raw materials and finished product.
  4. Regulatory levers.

How standards math uses this page

The percentile arithmetic that informs HMTc Cat 2 thresholds for this row lives on the staff Standards Workbench (data/workbench/standards/childrens-makeup.md, to be generated). This public page reports literature evidence; the workbench applies the Cat 2 methodology (which includes the OPERATING.md Part 7 initiative 3.1 non-ingestion-exposure supplement at Cat 2 (Children Personal Care) non-ingestion exposure pathways) to produce candidate threshold values. The gap between literature evidence and HMTc thresholds is named honestly on the workbench, not hidden.

Historical recalls and enforcement

Cat 2 (children’s personal care) regulatory enforcement is fragmented: cosmetics fall under FDA FD&C Act adulteration provisions without binding finished-product heavy-metal action levels; sunscreens fall under FDA OTC drug monograph; toothpaste falls under FDA cosmetic + OTC drug regulation. State-level enforcement is more active: Washington State Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act 2025 sets heavy-metal limits for cosmetic products sold in Washington; New York Toxic Children’s Cosmetic Products Act sets limits for children’s makeup. California Prop 65 enforcement actions on cosmetics (lip balm, lipstick, eye products) have established practical compliance thresholds via settlement agreements. EU Cosmetic Regulation 1223/2009 Annex II/III addresses cosmetic-ingredient restrictions but not finished-product action levels. Per CLAUDE.md Part 12, individual brand recall actions are not enumerated here; the recalls are framed as regulatory events that establish the operative compliance landscape.

Sources

Auto-generated from source-page frontmatter. The “Used on this page for” column is populated by the orchestrator’s POPULATE-SOURCE-LEGEND action; pending entries appear as *[awaiting synthesis]*.

#CitationYearTypeUsed on this page for
1Alblooshi 2025. The impact of perfumes and cosmetic products on human health: a narrative review, Frontiers in Toxicology 7:1646075 (Frontiers in Toxicology; published 29 August 2025; corrected 16 December 2025)2025ReviewUS/EU/CA Pb, Cd, tHg, tAs, Ni, Cr, Cr-VI occurrence in Single-author narrative review compiling peer-reviewed literature published 2005–2025 on health impacts of perfumes and cosmetic products. Sources drawn…
2Jităreanu et al. 2025. An Overview of Heavy Metals in Cosmetic Products and Their Toxicological Impact, Applied Sciences 15: 128832025ReviewEU/US/CA Pb, Cd, tHg, tAs, iAs, Cr, Cr-VI, Ni, Al, Fe, Cu, Zn, Co occurrence in Narrative review of heavy-metal contamination in cosmetics; literature 1990 - November 2025 retrieved via PubMed, Web of Science,…
3Moriceau et al. 2025. Measurement of traces of heavy metals in cosmetic raw materials and finished products according to ISO/DIS 21392:2021 using triple quadrupole ICP-MS, Thermo Fisher Scientific Application Note 0036022025IndustryEU/FR Pb, Cd, tAs, tHg, Cr, Ni, Sb, Al, Sn, Co, Mn, Fe, Zn, Be, Se, Tl, Ti, W, Pt occurrence in 17 finished cosmetic products sold on the French and European market (creams, gels, pastes, liquids, varnishes, solids) plus… (n=27)
4Allwood et al. 2024. Recently Recalled Children’s Products Due to Lead Hazards, Pediatrics2024RegulatoryUS Pb occurrence in Thirty US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) lead-related recall notices for children’s products issued between June 2022 and… (n=30)
5Kopru et al. 2024. Inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) detection of trace metal contents of children cosmetics, Optical and Quantum Electronics 56(8):3992024Peer-reviewedTR/US/CA Al, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, tAs, Se, tHg, Cd, Pb occurrence in Thirty cosmetic products purchased from local markets in Turkey, marketed as children’s cosmetics and sold within three different… (n=30)
6Mercan et al. 2024. Experimental study for inorganic and organic profiling of toy makeup products: Estimating the potential threat to child health, Environmental Science and Pollution Research 31: 33975–339922024Peer-reviewedTR/CN/EU Al, As, Ba, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Hg, Mn, Ni, Se, Sb, Pb, Zn occurrence in Sixty-three toy makeup products purchased from toy stores in Istanbul, Turkey, representing ten different brands coded BRAND A–J… (n=63)
7Tuladhar et al. 2024. Chemicals in Cosmetics Used by Washington Residents: Phase Two Results — Report to the Legislature Pursuant to ESSB 5693 (2022) Section 302 (56), Washington State Department of Ecology, Publication 24-04-022 (May 2024)2024Government reportThis is the Washington State Department of Ecology legislative report’s Phase 2 deliverable under ESSB 5693 (2022) Section 302(56), the…
8Washington State Department of 2024. Policy Statement: Interim Policy on Lead in Cosmetics — enforcement discretion under the Washington Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act (Chapter 70A.560 RCW), Washington State Department of Ecology, Publication 24-04-036 (issued December 19, 2024; minor revisions and clarifications January 15, 2025)2024Government reportUS-WA Pb occurrence in Regulatory enforcement-discretion policy issued by the Washington State Department of Ecology under authority of the Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act…
9Medley et al. 2023. Usage of Children’s Makeup and Body Products in the United States and Implications for Childhood Environmental Exposures, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20(3): 21142023Peer-reviewedThis Columbia/Earthjustice mixed-methods survey of 207 US parents/guardians (reporting on 312 children ≤12 years) characterizes the use, frequency, duration, and…
10Salles et al. 2023. Potentially Toxic Elements in Costume Cosmetics Used by Children and Adults Are Associated with Cancer Risk, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20:5312023Peer-reviewedBR Al, tAs, Ba, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, Sb, Sn, Sr occurrence in 95 samples of face paints (n=90) and pancakes (n=5) purchased at the largest high-street commercial center in São… (n=95)
11Attard et al. 2022. Heavy Metals in Cosmetics, Environmental Impact and Remediation of Heavy Metals (IntechOpen book chapter)2022ReviewUS/EU/WHO Pb, Cd, Ni, tHg, tAs occurrence in Multi-variate meta-analysis of published studies covering 16 cosmetic formulation categories
12Pawlaczyk et al. 2021. Determination of Metallic Impurities by ICP-MS Technique in Eyeshadows Purchased in Poland. Part I, Molecules2021Peer-reviewedPL/EU Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Pb, Sr, Tl occurrence in Eye shadow samples purchased on the Polish market, including products intended for adults and children (n=94)
13Stone 2021. Metals in Children’s and Consumer Products and Packaging, Washington State Department of Ecology, Hazardous Waste and Toxics Reduction Program, Publication 14-04-014 (Revised June 2021)2021RegulatoryUS Sb, tAs, Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Pb, tHg, Mo, Zn occurrence in 150 component samples submitted for laboratory metals analysis, sub-sampled from 101 children’s products purchased from local Washington stores… (n=150)
14Arshad et al. 2020. Evaluation of heavy metals in cosmetic products and their health risk assessment, Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal 28(2020):779-7902020Peer-reviewedPK Cd, Cr, Fe, Ni, Pb occurrence in 189 cosmetic samples (63 unique brands × 3 triplicates) from local community markets in Abbottabad, Haripur, and Mansehra,… (n=189)
15Trumbull et al. 2017. Children’s Seasonal Products Report 2014-2015, Washington State Department of Ecology, Hazardous Waste and Toxics Reduction Program, Publication 16-04-029 (January 2017)2017RegulatoryUS-WA/US Sb, tAs, Cd, Co, Pb, tHg, Mo occurrence in 189 component samples submitted for laboratory metals analysis, sub-sampled (by XRF prioritisation) from 6,878 individual components separated from… (n=189)
16Engel et al. 2016. Pretty Scary 2: Unmasking Toxic Chemicals in Kids’ Makeup, Breast Cancer Fund; Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (October 2016)2016NonprofitUS Pb, Cd, Cr, tAs, tHg occurrence in 48 individual face-paint colors from 14 Halloween face-paint kits ordered from an online Halloween retailer in 2016 and… (n=48)
17Heckmann et al. 2015. CMR Substances in Toys – Market Surveillance and Risk Assessment, Survey of Chemical Substances in Consumer Products No. 141, 2015. Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen. ISBN 978-87-93352-79-7.2015Regulatory agency reportDK/EU Sn, Al, Pb, Cd, Cr, Ni, Sb, tAs occurrence in Phase 2 chemical analyses: 28 toy products extracted by the Danish EPA’s Chemical Inspection Service (CIS) from 30… (n=28)
18Stone 2012. Quality Assurance Project Plan: Parabens and Metals in Children’s Cosmetic and Personal Care Products, Washington State Department of Ecology, Hazardous Waste and Toxics Reduction Program, Publication 12-07-021 (February 2012)2012RegulatoryUS-WA/US Sb, tAs, Cd, Co, Cu, Pb, tHg, Mo, Zn occurrence in Planning document only; no samples analysed within this QAPP. The QAPP scopes a planned procurement of approximately 200…
19U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition — Chapter 17, Consumer Products, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-09/052F2011Government reportChapter 17 of the U.S. EPA’s 2011 Exposure Factors Handbook (EFH) compiles consumer-product use and exposure data — frequency of…
20Sarantis et al. 2009. Pretty Scary: Could Halloween Face Paint Cause Lifelong Health Problems? A Report on Heavy Metals in Face Paints, Campaign for Safe Cosmetics; Breast Cancer Fund; Commonwealth (October 2009)2009NonprofitUS Pb, Ni, Co, Cr, tAs, tHg occurrence in 10 children’s face paint and theater makeup products purchased through Amazon.com (shipped by a variety of distribution companies)… (n=10)

Page history

The five most recent substantive edits to this page. The full version history lives in git; when DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.

CommitDateDescription
ae6c1292026-07-01feat(auth): large login + role-based signup screens (design, burgundy)