Overview
Nail polish products marketed for ages 0-5. Whole-row platform — every commercial product uses mineral pigments and/or pearlescent agents (iron oxides, mica, bismuth oxychloride, chromium oxides) 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 14. Literature evidence will be populated as routed source pages accumulate per the synthesis workflow. 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.
Literature scope
The Heavy Metal Index source corpus is currently focused on food and food-contact materials. This page documents an HMTc Taxonomy v2.0 row in the category this product class for which no peer-reviewed primary or government sources have yet been ingested. The page exists as the routing destination for future ingest. Until sources land, the literature-evidence sections below are deliberately empty rather than guessed; HMTc certification thresholds for products in this row continue to be developed under the certification program at heavymetaltested.com, not on this public page.
Who this page is for
Brand legal teams evaluating HMT&C certification for the Children’s Nail Polish (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 Nail Polish (ages 0-5) row. Speciation is non-substitutable (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.
The non-ingestion exposure pathways relevant to this row (dermal, inhalation, accidental-ingestion, and trans-placental) are documented at Cat 2 (Children Personal Care) non-ingestion exposure pathways.
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.
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 Nail Polish (ages 0-5). Values are pulled directly from cited sources without re-aggregation. This page publishes literature evidence only, not certification thresholds.
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.
| Analyte | Subcategory | Reported concentration range | Detection rate | Applicable regulatory cap | Sources | Confidence | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pb | Children’s Nail Polish (ages 0-5) (no contributing evidence loaded) | No concentration data loaded for this analyte | Sample-level detection rate not reported | No applicable cap loaded | 0 | data gap | Basis not reported |
| Ni | Children’s Nail Polish (ages 0-5) (no contributing evidence loaded) | No concentration data loaded for this analyte | Sample-level detection rate not reported | No applicable cap loaded | 0 | data gap | Basis not reported |
| Cr | Children’s Nail Polish (ages 0-5) (no contributing evidence loaded) | No concentration data loaded for this analyte | Sample-level detection rate not reported | No applicable cap loaded | 0 | data gap | Basis 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 HMT&C certification eligibility for this row should treat the formulation/sourcing levers as the dominant compliance pathway.
- Sourcing levers on platform ingredients. Even without a clean alternative within the row, supplier-grade differences within the platform are material.
- Refining levers.
- Testing/QC levers: lot-level ICP-MS on raw materials and finished product.
- Regulatory levers.
How standards math uses this page
This page reports what the peer-reviewed and government literature says about heavy-metal concentrations in this product category; it publishes no certification thresholds of its own. Certification criteria are set separately under the Heavy Metal Tested & Certified program at heavymetaltested.com, which reads this page as its literature baseline. The two are kept apart by design, so this page remains an independent record of the evidence rather than a justification for any threshold.
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. 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]*.
| # | Citation | Year | Type | Used on this page for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Moriceau 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 003602 | 2025 | Industry | EU/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) |
| 2 | Kopru et al. 2024. Inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) detection of trace metal contents of children cosmetics, Optical and Quantum Electronics 56(8):399 | 2024 | Peer-reviewed | TR/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) |
| 3 | Washington 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) | 2024 | Government report | US-WA Pb occurrence in Regulatory enforcement-discretion policy issued by the Washington State Department of Ecology under authority of the Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act… |
| 4 | Medley 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): 2114 | 2023 | Peer-reviewed | This Columbia/Earthjustice mixed-methods survey of 207 US parents/guardians (reporting on 312 children ≤12 years) characterizes the use, frequency, duration, and… |
| 5 | Stone 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) | 2021 | Regulatory | US 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) |
| 6 | Engel et al. 2016. Pretty Scary 2: Unmasking Toxic Chemicals in Kids’ Makeup, Breast Cancer Fund; Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (October 2016) | 2016 | Nonprofit | US 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) |
| 7 | Stone 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) | 2012 | Regulatory | US-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… |
| 8 | U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition — Chapter 17, Consumer Products, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-09/052F | 2011 | Government report | Chapter 17 of the U.S. EPA’s 2011 Exposure Factors Handbook (EFH) compiles consumer-product use and exposure data — frequency of… |
Update history
The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and 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.
| Commit | Date | Change | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| e317189 | 2026-08-11 | correction | 15 sections added; narrative text revised |