Heavy Metal Index
Ask the IndexAboutIndex Pro

An Overview of Heavy Metals in Cosmetic Products and Their Toxicological Impact

Cite this pageVersion history

Overview

This open-access Applied Sciences review synthesizes current literature on heavy-metal occurrence in cosmetic products (lipsticks, mascara, eye shadows, face powders, hair products, skin-care, sunscreens, toothpastes, kohl, henna, skin-lightening creams), per-metal toxicological impact, current EU, US, Canadian, and Chinese regulatory limits, and emerging non-animal (NAM) testing approaches. It compiles cosmetic-relevant regulatory thresholds in one place and assembles a per-metal hazard summary table linking metals to the product categories where they typically appear.

Key numbers

  • Regulatory limits compiled (Section 4, p. 6):
    • EU (Regulation EC 1223/2009): Sb, As, Cd, Hg, Pb prohibited as intentional ingredients; water-soluble Zn salts up to 1%; Zn phenolsulfonate in deodorants/antiperspirants/astringents up to 6%; Al-Zr chloride hydroxide complexes in antiperspirants up to 20%; mercuric thiomersal/phenylmercuric salts permitted in eye-product preservatives up to 0.007% Hg.
    • Germany (lowest in EU): Cd 0.1 mg/kg, Hg 0.1 mg/kg, As 0.5 mg/kg, Sb 0.5 mg/kg, Pb 2 mg/kg.
    • US FDA (MoCRA 2022 framework): As 3 ppm; Hg 1 ppm; Pb 10 ppm in lip products / externally applied cosmetics; Pb 20 ppm in color additives.
    • Canada: Pb 10 ppm; As 3 ppm; Cd 3 ppm; Hg 1 ppm; Sb 5 ppm; lead/arsenic/cadmium/mercury/stibium/chromium prohibited as intentional ingredients.
    • China: As 2 mg/kg; Cd 5 mg/kg; Pb 10 mg/kg; Hg 1 mg/kg.
  • Sample-level findings cited from prior studies (Section 3, pp. 3-4):
    • Piccinini et al. studied 223 lip products from 15 EU member states; the present review does not re-report individual values, summarizes findings.
    • FDA surveys (2010-2013): >400 lip product samples plus 120 externally applied cosmetics; 150 cosmetic products of 12 types analyzed for As, Cd, Cr, Co, Pb, Hg, Ni.
    • Hamann et al. analyzed 549 skin-lightening products using portable XRF; 6.0% above 1000 ppm Hg.
    • Al-Ashban et al. examined 107 kohl samples in Saudi Arabia; high lead correlated with high lead blood concentrations.
    • Mokashi et al. reported kohl Pb concentrations up to 800,000 ppm in some samples.
    • Iwegbue et al. 160 facial cosmetics from Nigeria (lip products, eye shadows and pencils, mascaras, blushes, and face powders); products from Asian countries showed higher heavy metals than those from Europe and USA but MoS indicated low consumer risk in most cases.
    • Corazza et al. examined toy makeup products: Cr exceeded the 5 ppm maximum limit in 53.8% of samples; higher levels in powdery products; Co and Ni also present.
    • Wang et al. face paints: >25% of samples associated with carcinogenic risk above maximum acceptable; Cr was primary contributor.
  • Per-metal hazard summary (Table 1, pp. 5-6): mapping of Al, As (iAs more toxic; As3+ more toxic than As5+), Cd, Cr (Cr6+ more toxic than Cr3+), Cu, Fe, Pb, Hg [inorganic salts], Ni, Zn to specific product categories and reported health effects. No new numerical occurrence data in this table; product categorization only.
  • Table 2 compendium of cited primary studies (pp. 9-12) covers 40+ studies across FAAS, ET AAS (GF AAS), HR-CS GF AAS, SS-HR-CS ET AAS, CV-AAS, MP-AES, and ICP-MS. Selected entries directly relevant to children’s product categories:
    • Talcum baby powder (n=4) from Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia: Ni 2082-3102 ppb (above permissible in all samples), As 63-672.6 ppb (within safe limits), Cr slightly above 5 ppm in 3 of 4 samples (5.846, 5.624, 5.25 ppm) [ref 108].
    • Toothpastes (n=9) MP-AES: Pb exceeded approved limits in most cases, max 8.83 ppm; Zn max 2417 ppm; Cr 0.28-7.35 ppm; Ni 0.43-2.54 ppm; Hg and Cd absent [ref 58].
    • Skin and hair products / makeup / toothpaste (n=21) from Saudi Arabia, ICP-MS: highest Pb 78.31 ppm and Cr 1610.64 ppm in a toothpaste; max As 221.96 ppm in toothpaste [ref 53].
    • Soaps / toothpaste / skin creams / hair products (n=31) multi-country, ICP-MS: Al max 512,607.9 ppb (creams), 339,869.0 ppb (hair products), 1,435,929.5 ppb (toothpastes); Pb 592.88-29,683.12 ppb (hair products); Hg 29.08-757.84 ppb (creams) [ref 32].
    • Kohl (n=10 each) from Syria/Sudan/Jordan: Pb concentrations Syria 391 µg/g > Sudan 352.3 µg/g > Jordan 328.5 mg/g (mixed units reported as in source) [ref 10].
    • Kohl (n=16) from Algeria/Saudi Arabia/India/Pakistan ET AAS: Pb detected in 81.2% of samples, max 85.57 µg/g [ref 7].
    • Face paints (n=91) from China/Germany/Japan ICP-MS: As detected in 100%; Cd 0.01-19.2 µg/g; Zn max 183,343 µg/g; Cu max 21,899 µg/g; Pb 0.02-370 µg/g (77 samples) [ref 31].
    • Lip products (n=223) from 15 EU member states ICP-MS: Pb below recommended limits; lipsticks higher than glosses; highest Pb average 0.91 ppm in price category II lipsticks [ref 3, Piccinini].
  • Methods reviewed: AAS (FAAS, GFAAS, CV-AAS for Hg, HR-CS-GFAAS), ICP-OES, ICP-MS, XRF (portable), FRET-based chemosensors (rhodamine-naphthalimide conjugate for Pb in lipstick; silica nanosphere chromophores for Cd/Co), distance-based microfluidic paper-based devices (D-µPADs). ISO standard for ICP-MS of trace metals in finished cosmetic formulations is cited (p. 7).

Methods (brief)

Narrative literature review (not systematic). Database searches across PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar using keywords “heavy metals,” “cosmetics,” “risk assessment,” “skin sensitization,” “carcinogenic risk,” “NAMs,” “cytotoxicity,” “genotoxicity.” Includes original articles, reviews, and book chapters published 1990 to present (received Oct 2025; accepted Dec 2025; published Dec 5 2025). No formal inclusion/exclusion protocol stated; no PRISMA flow diagram. Limitations: most cited studies are small-n (the review notes this). Speciation handled inconsistently across cited studies; the review’s Table 1 distinguishes iAs/As3+/As5+ and Cr-VI/Cr-III where the underlying citations support it but does not enforce the distinction across all summary statements.

Implications

Update history

No substantive edit history is available in this build. The full commit record is available in git.

Referenced by