When it comes to cosmetic safety from toxic materials, most of us don't give them a second thought.  We rely on the government to manage our safety and assume all things are regulated for our highest benefit..  This simply is not true.

Laws in regard to mercury and the policies set by the U.S. Federal Drug Administration are lenient.  The FDA agrees that the skin readily absorbs mercury and that it will accumulate in the body, yet they do not forbid it in cosmetics.   They discuss the possibility of a user experiencing "allergic" reactions, but there is no one with an "allergy" to mercury.  The dangers of mercury are universal to all living bodies.  The FDA understands that mercury causes neurotoxic problems, but they fail to mention these might last a lifetime or inhibit living normally.

The FDA calculates allowable percentages of "safe or tolerable" levels of mercury and other toxins in cosmetics,  but they fail to mention that there is no safe level of mercury in the body.   Adding to the failure, the regulatory process for cosmetics is rather loose and  it relies on manufacturers to self-regulate.  It is also important to note that the FDA has allowable limits of many toxic products that are extremely harmful carcinogens and hormone disruptors.  These toxic chemicals end up in most all cosmetics. 
 
Personally, I look forward to the day that manufacturers are required to label products truthfully.
"This Product Contain Mercury" would be a good start.

The following is taken from fda.gov

• Mercury compounds. Mercury compounds are readily absorbed through the skin on topical application and tend to accumulate in the body. They may cause allergic reactions, skin irritation, or neurotoxic problems. The use of mercury compounds in cosmetics is limited to eye area products at no more than 65 parts per million (0.0065 percent) of mercury calculated as the metal and is permitted only if no other effective and safe preservative is available. All other cosmetics containing mercury are adulterated and subject to regulatory action unless it occurs in a trace amount of less than 1 part per million (0.0001 percent) calculated as the metal and its presence is unavoidable under conditions of good manufacturing practice (21 CFR 700.13).
• Who is responsible for substantiating the safety of cosmetics? Companies and individuals who manufacture or market cosmetics have a legal responsibility to ensure the safety of their products. Neither the law nor FDA regulations require specific tests to demonstrate the safety of individual products or ingredients. The law also does not require cosmetic companies to share their safety information with FDA.  FDA has consistently advised manufacturers to use whatever testing is necessary to ensure the safety of their products and ingredients. Firms may substantiate safety in a number of ways. FDA has stated that "the safety of a product can be adequately substantiated through (a) reliance on already available toxicological test data on individual ingredients and on product formulations that are similar in composition to the particular cosmetic, and (b) performance of any additional toxicological and other tests that are appropriate in light of such existing data and information." (Federal Register, March 3, 1975, page 8916

​
​Mercury in the form of amalgam
fillings  in baby teeth are enough toxicity
to change a child's life forever.  

IQ, personality, developmental disorders,
psychological development and cognitive thinking 
are at the top of the list.  

Unbelievable as it seems, the US Food and Drug Administration allows mercury to be used in medications and pharmaceuticals as a preservative.  The most familiar form is thimerosal which is commonly used in vaccines and has been the subject of much controversy over its potential to cause deadly side effects.  

Even more startling is that eye products can contain mercury as a preservative, even though mercury has been linked to poor eye health and cataracts.  To make matters worse, the mercury used can have one of many names that allow it to be conveniently hidden.  This system leaves the consumer to be their own advocate and that task can be daunting.

The FDA website, [Code of Federal Regulations], [Title 21, Volume 5], [Revised as of April 1, 2016], [CITE: 21CFR349.50]
makes the following statement that directs manufacturers on proper labelling:

(3) For ophthalmic drug products containing mercury compounds used as a preservative. "This product contains (name and quantity of mercury-containing ingredient) as a preservative. Do not use this product if you are sensitive to" (select one of the following: "mercury" or "(insert name of mercury-containing ingredient) or any other ingredient containing mercury)."

Reading the FDA statement carefully makes it clear that you can easily misinterpret any message of mercury content.  You will not see legible red letters that state "This Product Contains Mercury."  You will instead see the a name and quantity of the "mercury-containing" ingredient.  The name of the mercury-containing ingredient may be completely foreign and in no way represent to you that you will be adding mercury to your eye.

When you see a message that says "Do not use this product if you are sensitive to mercury" regard this as a deceitful and misleading.  No one is "sensitive" to mercury.  Mercury is an extremely dangerous element that is second only to plutonium in toxicity to human and animal life.  When a toxin will kill,  it is hardly fair to ask if one might be "sensitive" to its attributes.  

Unfortunately, there is no clear directive when it comes to deciphering the potential of mercury in products you use.   Three familiar names for mercury in optic care include thimerosal, which has more than one spelling, PMA, also know as phenyl mercuric acetate and PMN, known as phenyl mercuric nitrate.  All three are approved by the FDA for ophthalmologic use as a preservative and there are certainly others.

I wish I could make this easier, but there is intentionally, no easy answer.  The FDA has an interactive site that will decode  the names you will find on ingredient lists and they do offer telephone assistance.  Neither is likely to be easy.  

Candida is an imbalance of bacterias in the gut that can cause illness.  Because it is not on the radar of traditional, Western medicine, most cases are misdiagnosed.

Traditional treatment is usually given from the outside in when the problem is really from the inside out.   You can never cure candida by treating the skin.

Curing it properly means a lifetime of health.  Letting it linger and treating only the symptoms allows disease to manifest.  

Just because it is legal...
Just because it's easier...
Just because everyone does it...
​Just because the FDA says it's ok...
Just because the doctor said it won't hurt you...
Just because it's everywhere and almost impossible to avoid...

You still don't have one good reason to allow poison into your life.