SCCS Revision of the Scientific Opinion on Vitamin A
Ingredients: RETINOL, RETINYL PALMITATE, RETINYL ACETATE, RETINYL LINOLEATE, RETINAL

Date of publication: 25/10/2022

The Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety has issued a final version of the Scientific Opinion on Vitamin A, concluding that exposure to Vitamin A derived from cosmetics can be a concern for higher exposure consumers, and since cosmetics alone do not exceed the upper limit the SCCS cannot suggest maximum concentration limits that take into account contributions from other sources.

BACKGROUND

Vitamin A is a group of lipid-soluble compounds that includes Retinol, Retinyl Palmitate, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Linoleate and Retinal. This vitamin is an essential micronutrient for most mammalian species, taking part in vision, immunity and embryo development, among others. Retinol (CAS number: 68-26-8 /11103-57-4), Retinyl Palmitate (CAS number: 79-81-2) and Retinyl Acetate (1CAS number: 27-47-9) are used as skin conditioning agents in cosmetics and personal care products.

In 2016, the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) issued an opinion on Vitamin A (Retinol, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate). The teratogenic potential of Vitamin A and effects on liver and skin were considered the most critical toxicological endpoints. The SCCS concluded that Vitamin A (Retinol, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate) at a maximum concentration of 0.05% (of retinol equivalent, RE) in body lotions is per se safe. The SCCS also considered that Vitamin A (Retinol, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate) at a maximum concentration of 0.3% RE for example in hand cream, face cream and leave-on and rinse-off products per se is safe. Simultaneously, baby skin care products, like body lotions and creams, containing Vitamin A (Retinol, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate) were considered safe for 1–3-year-old children. However, the cumulative exposure to Vitamin A (Retinol, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate) from sunscreen products, derivatives of Retinyl Linoleate and Retinal, exposure from sources other than cosmetic products, were not included in the SCCS opinion. Yet, the SCCS recognized that population’s overall exposure to Vitamin A (Retinol, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate) can be significantly higher, especially because the most important source of Vitamin A is usually diet (followed by supplements and cosmetics).

WHAT’S NEW?

After novel toxicological data regarding aggregated exposure to Vitamin A from cosmetics, diet and supplementation, and the contribution of cosmetic Vitamin A to the overall exposure to Vitamin A, the SCCS issued a revision of the opinion on October 2022. The SCCS concluded the following:

  • Regarding the contribution of cosmetic products to the overall/total exposure to Vitamin A, the SCCS considers that there are inconsistencies in model calculations. The probabilistic assessment regarding the contribution from food and food supplements shows that the exposure to Vitamin A of the most exposed consumers (5% of the total population) may already exceed the upper limit. Compared to food, the contribution of Vitamin A from cosmetics is lower. However, this can be a concern for consumers with highest exposure (5% of the total population) to vitamin A derived already derived from food and food supplements.
  • Regarding the updating of the maximum concentration limit for the different categories of cosmetic ingredients, the SCCS considers that cosmetics alone do not exceed the upper limit imposed for exposure to Vitamin A and contribution of different exposure sources is a risk management issue and cannot be addressed at the level of risk assessment. In this way, the SCCS cannot suggest maximum concentration limits that take into account contributions from other sources like food and food supplements.

References:

1. SCCS (Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety), revision of the scientific Opinion (SCCS/1576/16) on vitamin A (Retinol, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate), preliminary version of 10 December 2021, final version of 24-25 October 2022, SCCS/1639/21.

further
reading

cosmetic products

United Kingdom Restricts the Use of BHT in Cosmetic Products

The United Kingdom has taken a significant step in regulating the use of Butylated Hydroxytoluene (BHT) in cosmetic products. This move is crucial for distributors, manufacturers, and importers to ensure compliance and maintain the safety of their products in the UK market.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Great Britain Mandatory Classification List (MCL): cosmetic ingredients added.

On March 12, 2024, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) updated the GB Mandatory Classification List (MCL) by adding 25 new chemical substances, as mandated by Article 37 of the GB Classification, Labelling and Packaging (CLP) Regulation. This update impacts substances identified as cosmetic ingredients with proposed Carcinogen, Mutagen, or Reprotoxic (CMR) classifications under Article 15 of the UK Cosmetics Regulation (UKCR). Notably, 2-ethylhexanoic acid and its zinc salt, along with Dimethyltolylamine, are among those facing potential bans and additions to the UK Cosmetics Regulation’s Annex II. These changes will come into effect on September 2, 2025.

Read More »
cosmetic products

New coating for TiO2 (nano) – is it safe?

The Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) published the Preliminary Opinion on new coating for Titanium Dioxide (nano). It declared the data was not enough to draw conclusions regarding the safety of this alternative coating, as more evidence of similarity to other nanomaterials is necessary.

Read More »
cosmetic products

New EU cosmetic restrictions on Cyclic Volatile Methyl Siloxanes (cVMS)

Cyclic volatile methyl siloxanes (cVMS) have raised environmental concerns because of their persistence and bioaccumulative properties. In light of these concerns, the European Union has extended restrictions on substances like D4, D5, and D6 in cosmetic products. New regulations will further limit the concentration of these compounds in both rinse-off and leave-on products, with compliance deadlines set for 2026 and 2027.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Citral under review: SCCS Preliminary Opinion

The SCCS was tasked by the European Commission to evaluate if the safety levels for Citral, determined through QRA2 based on skin sensitization induction, are sufficient to safeguard consumers. A preliminary opinion was released.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Are sunscreens with Benzophenone-4 safe?

Benzophenone-4 is commonly known as a UV-filter in cosmetic products. Learn what the final opinion of SCCS states about Benzophenone’s safety profile as a UV-filter in cosmetic products.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Is Aluminium in cosmetics safe for human health?

The Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) published its Final Opinion on the safety of Aluminium in cosmetic products. This follows a lengthy review process that began in 2013 when the SCCS was first mandated to evaluate the potential health risks of Aluminium (Al) and its compounds in cosmetics.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Silver in Cosmetics: SCCS preliminary opinion.

Ingredients: SILVER

The recent preliminary opinion from the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) regarding silver in cosmetics is crucial for consumers and manufacturers. This article breaks down the key points, making it easier to understand the implications and stay informed.

Read More »
news & updates

EU Ecolabel adoption and recognition are on the rise

The Ecolabel certification is a comprehensive program focused on fostering sustainable practices. It evaluates products based on life cycle assessments, where every phase of said life cycle must abide by strict standards to attain the Ecolabel certification. The overarching objective of this certification is minimizing environmental harm from production or consumption activities.

Read More »