Personal Care

Are Moms Really That Busy?

Yesterday, for the first time ever, I watched the Dr. Phil show.  No, I haven’t been living in a cave; it seems I’ve always known about Dr. Phil, it’s just that the TV here is, 99% of the time, switched off during the day.  And I like it that way.

But I was compelled to watch yesterday’s show, “Are Moms Really That Busy?” in support of my Champaign-Urbana homie, Amy Hatch, who is half of the awesome duo behind chambanamoms.com.  She made an appearance on Dr. Phil’s panel in order to debate a recent finding by University of Maryland’s Dr. John Robinson that moms have, on average, 30-40 hours of leisure time each week.

It’s an easy thing to get a knee-jerk reaction to – particularly if you are among the aforementioned moms who are spread reeeeeally really thin in order to be the best mom and caregiver and housekeeper and working professional that they can be.  The consensus on the panel as to Dr. Robinson’s findings can be summed up the following way: “Are you freakin KIDDING me?!”.  The panelists and moms in the audience were happy to provide the kind of heartbreaking detail of how patently NON-leisurely their lives really are; and how hard, in fact, they do work, and how very very much is expected of them.  That they should even be put in the position of having to defend themselves on this subject is altogether insulting.  Actually, “adding insult to injury” is a perfect characterization.

Of course moms will be put on the defensive by Dr. Robinson’s findings.  I’m guessing that that, and the publicity surrounding it, was his aim in the first place.  The absurd examples of leisure time cited by Dr. Robinson should be all the evidence we need: waiting for a tow truck (in the car w/o kids), opening business email, sitting in the dentist’s office, and the like.

But what went largely undiscussed on yesterday’s show is exactly how we should address this finding:  What’s getting valued?  Who’s setting the standards here?  And why, for christ’s sake, is no one standing up for the very idea of leisure time?  The very notion that we have leisure time carries a subtext that we’re not working hard enough.

Because if we picture it, the dream of leisure time floats above all of mom’s heads, like a detached, unattainable balloon – where one can exist, enjoying our favorite things without interruption, without guilt; outside of time and responsibility.  and as much as we want and crave and need to be in that balloon, if we’re fortunate enough to have the ability to step in it, we’re afraid that others will judge us as being………..the word which can only be whispered………lazy.

Apparently, with the industrial revolution and the gadgets of the 20th century which allow for tasks to completed in a shorter amount of time, there has been a new cold war: the War on Lazy.  We have become so very time and productivity obsessed that we have come to believe, as a culture, that busy-ness is the natural and right state of being.  Which is counter-intuitive.  One would think that the progress made in the last 200 years would allow for more leisure time, and that it would become a natural and virtuous thing.  But something else happened: the standards were raised.  Wash day work cut down to a few hours?  Better impose a higher standard of cleanliness and sell a lot more clothes.  We’ve increasingly been sold a standard that we can’t, and shouldn’t, live up to.  And as moms reach a breaking point in which they can barely handle the stress of raising a family and being everything to everyone, mostly without compensation, they are made to apologize for the joke of what passes as leisure time.  Shame on us.

Listen to how Brigid Schulte wraps up her fine response in the Washington Post:  “it’s 1:31 in the morning; this story is two days late; the dinner dishes are still in the sink; and there’s a form I need to fill out before my daughter goes to school. For a few fleeting moments earlier this evening, however, as I searched for my son’s bike helmet, I did notice that the moon was uncannily beautiful”.  The saddest of poetry, but as moms, we’ve been there.  Maybe even four times already this week.  So instead of going on the defensive, please join me in the following chant:

“More Leisure Time Now!  Better Leisure Time Now!”

And fellow moms, when you see a television commercial which leads you to to think that your teeth should be as white as your wedding dress, and implies that anything less constitutes something sub-standard, please see this for the trap that it is, and take hold of what’s important in your life.  Having flashy white teeth is not being good to yourself (though corporations would love you to believe it) – having time and a little peace in your life to enjoy yourself IS.

Tags: , , , ,

Wednesday, March 31st, 2010 Kids, Personal Care, politics 2 Comments

Hair care during pregnancy

I blame the pregnancy message boards.  At the outset of my first pregnancy, I was blissfully oblivious to the potential hazards of shampoo.   Then, the posting was clicked: “Shampoo?“, then, the link followed: “Pregnancy Alert: Shampoo Ingredient Could Damage Developing Brain Cells“.  It should have carried a warning: “Danger!  Can of worms about to be opened“!  Because what unfolded was a long lesson in the vile substances in personal care products that could, key word: could, have the potential of harm to a developing baby.

If you think about it, our skin is our largest organ, so concern about hazards during pregnancy should not stop with what we simply ingest.  We do, like it or not, absorb many additional things through our skin, intentionally or no.  Here’s the main thing to take away from the link above: shampoo often contains an ingredient called methylisothiazolinone, a substance that acts as an antimicrobial agent, to give the shampoo a long shelf life.  Here’s the thing, though: methylisothiazolinone is a neurotoxic chemical.  It really shouldn’t be used in shampoo at all.  But it shows up in far more than just shampoo.  The Household Products Database has it listed as an ingredient in a wide variety of products: house paint, shampoo, conditioner, hand soap, hair color…….See the list here.

In addition to the Household Products Database, coming to the rescue to help us sort through the maze of ingredients on our personal care products is the Cosmetics Database, who warn: “Major gaps in public health laws allow cosmetics companies to use almost any ingredient they choose in everything from sunscreen and mascara to deodorant and baby shampoo, with no restrictions and no requirement for safety testing. To help you navigate your store’s aisles, Environmental Working Group researchers have scoured thousands of ingredient labels to bring you our top recommendations for what not to buy — products with worrisome or downright dangerous ingredients that don’t belong in your shopping cart or on your skin”.

They do a commendable job of rating personal care products based on the safety of their ingredients.  And it’s clearly not just methylisothiazolinone that is of concern here.  The database also singles out Placenta, Lead, Fragrance, Animal Parts, Hydroquinone Skin Lightener, Nanoparticles, Phthalates, and Petroleum By-products as the ingredients causing the highest concern.  Yes, these products really are in the personal care products we use every day without question.

But no despair necessary:  being pregnant does not condemn one to a 9 month avoidance of personal care products.  My picks for a low-chemical personal care routine, having already done the work of hashing through the Cosmetic Database’s findings and trying a wide range of the green-lighted products:

Shampoo:  Burt’s Bees – widely available; does a good job with far fewer ingredients of concern.

Conditioner:  Aubrey Organics – for my fine, dry, wavy hair, the Island Naturals conditioner can’t be beat.

Cosmetics:  100% Pure – amazing products.  The tinted moisturizer, eye shadows, and blush all get big thumbs up.

Skin creams and shower gel:  California Baby – I hate to say it……….as good as Kiehl’s.  It’s true.  The Calendula cream kicks Kiehl’s Abyssine cream’s butt, and it’s so much kinder to the wallet.  And with far fewer ingredients of concern.

Nail Polish:  Priti Polish – nail polish and remover is one of the leading offenders in chemical content.  Priti, astoundingly enough, offers a great product without the harsh ingredients that throw out the red flags.

As far as hair color goes:  Better to wait until after the first trimester, and thereafter, better to go to a stylist, who can apply the coloring so that it does not make contact with your scalp.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, October 20th, 2009 Don't Buy This!, Personal Care, pregnancy 1 Comment

Smart Choices?

Advertisers are very keen on making consumers feel good about their purchases: smart, beautiful, trendy, healthy, knowledgeable.  Problem is, for us consumers, that the market is flooded with choices, and actually making well-considered choices from among our options would be at least a full time job.  And who among us can take on another full time job?  So advertisers operate in the business of shorthand, assuring us that we don’t really need to look into our options, because what they’re offering is the best choice anyway.

smart choices

I can’t begrudge advertisers for this.  I can, however, begrudge the food industry for this; for teaming up with nonprofits in the so-called “Smart Choices” program, wherein certain food items receive a big green check mark on their labeling, leading the consumer to believe that by purchasing the product that bears the check mark, they are making a smart choice (and the implication is: smarter choice than the products that don’t bear the green check).  I can understand that food choices, in large part, do govern our health, and agree that measures taken to nudge the consumer towards healthier options are well worth the effort.  But the criteria for selection of the “smart choices” foods is simply wrongheaded.

As reported in the New York Times, the following paragraph alone ought to illustrate just how wrongheaded the standards are:  “Froot Loops qualifies for the label because it meets standards set by the Smart Choices Program for fiber and Vitamins A and C, and because it does not exceed limits on fat, sodium and sugar. It contains the maximum amount of sugar allowed under the program for cereals, 12 grams per serving, which in the case of Froot Loops is 41 percent of the product, measured by weight. That is more sugar than in many popular brands of cookies.”  Hmmm…..is it that Froot Loops naturally contains those ingredients that help it to meet the Smart Choices standard?  Nope.  They are additives.

In fact, this type of program only incentivizes the food industry to add synthetic vitamins and fiber to processed foods that have been stripped of any nutritional value, a practice that has long made my head spin.  Conversely, there seem to be no guidelines for the questionable additives that are placed in store bought food: preservatives, sugar substitutes, flavor enhancers, GMOs, food coloring, and the like.   Wonder if Morgan Spurlock would do 30 Days on a Smart Choices Program diet and monitor his results?

Read all about the Smart Choices program on their website.  And for added fun, do a search among the product categories.  This is the telling part — how very few products are listed, represented by even fewer corporations that manufacture almost exclusively processed food.  Among the few that are in my pantry at the moment:  Hellman’s Mayonnaise and Quaker Instant Oatmeal (maple and brown sugar).  Not exactly shining beacons of healthy food choices.

The only true shorthand I can think of that might be worthy of such labeling practice is this:  Don’t eat anything with ingredients that your grandmother wouldn’t recognize.  But the food industry wouldn’t be very gung-ho on that one, would they?

Updated 10/26:  Success!  Kudos to the news media for staying on top of this story, and to Gaga for the link:  Food Label Program to Suspend Operations

Tags: , , , , , ,

Wednesday, September 9th, 2009 Don't Buy This!, Personal Care, politics 3 Comments

An unexpected cure for headaches?

Like many women, I have chronic headaches.  I know my triggers:  bright sunlight, squinting, certain smells…….but really the nasty ones come on when my hormones are in flux, and as this happens monthly, I’ve just come to accept it as inevitable.  They’re pretty mean, and even ibuprofen doesn’t seem to help.  In fact, I had never really encountered anything that offered lasting relief.  Until……..

I keep trail mix in my car.  It’s great to have as a snack so that I’m not forced into the emergency bag of Doritos at the gas station.  It’s filling and, given that it’s good quality stuff, nutritious.  I usually just buy it bulk at the natural food store, but I’ve grown a little tired of their offerings, so tried something totally new: Navitas Naturals Trail Power.  It contains goji berries, mulberries, cacao nibs, incan goldenberries, and cashew.  I actually don’t really recommend the taste – it’s a kind of bittersweet that’s not right for all palates.  But something happens when I eat it:  my headaches disappear.  Fast.

I don’t know which ingredient is responsible for this, or whether it’s in the combination, but I have tested this effect several times, so I know that it’s definitely something in this mix.  After trying everything (ok, everything save for the stuff from Big Pharma) for most of my adult life, I completely stumbled on this by accident.  Maybe it will do the same for you!

11/09/09 Edited to add:  A fellow blogger who suffers from debilitating migraines gave the trail mix a shot; unfortunately to no avail.  Still holding out hope that it works for someone!  Please drop me a line if you’ve given it a try:  esnieto(at)earthlink(dot)net

Tags: , , ,

Tuesday, August 11th, 2009 Buy This!, Personal Care 1 Comment

The Female Body

If I have any gentlemen readers, I’m afraid that the content of this post may not be as titillating as the title might lead you to believe.  If this is the case, please let me offer the following link as an alternative:  The Pin-up Files

I got pregnant for the first time at 36.  This really didn’t involve lots of thought; I had never tried to get pregnant until that time, and my choice of birth control proved effective until then.  But I suspected that simply going off birth control does not a baby make.  There needed to be a little planning beyond just that, so I picked up a copy of Taking Charge of Your Fertility: The Definitive Guide to Natural Birth Control, Pregnancy Achievement, and Reproductive Health.  As I read the book, I actually felt dumber and dumber.  As I finished, I had gained plenty of insight, but was deeply embarrassed that I had never learned this stuff, which was actually so basic to the female body and its cycles.  No high school health class/sex ed, no women’s health guide, nothing that I had heard or read before this book had laid out the fertility cycles, its signs, and all of the variations and interpretations of these signs.  As a woman, I had certainly observed a lot of these signs, but never had the knowledge base to interpret them.

This seems like a very personal topic, and it is, in a way, but also so very universal.  So I posit a question: how the heck does any female in this world grow up to 36 without knowing this stuff?  Let alone a female who has a tendency to want to seek out information, to learn, to know?  The conventional wisdom that I grew up with was “you can get pregnant at any time of the month, so you must always practice birth control if you do not wish to become pregnant”.  The translation seems to be: “Always use protection; that’s all you really need to know”.  But seriously, read this book.  There is so much more to know.  At any point in your reproductive years, no matter your plans or lack thereof, we all should know this stuff.  This book should be required reading.

Tags: , , , ,

Monday, August 3rd, 2009 Buy This!, Personal Care No Comments

At long last……hair care dollars well spent

I am a hair care junkie.  Or at least……..I was a hair care junkie.  Seduced by all of the TV and print ads promising luxurious hair, I would try nearly anything in the hopes that it might tame my fine, naturally curly (read: frizzy) hair.  In my younger years, I would simply beat my hair into submission with curling irons, flat irons, perms (but none post-1990!), even trying out someone else’s hair through extensions, to make my hair look how I wanted it to look.  But now I seek to be kind to my hair, to let it do what it naturally wants to do, and find the best cut, and the best product to make it as close to luxurious as possible.  I hate to think how much money I have spent on this road.  And how many bottles of barely-used product have gone to waste.  So many of the “curl-enhancing” and “tames frizzies!” products actually made my hair frizzier and worse looking that I was happy just to have a product that performed marginally well.

This spring my stylist recommended a new product to me.  I was, as usual, skeptical, but considering that my stylist, who knows my hair about as well as I do, never recommends products, I bought some.  Thank god I did.  It actually smooths my hair and leaves it soft and shiny and it smells wonderful.  My road to luxurious (or as luxurious as my hair can naturally be) hair has ended with the addition of Moroccan Oil.  Let me qualify this a bit by also saying that the shampoo and conditioner that I use also plays an important role.  I’ve found that Moroccan Oil does not work quite as well if I’m not also using a good hydrating shampoo and conditioner. Bumble and Bumble Creme de Coco works best for my hair.

The good news for all reading this is that Moroccan Oil seems to work well on all hair types; it is oily, yes, but once it goes on the hair, it is light, nongreasy, and does not weigh hair down.  It does not look at all as if you have product in your hair; your hair just looks and smells nice.  I cannot recommend it enough.  Yes, it’s a little pricey, but now I am spending far less in general on hair care, and my hair looks better for it.

Tags: , ,

Wednesday, July 29th, 2009 Buy This!, Personal Care No Comments