Gender, self-care and toxic exposures: a narrative review of personal care product use and health equity implications
File(s)
Published version
Author(s)
Prifti, Eleni
El-Osta, Austen
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Background:
Personal care products (PCPs) are widely used across populations, yet their composition includes a range of hazardous chemicals that pose risks to human health and the environment. Emerging evidence highlights how PCP-related exposures are not evenly distributed, but shaped by intersecting forces of gender, race and social inequality. Despite being framed as tools for empowerment and wellness, PCPs may contribute to disproportionate toxic exposures, particularly for women and girls.
Objective:
This narrative review critically examines the environmental health implications of gendered self-
care practices through the lens of personal care product use. It synthesizes current evidence on chemical exposures, identifies high-risk subgroups, explores mechanisms of harm and outlines implications for regulation, clinical practice and environmental health literacy.
Methods:
Drawing on interdisciplinary peer-reviewed literature published between 2000 and 2025, the review focuses on endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), PFAS, VOCs, heavy metals, and micro- and nanoparticles commonly found in PCPs. Particular attention is given to vulnerable populations, including beauty salons workers, pregnant individuals, adolescents, women of colour, and infants.
Findings:
PCP use results in chronic low-level exposure to multiple hazardous compounds via dermal, inhalation and mucosal routes. These exposures have been linked to adverse reproductive, developmental and metabolic outcomes, increasing the risks of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) like cancer, and obesity, and possibly affecting infertility rates. Early evidence shows that interventions such as product substitution can yield rapid reductions in internal toxicant levels. However, individual behaviour change alone is insufficient to address systemic disparities in exposure risk.
Conclusion:
Self-care must be reframed as a public health and environmental justice issue. Stronger regulatory oversight, clinician education and population-level environmental health literacy are urgently needed to reduce harmful exposures. Equitable self-care should prioritize not only personal choice, but also structural accountability and collective safety.
Personal care products (PCPs) are widely used across populations, yet their composition includes a range of hazardous chemicals that pose risks to human health and the environment. Emerging evidence highlights how PCP-related exposures are not evenly distributed, but shaped by intersecting forces of gender, race and social inequality. Despite being framed as tools for empowerment and wellness, PCPs may contribute to disproportionate toxic exposures, particularly for women and girls.
Objective:
This narrative review critically examines the environmental health implications of gendered self-
care practices through the lens of personal care product use. It synthesizes current evidence on chemical exposures, identifies high-risk subgroups, explores mechanisms of harm and outlines implications for regulation, clinical practice and environmental health literacy.
Methods:
Drawing on interdisciplinary peer-reviewed literature published between 2000 and 2025, the review focuses on endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), PFAS, VOCs, heavy metals, and micro- and nanoparticles commonly found in PCPs. Particular attention is given to vulnerable populations, including beauty salons workers, pregnant individuals, adolescents, women of colour, and infants.
Findings:
PCP use results in chronic low-level exposure to multiple hazardous compounds via dermal, inhalation and mucosal routes. These exposures have been linked to adverse reproductive, developmental and metabolic outcomes, increasing the risks of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) like cancer, and obesity, and possibly affecting infertility rates. Early evidence shows that interventions such as product substitution can yield rapid reductions in internal toxicant levels. However, individual behaviour change alone is insufficient to address systemic disparities in exposure risk.
Conclusion:
Self-care must be reframed as a public health and environmental justice issue. Stronger regulatory oversight, clinician education and population-level environmental health literacy are urgently needed to reduce harmful exposures. Equitable self-care should prioritize not only personal choice, but also structural accountability and collective safety.
Date Issued
2025-07-01
Date Acceptance
2025-09-12
Citation
BMJ Public Health, 2025, 3 (2)
ISSN
2753-4294
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group
Journal / Book Title
BMJ Public Health
Volume
3
Issue
2
Copyright Statement
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2025. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. Published by BMJ Group. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license
License URL
Identifier
10.1136/bmjph-2025-003564
Publication Status
Published
Article Number
e003564
Date Publish Online
2025-10-28