Is coconut oil healthy?

BrendanMays · 14 April 2020 02:45

We hear a lot of marketing claims about coconut oil, but are they all true? We explore the pros and cons to coconut oil.

Have you heard any myths about coconut oil? Share them with us below.

meltam · 15 April 2020 03:21

Not mentioned is it excellent for massaging with!

syncretic · 15 April 2020 06:36

How about this https://thecoconutmama.com/coconut-oil-sunscreen/

Makes you smell like Manly beach in the 1960s

Just remember that all those sweet young things who were experimenting with bikinis and coconut oil all have terrible skin now and regularly get bits cut or burned off to head off skin cancer.

To be clear; coconut oil is a terrible sunscreen but it’s all natural!

meltam · 15 April 2020 23:50

It was never meant to be a sunscreen in those days. It was more of a basting medium to be as brown as possible!

bbalanced · 16 April 2020 00:58

This article does not “investigate” it cobbles together magazine style snippets.

bbalanced · 16 April 2020 01:21

Short answer - yes, if food grade.
Long answer avoid any synthetic petrochemical based oils especially if Parabens are included they will lodge and accumulate in your body.
When your massage is performed using conventional massage oil or lotion that is not food-grade it could include a significant dose of crude oil distillates and hormone-mimicking chemicals that are on the world watch-list of carcinogens, but are somehow still allowed into our personal care products.
Coconut oil needs to be warmed or blended with a carrier oil.
The following are all healthy options for your base or carrier oil:

Coconut
Sesame
Flaxseed
Jojoba
Sweet Almond
Avocado
Grapeseed
Olive
Argan

meltam · 16 April 2020 23:56

not if you have warm hands

syncretic · 17 April 2020 01:14

How do you know this?

Could you specifically name some of these hormone-mimicking or carcinogenic substances that are found in massage oil or lotion please.

bbalanced · 18 April 2020 07:33

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Parabens detection in different zones of the human breast: consideration of source and implications of findings.

PW Harvey and DJ Everett, Journal of applied toxicology : JAT, May 2012

This article is a discussion of the recent study by Barr, Metaxas, Harbach, Savoy and Darbre (2012; J. Appl. Toxicol. 32; doi: 10.1002/jat.1786) reporting residues of five paraben esters in the human breast, at concentrations up to the microgram per gram tissue range and with highest concentrations in the axilla area (closest to the underarm). The conclusion is that the detection of intact esters that have escaped the action of esterases is consistent with a local (dermal) exposure source since the metabolic capacity of the gut and liver would produce p-hydroxybenzoic acid as the common metabolite. Whereas the zone concentration differences (propylparaben was found at highest concentrations in the axilla) support an underarm exposure model, seven subjects reportedly never used underarm cosmetics, and other exposure sources, including other cosmetic product types, are discussed. The findings are placed into context with the limited regulatory toxicology database on parabens, oestrogenic action of the parabens, and status of the parabens, cosmetics and human health debate.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Measurement of paraben concentrations in human breast tissue at serial locations across the breast from axilla to sternum.

L Barr, G Metaxas, CA Harbach, LA Savoy and PD Darbre, Journal of applied toxicology : JAT, Mar 2012

The concentrations of five esters of p-hydroxybenzoic acid (parabens) were measured using HPLC-MS/MS at four serial locations across the human breast from axilla to sternum using human breast tissue collected from 40 mastectomies for primary breast cancer in England between 2005 and 2008. One or more paraben esters were quantifiable in 158/160 (99%) of the tissue samples and in 96/160 (60%) all five esters were measured. Variation was notable with respect to individual paraben esters, location within one breast and similar locations in different breasts. Overall median values in nanograms per gram tissue for the 160 tissue samples were highest for n-propylparaben [16.8 (range 0-2052.7)] and methylparaben [16.6 (range 0-5102.9)]; levels were lower for n-butylparaben [5.8 (range 0-95.4)], ethylparaben [3.4 (range 0-499.7)] and isobutylparaben 2.1 (range 0-802.9). The overall median value for total paraben was 85.5 ng g(-1) tissue (range 0-5134.5). The source of the paraben cannot be identified, but paraben was measured in the 7/40 patients who reported never having used underarm cosmetics in their lifetime. No correlations were found between paraben concentrations and age of patient (37-91 years), length of breast feeding (0-23 months), tumour location or tumour oestrogen receptor content. In view of the disproportionate incidence of breast cancer in the upper outer quadrant, paraben concentrations were compared across the four regions of the breast: n-propylparaben was found at significantly higher levels in the axilla than mid (P = 0.004 Wilcoxon matched pairs) or medial (P = 0.021 Wilcoxon matched pairs) regions (P = 0.010 Friedman ANOVA).

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Significance of the detection of esters of p-hydroxybenzoic acid (parabens) in human breast tumours.

PW Harvey and DJ Everett, Journal of applied toxicology : JAT, Jan-Feb 2004

This issue of Journal of Applied Toxicology publishes the paper Concentrations of Parabens in Human Breast Tumours by Darbre et al. (2004), which reports that esters of p-hydroxybenzoic acid (parabens) can be detected in samples of tissue from human breast tumours. Breast tumour samples were supplied from 20 patients, in collaboration with the Edinburgh Breast Unit Research Group, and analysed by high-pressure liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry. The parabens are used as antimicrobial preservatives in underarm deodorants and antiperspirants and in a wide range of other consumer products. The parabens also have inherent oestrogenic and other hormone related activity (increased progesterone receptor gene expression). As oestrogen is a major aetiological factor in the growth and development of the majority of human breast cancers, it has been previously suggested by Darbre that parabens and other chemicals in underarm cosmetics may contribute to the rising incidence of breast cancer. The significance of the finding of parabens in tumour samples is discussed here in terms of 1). Darbre et al's study design, 2). what can be inferred from this type of data (and what can not, such as the cause of these tumours), 3). the toxicology of these compounds and 4). the limitations of the existing toxicology database and the need to consider data that is appropriate to human exposures.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Paraben esters: review of recent studies of endocrine toxicity, absorption, esterase and human exposure, and discussion of potential human health risks.

PD Darbre and PW Harvey, Journal of applied toxicology : JAT, Jul 2008

This toxicology update reviews research over the past four years since publication in 2004 of the first measurement of intact esters of p-hydroxybenzoic acid (parabens) in human breast cancer tissues, and the suggestion that their presence in the human body might originate from topical application of bodycare cosmetics. The presence of intact paraben esters in human body tissues has now been confirmed by independent measurements in human urine, and the ability of parabens to penetrate human skin intact without breakdown by esterases and to be absorbed systemically has been demonstrated through studies not only in vitro but also in vivo using healthy human subjects. Using a wide variety of assay systems in vitro and in vivo, the oestrogen agonist properties of parabens together with their common metabolite (p-hydroxybenzoic acid) have been extensively documented, and, in addition, the parabens have now also been shown to possess androgen antagonist activity, to act as inhibitors of sulfotransferase enzymes and to possess genotoxic activity. With the continued use of parabens in the majority of bodycare cosmetics, there is a need to carry out detailed evaluation of the potential for parabens, together with other oestrogenic and genotoxic co-formulants of bodycare cosmetics, to increase female breast cancer incidence, to interfere with male reproductive functions and to influence development of malignant melanoma which has also recently been shown to be influenced by oestrogenic stimulation.

syncretic · 18 April 2020 23:38

The first 4 articles all discuss finding parabens residue in tissue. As far I can see none came to any solid conclusion about how it got there, how long it had been there or exactly what this means for the health of the persons involved. If I have missed some key item please point it out so I can read it again.

The last item by Sayer Ji of GreenMedInfo is where you got the quote "your massage could include a significant dose of crude oil distillates and hormone-mimicking chemicals "

The ji article says mineral oil has been detected in tissue. It doesn’t give any evidence that mineral oil is carcinogenic or hormone mimicking. The possible exception is the reference to a study that showed if mice were irradiated with ultraviolet radiation they were more likely to get tumours if given a certain moisturizing cream than not. We cannot generalise this one study to humans (who are not mice) who do not get such doses of UV and who do not necessarily use the preparations that were tested.

He also mentions parabens and says that it has been found in tissue and points to the article above (Barr et al). Ji then says of the article “leading researchers to conclude that paraben concentrations were from topical application of products such as deodorant and skin lotions.” I can’t find where that is in the study.

However the same Barr study yields this "The source of the paraben cannot be identified, but paraben was measured in the 7/40 patients who reported never having used underarm cosmetics in their lifetime. " Barr is actually saying it is inconclusive.

Before going any further, I do not work for or have any financial interest in any oil or lotion maker or any part of any industry remotely related to them. I have absolutely nothing to gain by the sales of parabens or any similar substance. I have no religion that requires the use of such preparations and I rarely use them myself.

Sayer Ji (like so many in the wellness industry) has a vested interest in selling his books and while the papers he refers to are peer reviewed the conclusions that he comes to in his tracts are not. If he has any qualifications in health, medicine, nutrition, toxicology or any related discipline he is very modest about them.

So it looks like you accept the word of Sayer Ji from GreenMedInfo. I am sorry but on the evidence supplied I don’t.

phb · 19 April 2020 02:48

This website has some interesting information in relation to parabens…

Something I learnt today is that they can naturally occur in foods…

bbalanced · 19 April 2020 03:11

I will give this as a response. As a female that has been exposed to breast cancer I am probably more attuned to reading labels and articles. Over the years I have read a lot of scientific articles on the dangers of certain additives and have reduced my use substantially. I am quite sure if I wish to spend time hunting out these science reviews I will discover them again but it has been 10 years since my diagnosis and my interest in the information. I think that females, due to the number of personal care items used everyday should definitely be aware of the ingredients in the creams and lotions they use.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Reducing Phthalate, Paraben, and Phenol Exposure from Personal Care Products in Adolescent Girls: Findings from the HERMOSA Intervention Study.

KG Harley, K Kogut, DS Madrigal, M Cardenas, IA Vera, G Meza-Alfaro, J She, Q Gavin, R Zahedi, A Bradman, B Eskenazi and KL Parra, Environmental health perspectives, Oct 2016

Personal care products are a source of exposure to potentially endocrine-disrupting chemicals such as phthalates, parabens, triclosan, and benzophenone-3 (BP-3) for adolescent girls.We enrolled 100 Latina girls in a youth-led, community-based participatory research intervention study to determine whether using personal care products whose labels stated they did not contain these chemicals for 3 days could lower urinary concentrations. Pre- and postintervention urine samples were analyzed for phthalate metabolites, parabens, triclosan, and BP-3 using high-performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry.Urinary concentrations of mono-ethyl phthalate (MEP) decreased by 27.4% (95% CI: -39.3, -13.2) on average over the 3-day intervention; no significant changes were seen in urinary concentrations of mono-n-butyl phthalate (MnBP) and mono-isobutyl phthalate (MiBP). Methyl and propyl paraben concentrations decreased by 43.9% (95% CI: -61.3, -18.8) and 45.4% (95% CI: -63.7, -17.9), respectively. Unexpectedly, concentrations of ethyl and butyl paraben concentrations increased, although concentrations were low overall and not detected in almost half the samples. Triclosan concentrations decreased by 35.7% (95% CI: -53.3, -11.6), and BP-3 concentrations decreased by 36.0% (95% CI: -51.0, -16.4).This study demonstrates that techniques available to consumers, such as choosing personal care products that are labeled to be free of phthalates, parabens, triclosan, and BP-3, can reduce personal exposure to possible endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Involving youth in the design and implementation of the study was key to recruitment, retention, compliance, and acceptability of the intervention.Harley KG, Kogut K, Madrigal DS, Cardenas M, Vera IA, Meza-Alfaro G, She J, Gavin Q, Zahedi R, Bradman A, Eskenazi B, Parra KL. 2016. Reducing phthalate, paraben, and phenol exposure from personal care products in adolescent girls: findings from the HERMOSA Intervention Study. Environ Health Perspect 124:1600-1607; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1510514.

but for your edification here is a definitive list of why the EU has banned 5 parabens and what has been written about other risky substances used by consumers.
https://chemicalwatch.com/search/?q=parabens&type=&author=&start=1

bbalanced · 19 April 2020 03:17

This (American) article is referencing the CIR Cosmetic Industry Review. If you care to read how they did it - it goes on and on… you will find some learned men admitting they don’t have enough data, or the data does not apply to cosmetics, or the studies were done on animals, or is there a difference between adult skin absorption vs babies and young children or etc. etc and then they come up with their answer. https://www.cir-safety.org/sites/default/files/Parabens_0.pdf

syncretic · 19 April 2020 03:45

Yes they should. However I don’t find Sayer Ji a good guide to which ones to avoid. He is also against, fluoride in water, vaccination, medical use of statins and says gluten is a ‘universal toxin’ and causes schizophrenia.

Ji is also a cherry picker, that is he chooses data that suit his position. His database of studies is biassed, heavy on those that suit his purpose and light on those that don’t. As I mentioned before he is unqualified, you would think if he was going to go through thousands of studies to pick the ones to list he should have some training in the subject matter. He has a huge following but that doesn’t make him a reliable informant.

The article you listed shows that in some situations altering the use of personal care products alters the amount of their metabolites in your urine. It would be amazing if it didn’t. It says nothing at all about whether those substances do any harm in the measured amounts.

The link to Chemical Watch gave me 74 items, I am sorry I am not going to read them all. If there is one or two you think are particularly import please point them out.

meltam · 19 April 2020 06:09

I tried to visit Ji’s webpage to find out more about him, but I was stopped by Chrome warning that
“Attackers might be trying to steal your information from www.------.com (for example, passwords, messages, or credit cards).” Please not I have blanked out the website as I don’t think it is wise for people to click on the link to try it for themselves.

Doesn’t portend well.

phb · 19 April 2020 08:14

I also agree, and one should also think if cosmetics are really needed based on potential risks not only from chemical (natural or synthetic) reaction but sensitivities or allergies.

One also has to realise that there are a significant number of chemicals consumed daily which can pose risks if consumed in the long term or if one has a predisposition to a reaction from their consumption. If all such chemicals were banned, or one chose to eliminate them because of something they read, then ones diet would be vastly restricted and very boring.

One has to place context to outcomes of scientific research. Some organisations take a precautionary principle type approach (like the EU) to their regulation and use, but this does not necessarily indicate there is an issue.

While the EU bans 5 paraben forms, the FDA in the US has stated that these same compounds are safe. It is possible that the EU may change it current status if there is conclusive research indicating they are safe for use, including in the very long term.

wdtaylor · 22 April 2020 02:22

In fact there is nothing wrong with parabens and they are widespread naturally. Olive leaf extract for instance is full of them.
I do not think you will find any massage oils using mineral oils; if you do they will be the most pure medium you can find. Nothin but C8 to C16 saturated chains. Certainly no “hormone Mimicking chemicals”.

wdtaylor · 29 April 2020 05:35

The study by Harley et al quoted above could have been quite good. If only they had read the labels of the cosmetics the subjects were using before the intervention.
I am worried because parabens are often, but by no means universally used. And triclosan has limited use in these types of products.

Also, it is a pretty standard practice to see what happens when the subjects revert to normal practice. I suspect their results are overwhelmed by the usual various problems these kind of studies are heir to.

wdtaylor · 29 April 2020 05:45

Indeed, the CIS body carefully considered all the data and came to the conclusion that all those parabens were save as used in cosmetics.

What a shame they went on and on instead of just rushing to some impulsive conclusion.

Join the conversation

Ask a question. Share tips. Help others.

Make yourself heard

Join our forum and be part of Australia’s biggest consumer movement.

Is coconut oil healthy?