We eat a lot of lipstick
I guess I might as well go back to choosing my lipstick based on flavor and scent like I used to as a child. While flipping through Women's Health magazine today, I learned that the average woman consumes between four and nine pounds of lipstick in her lifetime.
That means we literally eat anywhere between 481 and 1,083 tubes of lipstick. I wonder if it makes our insides look that same sexy shade of pink that compliments our outfits? Probably not. It makes me thankful for all of the safety regulations put on our products though(not that they're always adhered too)!
My next step is to find out how many calories are in 1,083 tubes of lipstick!
.jpg)
How to Build a Healthy Summer Pantry
Worst Restaurant Meals of 2009
Natasha Henstridge Says She Damaged Her Body With Diets
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-07-2007 @ 4:09PM
himekosorano said...
There are no regulations on cosmetics in the United States. Did you know that there is lead in our lipsticks? It is possible to manufacture lead-free lipstick for pennies added to the cost, but many companies do not do so. The following brands had the highest lead content. (None listed lead on the label.) L'Oreal Color Riche in True Red and Classic Wine, Covergirl Incrediful Lip color in Maximum Red and Christian Dior Addict in Positive Red.
This information can be found in the article "A Poison Kiss" on www.safecosmetics.org
The government does not regulate the cosmetics industry!
Reply
12-07-2007 @ 7:27PM
so-so-sanna said...
Hahahahahaha, yes I beleive it, I think I actually consume much more than that though, as I was once trapped for 45 hours and got so hungry I voluntarily ate 1.3 tubes, just to subside the grumbling in my tummy!!!
Reply
12-21-2007 @ 10:23PM
noone said...
As for the claim in one of the comments about lead in lipstick, it is largely refuted at snopes.com. Second about the claim on how much lipstick a woman eats, from the tube-size estimate in this blog entry that would mean a woman eats a full tube over the course of five weeks, which is clearly not feasible.
Reply