From Hair Discrimination To Cancer, The Pivotal Role Of Chemical Hair Straighteners In Endangering The Existence Of Humans!

Just a day after the news of the great company Johnson and Johnson’s third bankruptcy broke out, here we are again amid another lawsuit claiming that certain Dabur products contain elements contributing to the formation of cancer. Yes, three subsidiaries of Dabur, namely Namaste Laboratories LLC (“Namaste”), Dermoviva Skin Essentials Inc. (“Dermoviva”), and Dabur International Ltd. (“DINTL”), have received Several cases from consumers alleging that the company’s hair products caused ovarian cancer and uterine cancer. 

According to a filing with the exchange, the cases are in the pleadings and early discovery stages of litigation. The MDL currently has around 5,400 cases. However, according to the filing, these subsidiaries disagree with blame and have retained counsel to defend them in these lawsuits because the allegations are based on baseless and inadequate research.  Meanwhile, the Food and Drug Administration has proposed banning specific formaldehyde-containing hair straightening treatments, claiming they are connected to hormone-related cancers and can cause “long-term adverse health effects.”

In the short run, it can cause eye and throat irritation, coughing, wheezing, or chest pain, and in the long run, it can cause chronic problems such as frequent headaches, asthma, and an increased risk of developing uterine cancer, also known as endometrial cancer.

A National Institutes of Health research involving 33,500 women in the United States found that women who use straightening products have more than 2X the risk of getting uterine cancer as those who do not, and they also have a more difficult time conceiving a baby. 

The study also found that around 60% of those who reported using straighteners in the preceding year were self-identified Black women. While uterine cancer rates have risen among all women in recent years, the increase has been most significant among women of colour, including Asian and Hispanic women.

Women of colour is a political term that signals solidarity among women of minoritised racial identities. Women who are African American or Black, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Hispanic or Latino, and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islanders. According to Merriam-Webster, America’s leading and most trusted provider of language information, a woman of colour can be one whose skin pigmentation is other than and significantly darker than what is considered characteristic of people typically defined as white.

But here raises the question: why? Why are women of colour more prone to uterine cancer due to using hair straighteners and hair relaxers? Also, why are these black beauties so obsessed with using hair straighteners and hair relaxers? Is it just a fashion call, or does the actual cause find its way to the prejudices of the past?

The famous research, named ‘The Sister study’, is the first-ever national randomised trial to focus on improving outcomes for Black/African-American (AA) women with endometrial cancer (EC). Here again, popped the same question- Why are black women so exposed to using hair straighteners and hair relaxers despite knowing they may be exposed to cancer? Do they want these products, or has society made them feel a need for these products?

Here, we enter into a world of racial discrimination. Now, we will read how black women have faced workplace discrimination because of their hair, which eventually(forced) black women to contribute to the dire acceptance of hair straighteners and hair relaxers in daily life. Hair discrimination has long been a concern for black girls and women in school and the workplace. However, deploying chemical hair straighteners that keep to both spoken and unspoken customs comes at a high price: Scalp damage, discomfort, and a higher risk of developing uterine cancer are all possibilities.

From Discrimination to Cancer, The Pivotal Role of Chemical Hair Straighteners.

Straightening their natural hair has acted as a solution for many Black girls and women to escape hair prejudice and bigotry at school and employment. Natural hair is hair that has not been chemically straightened, including relaxers and texturisers. The study finds that 33% of women have changed their hair for job interviews. “Because Black beauties use hair straightening or relaxer products more frequently and at younger era than other races and ethnicities, cancer-causing results may be even more relevant for them,” said Che-Jung Chang, PhD, one of the study’s authors and a research mate at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Epidemiology Branch.

The Sister Study drew more than 33,947 women. For over 11 years, researchers tracked the participants. 378 women were diagnosed with uterine cancer over that period. Despite the risks of such a dangerous life threatening cancer, research reveals that some Black women feel forced to use potentially harmful treatments on their natural hair to advance in their careers or fit in with their coworkers. 

Chemical hair straighteners cause pain and injury, apart from cancer.

In the 1950s, chemical hair straighteners were popular. Along with the possibility of cancer caused by chemical hair straighteners, as outlined in the Sister Study study, the products have also been related to hair damage, scalp burns, and hair loss. “Chemical exposure from hair product use, especially straighteners, could be more concerning than other forms of personal care due to increased absorption through the scalp, which may be worsened by burns and lesions caused by straighteners,” according to the Sister Study’s authors.

The Problems of Natural-Hair Bias in the Workplace.

A 2021 study titled “The Natural Hair Bias in Job Recruitment” discovered indications of workplace natural hair bias against Black women. The findings were reported in Social Psychological and Personality Science.

In that study, researchers invited 240 Black and white women to review eight photographs of Black women and eight images of white women. Half of the images had Black women with natural or straight hair, while the other half included white ladies with curly or straight hair. The researchers next asked all survey respondents to score on the images they’d seen. Perceived professionalism, competence, and the possibility of picking the ladies for a job interview were among the rating categories. 

The authors of the study discovered that “Black women with natural hairstyles were considered to be the  least competent, least professional, and least to be recommended for an interview across all comparison groups.”  That can be an obvious indicator of racism. The scientists found that “natural hairstyle bias may be a subtle yet consequential cause” of Black women’s unfavourable workplace outcomes, such as greater unemployment rates than white female counterparts.

Eurocentric Standards of Beauty.

Some job recruiters place a high value on appearance, but natural hair bias extends beyond being well-dressed and appealing. It might be tough to pinpoint the factors that make someone appear professional. According to the authors of the workplace survey, many people have historically assumed that a professional appearance should resemble the physical attributes of white people. So, regardless of colour, women in the workplace were expected to have straight hair rather than natural or textured hair.

According to the study, 54% of Black women believe they must wear their hair straight before a job interview in order to be successful. Many Black women’s natural hair differs in texture and look from that of their white counterparts. This can lead to many Black women believing that using chemical hair straighteners or otherwise modifying their hair is necessary in order to be seen positively by employers and colleagues.

Workplace Hair Discrimination Effects.

• Bias: People may be passed over for promotions, become marginalised, have fewer chances, face unfair treatment, and be subjected to unfavourable stereotypes as a result of bias.
• Economic Disparities: A lack of job possibilities, a lack of professional advancement, fewer promotions, and lower-paying positions can all contribute to pre-existing socioeconomic inequalities.
• Mental Impact: People with natural hair bias may experience stress and worry at work. They may also lack confidence and self-esteem, which may have a significant effect on entire job satisfaction.

Is it only the corporate workplace or other sectors also ingrained in such biased mentalities?

Hairstyle restrictions have also been a source of contention for our country’s servicemen and women. Over the last several decades, the United States military has revised its grooming standards to be more inclusive. For example, the Army’s grooming rules were revised in 2021 to accommodate hairstyles such as locs, braids, and ponytails. That same year, the Navy began allowing men and women to wear their hair short. In 2020, the Air Force altered its standards to allow men and women to have longer hair. In 2022, the Marines began permitting longer hairstyles as well as twists in short hair.

What are the Legal Consequences? Are there any laws that cope with racial discrimination on the basis of hair?

The CROWN Act, aka, Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair) is a piece of legislation that protects people from discrimination based on their natural hairstyle. It has been passed in a number of states in the United States in 2022. It aims to prohibit hair discrimination based on hairstyle or texture. 

According to a 2019 study conducted by personal care firm Dove, Black women are 30% more likely than other women to be given information about their employer’s formal grooming policy. Dove collaborated with many social justice organisations that same year to establish the CROWN Act, which aimed to provide a more inclusive environment for Black men and women.

The CROWN Act passed the House but not the Senate, and it has yet to become federal law. However, other states have passed their own CROWN Act legislation. In July 2019, California became the first state to enact the CROWN Act. More than half of all states had filed legislation for consideration as of June 2023. Currently, 23 states have approved the CROWN Act or equivalent legislation barring hairstyle discrimination.

Conclusion.

The lawsuits against Dabur are at a nascent stage, and only time will tell whether the usage of chemicals in their products is justified or whether they are harming the beautiful hairs of all beauties of the world. Also, was it just an incorrect call by the organisation, or the company deliberately used such chemicals to keep profits over ethics? All these answers are a function of time. In the end, whatever the scene in the court, we need to address that we all should address everyone with utter respect and dignity, without being biased over what ethnicity they belong to.

Although now people are more open to accepting themselves the way they are, and the world is also not as insensitive towards these moral issues as it was 2 decades earlier, there is still a long way to go.