There Is No Safe Level of Lead. So Why Is It in Braiding Hair?
Consumer Reports recently released product testing data from an investigation into synthetic braiding hair. They tested 10 popular products commonly used by Black women. I had the opportunity to be quoted in their press release and participate in informational sessions before the report went public. I was grateful to learn more about what they tested, how they tested it, and why it matters.
You may have already seen think pieces or scientists weighing in on the findings. Consider this blog post just another voice from the field, but one rooted in deep expertise. As an analytical chemist and exposure scientist, my work focuses on understanding how Black communities are exposed to harmful chemicals through consumer products, especially beauty and personal care items.
So here’s my take… and it’s simple. If you stop reading after this next sentence, you’ll get the core message:
There should not be any detectable lead in synthetic braiding hair. Period.
Some people have said, “But the levels were low.” To that I say again: there are no safe levels of lead exposure. That’s not opinion. That’s public health consensus. Lead is a neurotoxin. Its effects are cumulative, and even low levels can cause harm, especially for children and pregnant people.
Consumer Reports found lead in 9 out of 10 braiding hair products tested. That means one product didn’t have detectable levels of lead. If one product can be manufactured without detectable lead, that means it’s possible. It’s not an accident. It’s not out of reach. It’s just not the standard, but it should be.
Now, let’s talk about sample size. Testing 10 products might seem small, but in science, especially independent testing, we often start with pilot studies. These smaller-scale studies give us the data we need to justify larger studies. And let’s be real: science is expensive. So yes, more testing is needed, but this was a powerful and important start.
I know this firsthand. For the past few years, I’ve been leading an independent study evaluating chemicals in synthetic hair extensions. We’ve analyzed dozens of samples and are working hard to get the findings published. All of these studies—mine, Consumer Reports, the earlier ones—build on each other. Together, they help us better understand chemical exposures from synthetic hair, particularly for Black women.
And this isn’t new. Studies published in 2013 and 2022—both in peer-reviewed journals—found lead and cadmium in synthetic hair products sold in Nigeria. The Consumer Reports study shows that Black people in the U.S. are not exempt from these same exposures. These findings are not isolated or incidental. They are part of a pattern.
And what concerns me most is the cumulative burden. Synthetic hair is just one exposure source. But we also have to consider the air we breathe, the water we drink, the products we use daily. All of it contributes to our total chemical load. For already overburdened communities, even small additional exposures can matter.
Is more research needed? Absolutely. But let me be clear: a lack of evidence is not an excuse for inaction. We shouldn’t wait until the damage is done to care. If we know something may be harmful, especially something as well-established as lead, we must act with urgency.
As a scientist and a Black woman who has used some of these products myself, I care deeply about this issue. I will continue to advocate for safer products, better testing, and more accountability.
Because at the end of the day: we deserve better.
