Abortion law in context, from the perspective of a Texan
Kristen argues that a battle for political power and control lies behind the most recent abortion ban in Texas, and considers the implications of this for women and underserved populations worldwide.
Content warning: this article discusses abortion
Abortion is a touchy subject that can often elicit a broad spectrum of reactions, both from public health professionals and lay voters alike. An understood silence is even more real and raw in my home state of Texas, a place where abortion law has taken centre stage in a national debate about the role of religion in government, women’s rights, and healthcare quality. However, the pursuit of restricting women’s bodily autonomy is not so much a moral battle, as Texas legislators may like you to believe, as it is a struggle over a rapidly changing culture.
Image credit: Unsplash
When people ask, I like to describe Texas as a microcosm for all the political tension currently unfolding in the United States (US), not unlike trends in the United Kingdom (UK), France, and other countries. It’s a state that is rapidly expanding, diversifying, and simultaneously attempting to hold onto its identity. These themes appear to conflict many long-term residents, and a fierce defence of tradition, homogeneity, and intolerance has taken hold of a swath of voters. The most recent result of attempts to uphold reactionary values within the laws of the state is the Texas Heartbeat Act (Senate Bill 8), signed into law by the governor Greg Abbott on the 1 September this year, which bans abortions six weeks after conception. This bill is the most restrictive abortion law of the century, and openly defies the legal precedents set by Roe v. Wade in 1973 (a legal case in which the US Supreme Court ruled that a state law banning abortions was unconstitutional), limited though they are. Arguably, one of the most remarkable features of the legislation is that it relies on civil reporting to keep women in check, as opposed to criminal enforcement of the ruling.
Growing up as a woman in Texas has taught me many things. Chief among them is resilience, an appreciation for cultural diversity, and the belief that I can achieve anything with a hardworking spirit. However, the state’s restrictive laws placed on female freedom have defied these values, and mandated the loss of opportunity for many women, especially women of colour. Unfortunately, the novel abortion ban is one of several laws passed by the state government that reduces the freedom of its people. While the Texas legislature was drafting Senate Bill 8, it was simultaneously constructing regulations to restrict voting rights. Senate Bill 1, signed into law on 7 September, reduces the validity of mail-in voting, shutters 24/7 polling stations, and grants free movement to partisan poll watchers (volunteers who observe the election process) in voting locations. All of these restrictions target the novel initiatives developed by Harris County to facilitate voting in the 2020 presidential election. This encompassed the state’s largest and most diverse city of Houston and primarily impacted voters of colour. By passing both of these laws, Texas legislature has effectively revoked the legal rights of women of colour to receive an abortion, and to vote freely and easily.
“Texas legislature has effectively revoked the legal rights of women of colour to receive an abortion, and to vote freely and easily.”
While Republican lawmakers may refute their desire to dismantle the rights of minority groups within Texas voting pools, the restrictive abortion law currently in place is clearly not an attempt to protect unborn children. If that were the case, it would have been accompanied by sweeping child support mandates, day-care stipends, and mandatory paid parental leave. Furthermore, if the law represented the legislators’ belief that all life is sacred, they would be applying equally vigorous restrictions to gun ownership, eliminating the death penalty, and funnelling government funds towards public health measures and education. Instead, the highly religious language used to justify the ban is simply an attempt to consolidate power through the mobilisation of evangelical voters. The US prides itself on religious freedom, and reduced government involvement in matters that involve personal beliefs. However, when it comes to maintaining a significant portion of your voter base and eliminating the power of your opposition—anything is fair game.
Image credit: Unsplash
Because political complexity has created such tangible tension in Texas, it would be inaccurate to paint these events as straightforward racist acts against a large proportion of Texas residents, although their repercussions certainly have that effect. Rather, they represent the last dying breaths of a government that no longer represents the people. Texas republicans have played every move at their disposal to maintain power, including gerrymandering the most diverse portions of primarily left-leaning cities, passing the aforementioned restrictive voting laws, and mobilising evangelical values to support their claim to moral supremacy. However, Texas is changing, much like the rest of the world. The population is becoming increasingly youthful, and Texans of Hispanic heritage are set to comprise the largest demographic group in the state by 2022. These populations tend to swing left, a fact that was exemplified during the 2020 presidential election where only slightly less than half of the state voted for Joe Biden—the greatest turnout of blue votes since the state switched to red in 1980 during the election of Ronald Reagan. Reactionary representatives can see writing on the wall: it won’t be long before Texas becomes at least a toss-up state, much like Florida, where election turnover is high, and leadership is diverse.
“Restrictive abortion laws do not stand alone, and Texas’ inability to release its hold on women’s freedom is, in reality, an expression of a fear of change.”
Finally, the US Supreme Court—the highest court in the land—has done nothing to protect women and their rights against the draconian rules laid out within Senate Bill 8. Even though the court could choose to temporarily suspend the law while it considers the bill’s legality, a 5-4 decision permitted the ruling to move forward without challenge. Although it now appears the court will reconsider this position, and likely rule in favour of abortion providers, this slow action has left hundreds of women exposed to the risks of unsafe abortions and the “civil servants” hell-bent on reporting and punishing their private actions. I’m fortunate enough to now live in a country where abortions are safe and legal, but my heart breaks for other Texan women who cannot say the same, and whose government refuses to protect them. Restrictive abortion laws do not stand alone, and Texas’ inability to release its hold on women’s freedom is, in reality, an expression of a fear of change. Sadly, the reflections of a faltering democracy afflict not only Texas, or the US; Europe is well on its way to a political schism of its own. In what other ways will scapegoated women, minorities, and immigrants suffer? Illegalised abortion is simply a signpost on the road toward the erosion of human rights in the name of power.
The truth about sunscreen: harmful products and safer alternatives
Kristen explores the expanding science behind one of our favorite forms of skincare, sunscreen, and shares her recommendations on the ones to get and ones to stay away from.
Summer may be over but, even in rainy England, sun rays can still cause daily skin damage in both light and dark complexions. However, our strongest protector against ultraviolet (UV) radiation may not be on our side. Sunscreen—a ubiquitous public health measure that supposedly prevents malignant melanoma development—is perhaps not as safe for application as once thought, according to recent studies by the Environmental Working Group (EWG). The organisation’s work focuses on compiling scientific research into comprehensible information for the lay consumer—putting knowledge and purchasing power back in the hands of its readers. I have utilised the EWG’s research in order to rate some of the most popular brand-name sunscreens, and recommend alternatives if their ingredients aren’t up to par. All of the information for these rankings was sourced from the EWG’s sunscreen listings, and more detailed reporting can be found on their website.
Image credit: Unsplash
First, what exactly is the problem with contemporary sunscreens? Unfortunately, sunscreens containing the industry-standard chemicals oxybenzone and homosalate were declared unsafe at current levels by the European Commission. These ingredients were linked to hormonal disruption and can be detected in blood samples up to several weeks after disuse, according to the Food and Drug Administration. These particles break down in the sun, rendering the protective effects of sunscreen void, and they contribute to up to 15% of formula composition. Currently, the recommended level of these chemicals, based on European Commission data, should exceed no more than 2.2% oxybenzone and 1.4% homosalate. Not only are toxic ingredients contributing to the ineffectiveness of sunscreen options, but sun protection factor (SPF) levels are highly unreliable as well. High levels of SPF are often preferred by consumers, as they indicate a stronger level of protection against the sun’s harmful UV rays. However, the SPF level only indicates a product’s ability to protect against UV-B rays and not against other forms of UV rays that are largely responsible for premature aging and cancer. Naturally, when reaching for a product with high SPF, the consumer assumes they are protected from the sun for longer and may forgo more frequent application. Therefore, both the limited protective scope of SPF and a false sense of security are contributing to a lack of effective measures against UV rays and skin deterioration. The two issues highlighted here are only a few of the many problems associated with industry standard sunscreens, and consumer awareness will be key in changing the legislation that governs these products.
“The limited protective scope of SPF and a false sense of security are contributing to a lack of effective measures against UV rays and skin deterioration.”
Second, why is this information relevant to you? In the last five years, as the beauty industry has experienced massive growth, sunscreen has become even more popular as a mechanism to prevent premature aging for those with light and dark complexions alike. In fact, preventing UV rays from harming the skin is truly the only way to slow the natural aging process. As a result of increased marketing, celebrity influencers, and cultural beauty standards, daily sunscreen use is more popular than ever. While this shift in grooming habits is undoubtedly a good thing, for reasons discussed above, choosing the right brand and formula can be paramount to future health outcomes and cancer rates. In the following section, I will assess three of the most popular sunscreen products in the United Kingdom, according to the EWG’s standards, and recommend two alternatives. The EWG’s rating system contrasts the potential harm of ingredients with SPF protection in order to derive a product score between 1 and 10; 1 being the best possible product and 10 being the most harmful.
Number One: CeraVe Facial Moisturising Lotion, SPF 30
CeraVe has long been valued as a skincare giant, both for its simple ingredients and sensitive skin-friendly formulas. However, its most popular sunscreen product, a light lotion designed for daily morning use, scores fairly low according to EWG standards. Not only does it contain homosalate at 10%, but its SPF protection against UV-A rays is also extremely minimal. Overall, this product garners a cumulative score of 4—pretty ineffective, but not horribly toxic.
Image credit: Unsplash
Number Two: La Roche-Posay Anthelios 60 Cooling Water Sunscreen Lotion, SPF 60
Another industry giant, La Roche-Posay, benefits from the French reputation and is a top sunscreen seller. Unfortunately, the extremely high SPF value is likely to trick users into thinking they’re well protected against all UV rays, and the formula contains oxybenzone at 3.9%, a chemical linked repeatedly to endocrine disruption and allergic reactions. Sadly, this fan favourite lands with an abysmal score of 7—avoid at all costs.
Number Three: Murad Environmental Shield City Skin Age Defense Mineral Sunscreen Lotion, SPF 50
For our final industry contender we have Murad, a high-end skincare brand but, unfortunately in this case, the high price tag does not buy a better product. Although Murad does have some better scoring skincare products, this formula was chosen specifically for the marketing. Not only does the brand suggest their product slows aging and limits the effects of environmental factors, but they also indicate their formula has natural “mineral” ingredients. This could not be further from the truth—the natural mineral content is minimal and in fact the primary active ingredient, Retinyl Palmitate (RP), has been linked to reproductive disruption and some cancers. RP sits next to other toxic chemicals in the ingredient list, including oxybenzone and homosalate. Ultimately, the product scores a solid 7—stay away!
Image credit: Unsplash
Ready for some good news? There are better options! The EWG’s website lists hundreds of strong scoring brands and formulas, here are a couple. The two products selected here are designed for everyone, and purport that they will not leave a whitecast on darker complexions.
Number Four: 100% Pure Tomato Lycopene Moisturiser, SPF 20
This product utilises the natural effects of Lycopene to aid in the protection against all forms of UV rays, for half the price of Murad’s listing. Furthermore, the primary active ingredients zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are especially robust in the face of harsh UV rays and pose limited threats to hormone balance and bioaccumulation. Finally, there’s not a trace of oxybenzone or homosalate in the ingredient list, and the SPF level remains responsibly low. Overall, this product has secured a solid, near perfect, score of 2.
Number Five: AKT Therapy Elemental Sun Balm, SPF 30
Our last product is arguably the best, relying on the proven effectiveness of zinc oxide as one of only six ingredients. Furthermore, the honest SPF rating keeps consumers safe and protected against all forms of UV rays. Ultimately, this product has earned a number 1 score compared to all other formulas and is a great option for those searching for a clean and powerful sunscreen.