top of page
Search
simonahamilton

The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry: Shark Liver Oil

Updated: Nov 19, 2023

Have you ever read ‘shark’ in the ingredient list of skin care products? Time to check again.

by Simona Hamilton


When buying packaged food products, it’s pretty clear that long, hard-to-pronounce, artificial ingredients are best to steer clear of. But in regards to cosmetics, it’s not so simple. To the general consumer, most cosmetic ingredients sound like gibberish, science jargon (when read at all). Even if these convoluted ingredient names are derived from plants or naturally occurring minerals, it’s still unlikely the general buyer knows their scientific name. Squalene, for example, is a typical ingredient found in moisturizers, sunscreens, lipsticks, eyeshadows, perfumes, conditioners and vaccines.²,¹⁴ Most people are unaware of this ingredient and would be shocked to discover that squalene is primarily sourced from the liver of deep-sea sharks.


Interestingly, both squalene and squalane* (its commonly used saturated form) are abundant and naturally occurring organic compounds also found in some seed, vegetable, and fish oils and even make up to 13% of human sebum (oil protecting our skin).¹ Some researchers even believe squalene is naturally occurring in all taxonomic groups worldwide.³ Modern research reveals squalene to have anticancer, antitumor and antioxidant properties alongside being detoxifying and skin hydrating.¹,⁴,⁵,¹⁴ But, due to being odourless and having a long shelf-life, most squalene is used in cosmetics and nutraceuticals.¹ The majority of which is extracted from deep-sea sharks.¹,¹⁴


As squalene is available in various fish, seeds, and plants, cosmetic companies can choose how to promote products containing squalene. For example, why would a company like Maybelline promote ‘Shark Liver Oil’ in its ingredients list if they could remove malevolent connotations by referring to the oil as ‘squalene’? Brazenly highlighting the slaughter of sharks for their oil will likely discourage customers from buying a product. Luckily, Squalene is an uncommon word and holds a minor connotation (assuming the ingredient is read and questioned at all).


Let’s look at an example we may all be familiar with. Omega-3, derived from fish oil, has diverse human health benefits and is used as a supplement for all ages, from infant formula to reducing heart disease for the elderly.¹² Because of its many known benefits, most products containing this oil will promote it, either as omega-3 or fish oil. In the medical realm, however, fish oil is known as DHA or Docosahexaenoic acid, among other names.¹² Generally, consumers only know it as Omega-3 or fish oil and are less likely to buy a product promoting DHA. The point is that cosmetic companies manipulate the language used in marketing to draw attention toward or away from specific aspects of their products. And squalene or Shark Liver Oil is the perfect example. Rather than promoting the oil via its source (i.e. the way companies advertise fish oil), companies purposefully draw the buyer’s attention away from this, rather choosing to refer to the product more subtly.



One of Many Problems within the Cosmetic Industry



We can easily be misguided as consumers buying cosmetic products because, truthfully, the language and numbers squished into an ant-sized format on the back of cosmetic products are simply too difficult to read. And what’s more concerning? The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ‘does not require premarket notification, safety testing, review, or approval of the chemicals used in cosmetic products. The law does not require cosmetic products and ingredients, except for colour additives, to be approved by the FDA before they go on the market.’ ⁶,⁷ Statements like this take away any value from products claiming to be natural, oil-free, chemical-free or non-toxic (among a mosaic of other false claims).


Even when overlooking this major manufacturing loophole, the cosmetic industry is still far from perfect. Even if ‘naturally sourced’ means derived from the natural environment, does that mean it’s ethical? The roots of the cosmetic industry run deep, and the squalene industry represents just one of the root systems that has built our booming cosmetic industry.



Why Should I Care That There is Squalene in My Makeup?



Over 100 years ago, Dr Tsujimoto discovered squalene in the liver of deep-sea sharks, and to this date, extraction from shark liver remains the highest source of the compound.¹ In the ocean, fish maintain buoyancy using an oxygen-filled swim bladder, which stops ocean pressure from pushing fish to deeper depths.¹³ Deep-sea sharks, however, live at depths of 300m – 1500m and maintain their buoyancy with the aid of large, oily livers.⁵ Squalene is a major component of shark liver, comprising between 50%-80% of liver mass.¹⁴ Deep-sea sharks are hunted specifically for this reason, requiring an enormous 3000 sharks to extract 1 ton of squalene oil.⁵,¹⁴ The lineage of today’s sharks is an important group of predatory fish that have survived mass extinctions and even predate the dinosaurs, dating back to 423 million years ago.⁸ Their evolutionary timeline and significance in sustaining ocean food webs surpass what humans can barely comprehend. And yet, over three million deep-sea sharks are killed yearly to extract their livers.¹⁵


Attaining squalene from deep-sea sharks – a term called ‘livering’ – is as equally inhumane and barbaric as shark finning. A meat butcher will sell every muscle and organ from the body of a dead cow, but once a fisherman has removed the liver from a deep-sea shark, its body is thrown back into the ocean, wasted and discarded.⁵ Unfortunately, livering is fast, cheap, and secures an abundance of oil compared to its industry alternatives. Deep-sea sharks, however, are slow-growing animals, producing only one or two offspring at a time.¹⁷ Shark populations are, therefore, suffering much greater losses than they can naturally keep up with. If ‘livering’ continues at such an aggressive pace, scientists are fearful that more species will join the already 50% of deep-sea sharks listed as vulnerable to extinction.⁹ Conservation of these species is still possible if we actively work toward safeguarding deep-sea areas and shark populations. Read my latest article to learn more about the effects of overfishing and changes towards sustainable practices.



There’s Always Hope!



Thankfully, numerous cosmetic companies actively strive to be part of a more sustainable industry. You can find a long list of companies that have pledged not to use shark squalene in their products. And if you do find squalene listed as an ingredient in a product, make sure it reads something like ‘100% plant-derived’.


But the conversation doesn’t end here. If we know shark livering is reducing shark populations and disrupting food webs, what’s the solution? As mentioned, squalene is available in various foods; however, the available quantity depends on the cultivation and extraction methods used. Second to ‘livering’, amaranth seeds contain the highest source of squalene, with one study proving the seed can produce quantities as high as 14.38g per 100g!¹¹ Olive oil also contains high concentrations, and depending on cultivation and extraction methods, concentrations range between 0.7 to 12 g per kilogram of olive oil.¹⁰ Because olive oil contains higher lipid concentrations compared to amaranth seeds, olive oil provides the second largest source of squalene, comprising roughly 40% of the global market.¹⁴ And while this is a hopeful step toward a shark-free industry, extraction from seeds and plants (phytosqualene) is costly.


Phytosqualene production requires specific temperatures, geographies, soil and weather conditions, not to mention the agricultural land required for growing these plants and seeds. One study exposed that one hectare of land is required to produce 50kg of squalene.¹⁶ Nevertheless, the production of phytosqualene has had an overwhelming effect in reducing fishing pressures on deep-sea shark populations. And, thanks to novel research and technological developments in recent years, squalene extraction from microorganisms might completely change the industry as we know it.


Research shows that microorganisms, including yeasts, algae and bacteria, are valuable sources of industry squalene. This is possible due to their high growth rate and the use of genetic engineering in creating optimal environments for growth.¹⁴ As research continues, so does the list of microorganisms capable of producing squalene for the cosmetic and pharmaceutical industries. And, while it will take time to get these technologies, i.e. genetic engineering, to a point where they can support the industry, we are step toward ending the unpardonable slaughter of millions of sharks every year.



Consumers Have a Choice



Science and technology are now advanced enough that it is time we take a step back from the inhumane slaughter of millions of sharks yearly to acquire an oil that has proven abundant in various and more sustainable practices. Indeed, consumers can’t forcibly stop cosmetic companies from hunting sharks or testing on animals, but it is a choice to support these cruel acts. As individuals, we can make conscious and educated decisions about which companies we support. Many of us live with enough options to make the better choice. Prove to the cosmetic industry that consumers can’t be bought as easily as they wish!



Footnotes:

*Squalene has a chemical formula of (C30H50) while squalane slight differs (C30H62).14 Both compounds are used for a variety of pharmaceutical and cosmetic products; however, this article uses the term ‘squalene’ to refer to both oil compounds.



References

  1. Se-Kwon, Kim, and Fatih Karadeniz. “Chapter 14 - Biological Importance and Applications of Squalene and Squalane.” Advances in Food and Nutrition Research, vol. 65, 2012, pp. 223-233, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780124160033000147.

  2. Rob Stewart Foundation. “THERE’S A SHARK IN MY LIPSTICK?!” Rob Stewart Foundation, Rob Stewart Foundation, https://www.robstewartsharkwaterfoundation.org/articles/shark-squalene-in-cosmetics.

  3. Garaiovà, M., and Ivan Hapala. “Squalene: From traditional medicine to modern applications.” Czech Chemical Society, vol. 112, no. 7, 2018, pp. 427-433, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326839647_Squalene_From_traditional_medicine_to_modern_applications.

  4. Das, Bikul, et al. “In vitro cytoprotective activity of squalene on a bone marrow versus neuroblastoma model of cisplatin-induced toxicity: Implications in cancer chemotherapy.” European Journal of Cancer, vol. 39, no. 7, 2003, pp. 2556-25565, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/9022787_In_vitro_cytoprotective_activity_of_squalene_on_a_bone_marrow_versus_neuroblastoma_model_of_cisplatin-induced_toxicity_Implications_in_cancer_chemotherapy.

  5. Patel, Alok, et al. “Microbial genetic engineering approach to replace shark livering for squalene.” Trends in Biotechnology, vol. 40, no. 10, 2022, pp. 1261-1273, https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0167-7799%2822%2900076-2.

  6. Congressional Research Service. “FDA Regulation of Cosmetics and Personal Care Products.” Congressional Research Service, Congressional Research Service, https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R42594.pdf.

  7. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. “Small Businesses & Homemade Cosmetics: Fact Sheet.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/resources-industry-cosmetics/small-businesses-homemade-cosmetics-fact-sheet#1.

  8. Ferretti, Francesco, et al. “Patterns and ecosystem consequences of shark declines in the ocean.” Ecology Letters, vol. 13, no. 8, 2010, pp. 1055-1071, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01489.x.

  9. Roth, Annie. “There might be shark in your sunscreen.” National Geographic, National Geographic, 24 July 2018, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/sharks-news-cosmetics-squalene-health?loggedin=true&rnd=1700197294576.

  10. Caballero, Benjamin, editor. Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition. Second ed., vol. 10, Maryland, USA, Elsevier Science, 2003. 10 vols. Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition, https://www.sciencedirect.com/referencework/9780122270550/encyclopedia-of-food-sciences-and-nutrition#book-description.

  11. Srivastava, Shweta, et al. “Effect of processing on squalene content of grain amaranth fractions.” Journal of Cereal Science, vol. 100, 2021. Effect of processing on squalene content of grain amaranth fractions, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S073352102100059X.

  12. P, John. “FISH OIL.” RxList, RxList, https://www.rxlist.com/fish_oil/generic-drug.htm.

  13. Science Direct. “Swim Bladder.” Science Direct, Science Direct, https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/swim-bladder.

  14. Mendes, Adélia, et al. “From Sharks to Yeasts: Squalene in the Development of Vaccine Adjuvants.” Pharmaceuticals, vol. 15, no. 3, 2022, p. 265, https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/pharmaceuticals/pharmaceuticals-15-00265/article_deploy/pharmaceuticals-15-00265-v3.pdf?version=1645691546.

  15. Ducos, Laure, et al. “Shark in Our Beauty Creams.” Bloom, 2015. Beauty and the Beast: Shark in Our Beauty Creams, http://www.bloomassociation.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/squalane-bloom-english-1.pdf.

  16. Ciriminna, Rosaria, et al. “Catalytic Hydrogenation of Squalene to Squalane.” American Chemical Society, vol. 18, no. 9, 2014, pp. 1110-1115. Catalytic Hydrogenation of Squalene to Squalane, https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/op5002337.

  17. Norse, Elliott A., et al. “Sustainability of deep-sea fisheries.” Marine Policy, vol. 36, no. 2, 2012, pp. 307-320. Sustainability of deep-sea fisheries, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0308597X11001102.








Comments


bottom of page