| Book Review | The American Historical Review, 111.4

You have not been recognized as a subscriber to the AHR online. About 279 words from this article are provided below; about 562 words remain.

If you are a individual member of the American Historical Association, you may:: • login here if you have already registered for online access.; • Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
• Set up your online account for the first time. AHA members can go to the AHA individual membership section to locate their member numbers.
If you are not a member of the American Historical Association, you can:: • Join the AHA and receive many member benefits including print and electronic issues of the American Historical Review.
• Purchase a research pass to gain two hour access to the entire History Cooperative web site. You will have full access to current issues of the American Historical Review (104.3-present). Note: the Research Pass does not provide access to JSTOR's holdings of the American Historical Review.
Instititutions can:: • Subscribe to this journal and receive print and electronic issues.
• Activate your existing subscription so that we recognize your IP number ranges.

| Book Review | The American Historical Review, 111.4 | The History Cooperative

Book Review

Canada and the United States

Gwen Kay. Dying to be Beautiful: The Fight for Safe Cosmetics. (Women, Gender, and Health.) Columbus: Ohio State University Press. 2005. Pp. xii, 190. Cloth $64.95, paper $22.95, CD $9.95.
From its catchy title to its concise epilogue, this book explores the fight for safe cosmetics in the United States leading up to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938. Gwen Kay lays the background by reviewing the original 1906 Food, Drink, and Drug legislation, its advocates, and its shortcomings, among which was the omission of cosmetics from Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation, not as an oversight but as one of many concessions the framers intended to rectify through amendment. During the 1920s and 1930s a phenomenal increase in cosmetic use, and its dangers, intensified the need for government supervision.	1
From 1933 to 1938, as the new bill wound its circuitous five-year course through the maze of congressional hearings, delays, and revisions, objections by the opposition paralleled those made in the early 1900s. At first opponents fought tooth and nail to prevent the bill from consideration. They claimed it lacked public support, would create a hardship on manufacturers and their employees, that the market would weed out dangerous products, and self-regulation was the best remedy. When it was evident that some version of the bill would pass, they attempted to emasculate it with compromises and amendments. After the act passed, some of the most pernicious offenders who tried to circumvent the law were prosecuted, but most manufacturers formed a loose coalition with the FDA and health providers to comply with the guidelines without court action.	. . .

There are about 562 more words in this article. Please log in (or, if you are not yet an authorized user, please go to the User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.