itt ae ad ets oe Bed

 

Wiles Co yoy e os Reel

Next to godliness: A brush with makeup

> Three ways to clean your makeup brushes, and why you should do it

Sophie Isbister
Senior Columnist

 

fyou're a person whe wears makeup

and you currently wash your makeup
brushes regularly, gor! for you! Reael
on anyway, because in this article | will
outline a few budget-friendly ways te
hlast your brushes free of caked-on
concealer, foundation, and powder, If
you're a makeup aficionada, ane you
don't clean your brushes, please don't
feel badd about your failure te freshen
up your arsenal; we've all been there,
Nobody ever popped out of the worl
knowing how to clean absolutely
everything, We're all in this together!

Brushes need to be washed regularly
hecause they are used on the delicate
skinaf your face, Their dense bristles
and fine hairs can harbour bacteria that,
if not cleaned away, can sneak inte your
pores and cause breakouts, Most beauty
experts recommend a quick clean of
your brushes after cach use, using a daily
hrush cleanser, Extra-gunky brushes
or beauty blenders, like the kinel you
would use for liquidl foundation, necel
adcep-cleaning once a week, All other
brushes need a bi-monthly cleaning,

For this article, | tested three
different cleaning methods using
preducts found in the drugstore, or items
lalready had around the house, There
is no nece to break the hank on faney
silicon mats or drop sgo.on an automatic
hrush-cleaner, Affordable ane casy-to-
find products will work just as well,

The first product | uscel was Quo's
spray-on brush cleanser, You use this
preduct by wetting the bristles of your
hrush and then spraying the product onte
the brush, Rub the brush inte the palm of
your hand te work up a lather, then rinse

The fatal frequency of

the brush clean under lukewarm water.

I find that I need to use a lot
of this product to get the desired
lather, and it is not particularly
useful for my foundation brushes.

Solid cleansers are growing in
popularity these days, so [ picked
up another Quo product to use for
this article —the Gentle Goat-Milk
Cleansing Balm, which is around $15 at
the drugstore. You use them by simply
wetting the brush, rubbing it on the
balm until you see the dirt lift from
the brush, and then rinsing the brush
clean under water. You also need ta
rinse the surface of the balm clean so
it's ready for the next time you use it,

I loved the smell of this product, and
found it was very effective at cleaning
eyeshadow and blush brushes, It was more
effective than the spray at cleaning my
foundation brushes—but still not great.

love DIY cleaning products, so
when | read that people were cleaning
their brushes with coconut oil and
Dawn dish soap, I had to see what all
the fuss was about. The concoction
was easy enough to make: Graha bowl
and mix a tablespoon of coconut oil,
acupof water, and a squirt of Dawn
dish soap (Dawn is recommended
because it’s less abrasive than other
detergents). Microwave the mixture for
a minute or so, until the oil melts,

Onee you have your DIY cleanser
made, start giving your brushes a
little bath in it. Swirl the bristles
around, and then rub them gently as
all the excess product squeezes out.
Then rinse thoroughly under running
water until the water runs clear.

This was by far my favourite
method, and the only thing that got my
foundation brush completely clean

As with all methods, once your
brushes are clean, reshape the bristles,
and place them ona hand towel to
fully dry, preferably overnight,

l hope you learned a bit trom
this column, and happy cleaning! If

> New study in marine pollution proves problem worse than we thought

Brittney MacDonald
Life & Style Editor

 

new study published on February 16 in
he online journal Frontiers in Marine
Science claims that the microplastics
problem that environimentalists have
heen warning us about for the last 1 or
so years is far worse than anyone could
have imagined—especially for Canada,
The study, Frequeney of Microplastics
in Mesopelagic Fishes from the Northwest
Atlantic, combines the research efforts of
8 different marine scientists from around
the world, and claims that over 73 per
fish in the Northwest

 

cent of mesopele
Atlantic contain microplastics, This is
a steep increase comparcd to previous
findings that claimed that it was closer te
percent in the North Atlantic and 35
percent in the northern Pacific Ocean,
Mesopelagic fish are net typically
consumed by humans, but they are a fooel
source for various other fish that are, as
well as several marine species that are vital
to the marine ecosystem, The reason why
these findings are sa concerning is that
the microplastic fragments can absorh
chemical pollutants, creating a toxicity
within the fish itself, This toxicity can then

transfer to any predator that consumes
the fish, which can then indirectly
contaminate various seafood meant for
human consumption, The microplastic
issue could also cause a global population
drop in mesopelagic fish. As more and
more fish are affected, the inflammation
caused by the microplastics will

result in reduced feeding, weight

loss, and eventual starvation.

One of the possibilities for the
number differential between previous
studies and this one is the inclusion of
plastic bres used in textiles. Previous
studies have eliminated the fibres on the
grounds of possible contamination from
the lab space where the research was
done. However, careful consideration
of this, and extensive examination of
the filters used within their labs ensure
that ne contagion from the space
occurred, According to the study, “As we
did not observe any fibres on the filters
used as blanks, we argue that fibres do
indeed make up a large proportion of
microplastics and are not of airborne
nature.” Essentially this means that
the majority of the bres found within
the fish they examined existed in their
systems prior to the fish being caught

 

you have any comments, questions,
or ideas for topies you'd like to see
covered in my cleaning column, email
lifeandstyle@theotherpress.ca

microplastics

 

and examined forensically, The study
goes on to say that the amount of

mastic fbres present in their samples

is most likely duc te North America’s
dependence on washing machines, as well
as our fashion industry's use of synthetic
fabrics, The existence of these fibres is
found far less in more under-developed
countries where handwashing clothing
and natural fabrics are more common,

The microplastics issue has been
on the global radar for some time now,
and has prompted many countries te
work towards a complete ban of them
by 2020. Perhaps these latest findings
will push Canada closer to making that
areality, Ifyou would like to read the
study for yourself, it is available online
for free at https://www.trontiersin.org/
articles /10.3389/fmars.2018.00039/full

Protos by Sophie Isbister