Aluminum-Free

Introducing "The Hall of Fame of Things That Will Kill You (Sometimes)"

The thirteenth element in the periodic table was discovered by Hans Christian Ørsted in 1825, when the Danish physicist managed to isolate a few precious grams of aluminum from aluminum chloride. For most of the 19th century, aluminum was more valuable than gold, so rare and difficult to extract that Napoleon III served his most honored guests with aluminum cutlery while lesser dignitaries made do with gold utensils.

Aluminum is also going to kill you. Sometimes.

I’m at CVS on a Saturday morning as Hootie and his band of Blowfish tell me they only wanna be with me, which is comforting. It’s like they know I’m here to decide what sort of man I want to present to the world for the next 2-4 weeks.

Do I want to be Swagger? Timber? Desperado? Ambassador? Krakengärd? These are Old Spice deodorant scents, and just reading their names means you’ve been subscribed to the Liver King’s monthly bone broth newsletter. Then there’s Bearglove, which raises uncomfortable questions about what happened to the bear.

Other sensible names mock me with their restraint. Fresh. Clean. Original. What am I, a man with taxes and a bedtime? Someone who settles for “Original” when I could smell like I crushed a kraken beneath my morning kettlebell swing?

Then I see it, written above scents like Pure Sport, Captain and Fiji:

Aluminum-Free

Blood rushes from my aluminum-filled cheeks. How long have I been rolling and spraying pure, unadulterated ALUMINUM onto my armpits? Decades, certainly. I’m doomed.

I scan the shelves again. Surprisingly, some brands flaunt the presence of aluminum as a bonus. One goes as far as suggesting its sweat protection is powered by Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex. Yum.

Then I remember last night's leftover pizza, wrapped in the devil's parchment itself. How long have I been slow-cooking my internal organs with metallic death sheets?

Wait—has there been aluminum-free aluminum foil this whole time?

I'm probably 47% aluminum by now. Should I call my mom? Should I call a lawyer?

How We Learned to Stop Sweating and Love the Fear

The aluminum panic started with good intentions. In 1976, researchers found elevated aluminum levels in the brains of Alzheimer's patients. The study was small, preliminary, and raised more questions than answers. Later, cancer researchers began investigating whether aluminum compounds in antiperspirants might be absorbed through the skin and affect breast tissue, since aluminum was being applied near the breast area daily. Follow-up research largely debunked any meaningful connection. The Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation, American Cancer Society, and National Cancer Institute all maintain that aluminum exposure from consumer products poses no significant health risk.

But science moves slowly. Marketing moves fast.

Within a decade, "aluminum-free" had transformed from medical curiosity to premium positioning. Brands discovered they could charge more for what they didn't put in than what they did. The transformation was so gradual that most consumers never noticed they were being taught what to fear.

What started as antiperspirant quietly became "natural protection." Clinical-strength became "gentle formula." We went from wanting products that worked to wanting products that wouldn't hurt us, even when there was no evidence they ever could.

Meanwhile, Degree was putting "Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly" right on the front of their package like they were proud of it. Not buried in the fine print, but displayed where you can't miss it. While Old Spice was running away from aluminum, Degree was running toward it at full speed.

Turns out they figured something out. Some people want the strongest possible antiperspirant because they have a job interview at 1:00 PM in July. To those customers, aluminum isn't a scary chemical. It's the thing that actually works. Aluminum compounds are what stop you from sweating, and if you need to not sweat, you want aluminum compounds.

So now the deodorant aisle has three types of people. The aluminum-free people who pay extra for "natural protection" and accept that they might sweat a little. The aluminum-maximalist people who pay extra for "clinical strength" and embrace chemistry for results.

And then there are people like me with the unmitigated gall to enter a CVS without a PhD in organic chemistry. We only want to smell good and not die.

Brands figured out they could sell to different anxieties using the same ingredient. But they also figured out they could create entirely new anxieties for people who never had them in the first place.

The Economics of Absence

"Free-from" marketing operates on beautiful logic: you cannot compete on infinite absence. There are millions of things not in your deodorant, but only a select few get the marketing treatment. The ingredient must sound scary enough to avoid but common enough that avoiding it feels like an upgrade.

Aluminum hit the sweet spot. Scientific enough to seem threatening, pronounceable enough to remember, preliminary research scary enough to reference, but not enough definitive science to completely debunk. Perfect.

This created what economists might call manufactured demand based on manufactured anxiety. Consumers felt educated and empowered, paying premium prices for products that often performed identically to their "conventional" counterparts. Market success became proof of consumer need, regardless of whether that need was real.

The Hall of Fame of Things That Will Kill You (Sometimes)

What started as a simple deodorant purchase sent me down a research spiral about ingredient fears and marketing. The following "Hall of Fame" represents my own deep dive into the science behind common food and product anxieties. I've tried to present each topic with nuance — acknowledging both the legitimate science and the manufactured panic — but I'm not a scientist or medical professional. This is one writer's attempt to make sense of conflicting information. Do your own research, consult actual experts, and remember that the most dangerous thing in your bathroom might just be the overconfidence that comes from reading too many studies at 2:00 AM.

1. Sulfates - The sudsy villains that made shampoo foam beautifully for decades before someone decided that luxurious lather equals harsh damage. The same sodium lauryl sulfate that creates those satisfying bubbles got rebranded as a "stripping agent" that would destroy your hair's natural oils. Sulfate-free shampoos now command premium prices for the privilege of less foam and virtually identical cleaning power. The irony? The FDA considers SLS safe for use in cosmetics when used briefly and rinsed off, and it's been used in baby shampoos for generations specifically because it's gentle.

2. Parabens - These preservatives kept our lotions from growing festering colonies of bacteria until a 2004 study found trace amounts in breast tissue. The research never established that parabens caused anything harmful — just that they were present, like finding breadcrumbs in a kitchen and concluding bread causes house fires. The FDA and major health organizations still consider parabens safe, but "paraben-free" became a multi-billion dollar beauty category practically overnight. Now we pay extra for products that might spoil faster.

3. Gluten - Here's where marketing brilliance meets genuine medical complexity. About 1% of the population has celiac disease and must avoid gluten to prevent serious health complications. But research also shows that about 6% of Americans have non-celiac gluten sensitivity, a legitimate condition where gluten triggers symptoms without the intestinal damage seen in celiac disease. So there are actually 7% of people who have medical reasons to avoid gluten. But somehow, the gluten-free market exploded into a multi-billion dollar industry built largely on the other 93% of Americans who were convinced wheat protein was dietary poison for everyone.

4. MSG - Monosodium glutamate has enhanced food flavor since 1908, when Japanese chemist Kikunae Ikeda isolated the source of "umami" flavor from kombu (seaweed). Then came a 1968 letter from Dr. Robert Ho Man Kwok to the New England Journal of Medicine describing symptoms he experienced after eating Chinese food—headaches and nausea that he speculated might be caused by cooking wine, salt, or possibly MSG. Just one doctor's dinner experience that launched decades of xenophobic panic and "No MSG" signs covering restaurant windows.

According to Harvard Medical School, “In the 1990s, the FDA asked the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) to look into the safety of MSG. FASEB concluded that MSG is safe.” What's clear is that the widespread panic far exceeds any demonstrated risk — a perfect example of how one anecdotal report can become entrenched cultural fear despite scientific reassurance.

5. High Fructose Corn Syrup - This became America's dietary boogeyman despite being chemically nearly identical to table sugar. HFCS is typically 55% fructose and 45% glucose, while table sugar is 50% fructose and 50% glucose. Research suggests fructose metabolism may be more problematic than glucose—fructose is processed primarily by the liver and doesn't trigger the same satiety signals, potentially contributing to overeating. But here's the thing: this applies to all fructose, whether it comes from corn syrup, cane sugar, agave nectar, or honey. The panic specifically demonized corn syrup while giving table sugar a free pass, despite both posing the same potential metabolic concerns. Now "made with real sugar" sodas charge premium prices for swapping one form of fructose-glucose combination for another nearly identical one, banking on consumers who learned to fear corn but trust sugar cane. The real issue isn't the source — it's that Americans consume too much added sugar, period.

6. Phthalates - These plasticizers make everything from nail polish to shower curtains flexible. When studies suggested potential hormone effects, "phthalate-free" became a premium selling point. The research is genuinely mixed. Harvard researchers argue phthalates should be banned, citing links to learning and behavioral disorders. Cleveland Clinic calls them "hormone-disrupting chemicals" but notes research on human effects is limited. The FDA maintains it has no evidence phthalates in cosmetics pose safety risks. Unlike other entries on this list, the phthalate concern has legitimate scientific backing — even if experts disagree on the actual risk level.

7. BPA - Bisphenol A research suggested potential hormone disruption, leading to the "BPA-free" plastic revolution. This was actually a reasonable response to legitimate safety concerns — unlike many items on this list, the BPA panic had solid scientific grounding. The problem? Most BPA-free products just substituted BPS or BPF—chemically similar compounds with even less safety research. We traded a chemical with decades of study for chemicals with virtually no long-term data, then paid extra for the privilege. It's a perfect example of how addressing one legitimate concern can create new, potentially worse problems when marketing outpaces science.

8. Fluoride - Added to water supplies since the 1940s, fluoride has been one of the great public health successes in preventing tooth decay. The CDC calls water fluoridation one of the ten greatest public health achievements of the 20th century. But fluoride-free toothpaste markets itself to parents worried about "chemical exposure." While major health organizations maintain that current fluoride levels are safe and effective, there's ongoing scientific debate about optimal dosing, particularly regarding potential effects on developing brains. The fluoride-free market capitalizes on this uncertainty, often without acknowledging that the concentrations in toothpaste and water supplies have decades of safety data behind them.

9. Petroleum-derived ingredients - The beauty industry turned "petroleum-free" into a selling point, as if the molecular source of an ingredient determines its safety. Petroleum jelly has been safely moisturizing skin for over 150 years. But slap "petroleum-derived" on a label and suddenly customers flee toward "plant-based" alternatives that often perform worse and cost more.

10. Sodium - Salt became the enemy when research correctly linked high sodium intake to hypertension in sensitive individuals. People with high blood pressure genuinely benefit from low-sodium diets. But the "low-sodium" food industry took this targeted medical advice and applied it to everyone, creating products so aggressively salt-reduced that they taste like cardboard while loading them with sugar and other flavor enhancers to compensate.

Real scientific breakthroughs have made our lives measurably better: sunscreen prevents skin cancer, vaccines eliminated polio, and preservatives keep our food from poisoning us. The problem is “studies show" became marketing gold, even when the studies were commissioned by the company making the claim. If enough people buy aluminum-free deodorant, retailers stock more aluminum-free options. Market success becomes proof of necessity, regardless of whether that necessity was manufactured.

Maybe soon an AI tool will tell us which fears are real and which ones came from a marketing department. Point your phone at any product label and get instant access to every study conducted on its ingredients. Even better if the AI tool is trained on your biological makeup, medical history and allergies.

Then again, who's manipulating the app? It's turtles all the way down.

---

Back at the pharmacy, I chose the Old Spice because I had a four-dollar-off coupon.

For now, I'll keep wrapping leftover pizza in aluminum foil. Wondering why YouTube thinks I want to watch Kill Tony clips. And thinking that maybe paying attention in science class could have saved me a lot of anxiety.