I'm not too impressed with that link.
Gary Moss's complaints about the programme appear to be flawed as much as he claims the programme is.
I didn't see a claim in the programme that women absorb 5lb of cosmetics every year, I think the claim was in a lifetime.
He says "skin irritant" is an unscientific term however the programme was directed at lay people and he doesn't come up with the correct term he thinks they need to use. Cosmetic companies routinely test their products to measure skin irritation, that may not be the scientific term for it but it's certainly the correct way to understand what their methods are trying to achieve.
He says this:
"Domestic cleaning products contain surfactants (similar to soap), and may cause damage to the stratum corneum barrier of the skin. However, because your skin replaces itself very quickly, eight days without exposure to these chemicals is unlikely to make any difference"
Entirely missing the point that the criticism isn't the damage done to the stratum corneum but the fact that because of this damage chemicals can be absorbed into the body. Also he obviously doesn't do much housework because an awful lot of people don't leave it for eight days for their skin to recover. Why do we even need products that cause this level of damage?
Nowhere in his criticisms does he address the main point of the programme, that when we use these products we absorb toxic substances into our blood. Substances which can then be measured scientifically.
I've noticed that the chemical industry PR people have been out in force after this programme, quite surprisingly given that most viewers haven't paid much attention to it. Anybody would think they were trying to shut down public debate.