Jennifer has a question about using facial cleansers as moisturizers. I’ve heard a dermatologist say to use Aquanil to cleanse and to moisturize any dry patches. I use a product called Cerave as a cleanser and I’m wondering if it’s okay to use that as a moisturizer? I’m worried that using a cleanser/detergent on my face might irritate it or cause redness.”
The Left Brain responds:
I totally agree with you Jen – it doesn’t make sense to leave ANY detergent-containing product on the skin as a moisturizer. Especially one like Aquanil that contains Sodium Lauryl Sulfate. The Cerave product looks like it would be a pretty mild cleanser because it doesn’t contain any of the standard harsh detergents, but some of those ingredients could be irritating too if left in contact with your skin. You’re better off finding a mild lotion and using that to moisturize or using a product like Clarisonic to clean your face.
What’s most puzzling to me is this: why would any dermatologist recommend using a detergent-containing product as a moisturizer when there are so many excellent facial lotions on the market?
Has anyone else in the Beauty Brains community heard this recommendation? Have you tried the Clarisonic system?
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
Maybe the Dermatologist meant to say “Aquaphor” instead. Aquaphor wouldn’t be a good cleanser, but is good to put on dry patches on the face.
aquaphor actually makes a cleanser, or at least they used to. it was beyond moisturizing (in fact, too much for my skin).
I just noticed tonight that there is a product review for this “Aquanil” on the website – http://www.makeupalley.com. it is under product reviews, you may find more information on this product and others experiences with it on this website. One lady said that her Derm. told her it was more mild than Cetphil because of not having propylene glycol but seems like SLS would be more harmful or more harsh. Anyway, just an idea.
Propylene glycol is not going to make a product more harsh. If anything, it will make it more mild. The ingredients in the Aquanil and Cetaphyl are pretty similar. (Fatty alcohols & a lauryl sulfate). Practically, you won’t likely notice a difference.
Sorry, but Aquanil does NOT contain sodium lauryl sulfate(SLS). It contains sodium LAURETH sulfate(SLES). Not sure how they are different but according to the EWG’s website at http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com sodium LAURETH sulfate(SLES) has a safety profile of 1, with 0 being the lowest. Sodium LAURYL SULFATE(SLS) has a safety score of 2. However, the Cerave has parabens in it such as methylparaben, which has a safety score of 4, and polyoxyl 40 stearate, also a 4. Aquanil isn’t perfect but neither are many other products out there.
The truth is that even if something claims to not have SLS, it does contain some SLS if it contains SLES. You make SLES from SLS. The chemical reaction to get there is not 100% so you’re left with a certain amount of SLS no matter what you do.
And while the safety profile of SLES is better than that of SLS, the difference is irrelevant. Both are classified by the EWG as “low hazard”.
And the Aquanil product contains Benzyl Alcohol. Did you see the EWG gives this one a whopping rating of 6! That’s just short of a high hazard.
I don’t put much stock in what the EWG has to say but if you’re going to cherry pick the data, at least make sure you don’t ignore data that conflicts with what you are trying to prove. It reduces your credibility.
Thank you for the reply to my comment. I was just setting the record straight on what was LISTED as ingredients by the manufacturer. Further, I never said Aquanil is perfect and I do know there is benzyl alcohol in it. My comment was based on reading the listed ingredients. If there is still SLS in the ingredients, so be it. But again, the manufacturer does NOT list it as such so as a layperson, I wouldn’t know.
But heck, methylparaben, listed in the Cerave, could possibly also contain sodium methylparaben since they seem to be synonymous, and this gets a safety score of 8, which is a high hazard according to the EWG.
Yes, I am cherry picking the data, and let’s hear what is wrong with the EWG? Look forward to your reply.
As mentioned by Left Brain, Aquanil does not contain Sodium Lauryl Sulphate. It contains a chemically very different surfactant called Sodium Laureth Sulphate. The Laureth is much gentler to the skin but neverthless, no surfactant should be left on the skin.
This is an old one I was reading and I have to take a stand here. Aquanil is way better than Cetaphil. The SLES+Benzyl Alcohol instead of SLS+Propylene Glycol is what makes all the difference to my rosacea and facial psoriasis.
Left Brain,
I love this blog. Love reading the articles (especially the one about the worrisome lack of skepticism and critical thinking going on).
I see no need for you to be so haughty in your comments, however. “If you’re going to cherry pick the data” Or, in another post “So, stop the fear mongering”. You obviously love rationale, logic, and scientific data (as do I, which is one of the reasons I love this blog).
But, if you’re going to act snobby about it, at least respond when someone asks you why you don’t put much stock in the EWG. Otherwise, it reduces your credibility.