Most things are chemical. “Natural” soaps still require sodium or potassium hydroxide (lye) for saponification. Yes, they are better than soaps that use synthetic emulsifiers such as SLS and SLES, but they can never be completely natural. That’s like saying that all alcohols are bad for the skin and drying, when in fact certain alcohols (e.g. cetyl alcohol) are actually humectants!

I agree with the harmful effects or and avoid the synthetic emulsifiers and preservatives, but no complete product can be without any preservative unless refrigerated and stored only up to 2 weeks for home use. Vitamin E and rosemary extract are common natural preservatives, but they are not broad spectrum, only antioxidant, so do not protect against fungal or bacterial growth, only prevent the oils from going rancid. The only reason HTY Gold wouldn’t contain any is that palm oil is a natural source of tocotrienols as well as tocopherols (Vitamin E and similar) and contains no water. Now onto the water issue.

Water is the source of life! Good products don’t just coat or absorb into the skin to nourish it, but help the skin retain moisture, which is often by binding water to oil and to the skin through emulsifiers and humectants. Unless you have extremely dry or cracked and callused skin that you don’t mind remaining greasy for a while, water is necessary in lotions! Butters, salves, and balms are a different story, but they are specifically made to target problem areas, such as cracked heels or chapped skin or sun/wind burn, where a protective coating is necessary to avoid irritation while the skin’s protective horny layer (outer layer that is comprised of DEAD skin cells) is rebuilt. Otherwise, water nourishes and increases spreadability of the product, and skin DOES need to breathe (which palm oil does not allow) and receive oxygen to help itself regenerate and regain elasticity, which would help the “crepe skin” that many commenters mention. Thus the implication that the water just “evaporates” off, which makes other products bad products, is misleading and irresponsible!

Regardless of someone’s interpretation of the comments, the point is that using misleading descriptions in order to sell an exorbitantly overpriced product is bad form and unethical.

“First, it implies that regular lotions are bad for your skin just because they contain chemicals.”

But does it, or is that a sensationalized interpretation?

“Second, saying that regular lotions contain water that just “evaporates off your skin” implies that regular lotions don’t work at all”

Does it really imply that regular lotions don’t work AT ALL? Could it simply be implying that they may not be as effective as ones that don’t?

“Look at the ingredients they are made with chemicals, water and preservatives. The water in these creams evaporate off of your skin and leave you with chemicals that can actually harm your skin.”

…you: it implies that regular lotions are bad for your skin just because they contain chemicals”

But don’t some of them in fact leave chemicals that can be harmful to your skin? Doesn’t this happen? Certainly when it does no one can agrue it’s a good thing.

“something is bad just because it’s a chemical is ridiculous; there are good chemicals and bad chemicals.”

but isn’t it pretty well known that many lotions are there do contain bad chemicals?

You’ve made an entire case against it based heavily on what you think they’re inferring. Your argument would hold little weight if your interpretations are incorrect.

This reminds me of quote from an email exchange Steve Jobs had recently with a critic, he ended it with:

“By the way what have you done that’s so great? Do you create anything, or just criticize others work and belittle their motivations?”