Melissa asks…Could you please explain to me why you guys slam any natural product that someone asks a question about? I understand that whatever i put on my skin gets absorbed into my body through my pores and isn’t it true that products that are all natural will protect my overall health? I am very confused on the matter if you could please help me understand.
The Left Brain laments: 
Melissa, thanks for your question and the opportunity to clear up a misconception of the Beauty Brains.
Chemical absorption myth
First, it is not true that whatever you put on your skin gets absorbed into your body. Skin is designed to keep things out of your body. It is an excellent barrier to almost all chemicals. This is why doctors still have to give you shots or you have to take pills for most medicines. Some drugs, like those delivered through nicotine patches really work, but overall very few chemicals can penetrate your skin and get into your system!
Naturally Nasty
Second, natural products do not necessarily protect your overall health. I don’t know where this comes from, but “natural” does not make something nice. Consider all the awful natural things in the world like poison ivy, radiation, or cyanide.
In fact, “natural” ingredients are often more dangerous than the synthetic ones. These ingredients can harbor disease and allergy-causing microbes that can send some people to the hospital. Peanut allergies, wheat allergies, and hay fever are all caused by natural plant ingredients. There is nothing inherently good about natural ingredients. Synthetic ingredients are cleaned of bacterial contamination. They are standardized so you know exactly what you are using each time. Overall, synthetic ingredients are safer.
Slamming Natural Products?
We don’t slam all natural products. For example, we gave a mostly positive assessment of the Aveeno Active Natural product. And here is an article that shows some natural ingredients that really work on eczema. Here’s another one that shows the benefits of Honey for hair. And broccoli has shown benefits as a sunscreen. We try hard to find and write about natural beauty solutions that really do what they say. We are not inherently anti-natural.
Naturally Harder Than You’d Think
Unfortunately, most of the time you’ll find that “natural” products are no more natural than their “synthetic” counterparts. Typically, a marketer of a “natural” product will take a standard formula, add small amounts of natural sounding ingredients and play up the natural-ness on the label and in advertising. For example, see our recent evaluation of a natural product like Aveda.
This is classic cosmetic marketing. But the companies shouldn’t get all the blame. Consumers are mostly frightened by chemically sounding names. Would you rather buy an Aloe based moisturizer or one based on Petrolatum? The Petrolatum is superior in function but the name is not nearly as friendly. People want to buy the story in addition to the functional product.
The Natural Problem
The real problem we have with natural products is that there is an implied superiority that just isn’t deserved. While most companies don’t come right out and say it, they do insinuate that regular products are dangerous and harmful. They use claims like “Paraben-free” or “Sulfate-free” which only makes people wonder why those chemicals aren’t used. A natural conclusion is that they are somehow bad for you when this isn’t proven by any science. These kinds of junk claims border on lying to me.
Then there are some natural companies who come right out and tell you the chemicals you are using are poisoning you. They are so desperate to steal market share from more legitimate companies that they issue skewed press releases designed to scare you. The incredible hypocrisy of this company is that they issue this ridiculous press release about cosmetics containing cancer causing ingredients and then a quick examination of their own products reveals they use the same ingredients they say CAUSE CANCER!
Juice Beauty Cleanser and Toner uses Benzyl Alcohol. This ingredient is listed in the Environmental Working Group’s ingredient database as one that has been linked to cancer.
* Just for the record, there is no proof that Benzyl Alcohol as used in cosmetic products is harmful in any way.
Insidiousness of Natural
Finally, the biggest problem we have with most natural products is that they help spread chemical ignorance and fear. They contribute to the dumbing down of the population. They count on the fact that most people will naturally remember bad things they hear and often won’t follow up to see whether it’s true or not. This scientific ignorance & lack of skepticism is one of the most troubling problems in the world.
For cosmetic products, it’s really not such a big deal. Nearly all products will work and are generally harmless. But when that same fear & lack of skepticism is applied to the areas of medicine it can cause great harm to the entire population. Sadly, there are people like Jenny McCarthy who go on television shows, write books and spout unproven theories about a link between vaccinations and autism. They ignore science and twist data to suit their political agenda. And if enough non-skeptical people listen and believe, one of the greatest medical miracles of human existence could be reversed. Beaten diseases like polio, mumps, and small pox could come back and kill millions of people. It would be tragic.
This is why natural products are so troubling.
Loading ...
Mary Khan Says:
For cosmetic products, it’s really not such a big deal. Nearly all products will work and are generally harmless. But when that same fear & lack of skepticism is applied to the areas of medicine it can cause great harm to the entire population.
Juliet Says:
Congratulations to the Beauty Brains again on clearly and gently myth-busting.
I say this as a sensitive-skinned soul whose condition has forced her (a non-scientist) into a scientific approach to skin-care, through a sceptical approach to all marketing claims and ingredient fashions, and rigorous patch-test experimentation on self.
The result? Some things that work are “natural,” and some are synthesized. Similarly, some things that don’t work on me are “natural”and some aren’t.
I think there are two other huge grey areas that deserve more attention.
The first is synthesized products that are chemically identical to ones from natural sources (ex. SLS from coconut oil or not…).
The second is naturally-derived products that are much-maligned as from mineral rather than vegetable sources: I am thinking here particularly of mineral oil (a lifesaver for *genuinely* sensitive skin) - which the Beauty Brains has done sterling work in defending.
The big problem here is that appeals to reason and empirical good sense may fall on deaf ears, when in conflict with the gut reaction to putting things on your skin that you wouldn’t put in your mouth. Even very smart, well-educated, and well-read people fall into this trap, and really resent coming to terms with what is an irrational prejudice - perfectly understandable and explainable in psychological and anthropological terms, but an irrational prejudice nonetheless.
Anyway. I’ll go back to lurking quietly now…
Southern Angel Says:
As a doctor, I find few things more frustrating than the growing negative attitude towards science in this country. So many people are regressing the the middle ages when people thought science was some type of black magic. It’s so scary how little proof (or no proof at all) it takes to convince people that synethetics are bad, or vaccines are bad.
Thank you for this well-written article and for your constant fight for scientific truth in cosmetics.
Ann Says:
As always kudos to the brilliant BBs… such a well written article. As a mid-life career changer (banking to health care), I have changed a lot of my ideas that were not based on fact, but on popular “press” or marketing ploys. Despite my previous fervor for being “well read”, I am astonished at how I was taken in by many unscientific baseless “new discoveries” and half truths, and how many others have done the same. It is amazing to me how many folks that I meet in daily clinical life that are extremely under informed in the basic care of their bodies/health. It would only follow that these minds are ripe for the manipulation of marketers. So often I wonder, what is going on in school….? I guess it is easier to be fed info from the media, that doing your own (substantial scientific) research…
anactoria Says:
Best. Post. Ever.
I totally agree with Southern Angel (I’m southern too, but baby, I ain’t no angel!) re Middle Ages and black magic: I see those bottles of ‘anti-bacterical gel’ and think ‘modern day posey’.
Just the other day I heard a discussion about the age of the earth amongst lay people. They spoke of what seemed ‘logical’ and ‘obvious’. Obviously they are more knowledgeable on a subject that scientists have spent decades dedicated to study and they spent, well, one afternoon listening to easily digestible soundbites about intelligent design.
People don’t want to think. And critical thinking isn’t nearly as interesting as the urban legends.
Miss Laura Mars Says:
This is pretty much the most important post you’ve ever done. Bravo!
Janis Says:
BRAVO. Often, the only good thing about natural products is that they’ve been extensively beta-tested by thousands of years of users — but that doesn’t make them wonderful. It just means that if they kill you, you know about it already.
Henna, tobacco. Both “natural,” both extensively used since the dawn of humanity. One kills, one doesn’t.
That’s the ONLY benefit to natural — after a few millennia of use, you can often tell if it’s any good or not. Synthetics use lab work to determine that. That’s the only difference.
Besides, if you love “all-natural” so much, then wear your natural face as Mother Nature gave it to you, and ditch the cosmetics. The entire purpose of cosmetics is to celebrate the artificial. I’m a bit bitchy about that because I’ve been collared on using synthetic haircare products by PETA types who have trowelled on more makeup than I’ve worn in 15 years, but because it’s supposedly “cruelty-free,” they are more morally superior. Speaking as someone who wears NO cosmetics, washes her hair once a week (it’s not gross, seriously), and uses a bit of hand cream every now and then, I can guarantee that I’m more “natural” and nicer to bunnies than any of those types. *grumble*
Oh well.
Janis Says:
Minor addition: you guys rip on synthetics all the time. If I go back and read your old posts, 99% of the products you review are called out for not doing what they heavily imply they do.
“New Wrinkle Cream X makes wrinkles vanish!”
“Footnote: Wrinkle Cream X may conceivably reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles if you back away and squint.” Or whatever.
You guys are constantly calling out the products and advertisers on stretching the truth and not actually doing what they claim to do.
Blake Says:
I understand your defense of synthetic ingredients but please be aware of all of the facts. I found a 2001 study on pubmed (by Bellare J, Iyer R, Mainkar AR, Jolly CI) which states that “The damage caused to the hair due to sodium lauryl sulphate was visible” and the all-natural laboratory formulations were found to be better than the commercially available products.
Furthermore, I know that Jenny McCarthy is not the best spokeswoman for her cause, but there is actually strong evidence indicating a link between childhood vaccines and autism. Former NIH Director Dr. Bernadine Healy says that the question of a link between vaccines and autism is still open for debate. I fully appreciate all that vaccines have done and will do for the world but I find it frightening that it is doctors who refuse to see that there are also risks. If you are interested in reading more I suggest the following article: http://www.buffalobeast.com/80/thimerosal.htm.
thebeautybrains Says:
I didn’t remember reading the pubmed study you sited but I’ll be sure to get a copy and look at the science.
But as far as the vaccine thing goes, stop with the fear mongering and go learn something about the subject.
The best source at the moment is Science Based Medicine. It is not run by big pharma either. The link between thimerosal and autism has been thoroughly debunked.
Juliet Says:
Ahem … speaking as a professional Medievalist (academic) … can we please stop throwing around the M- word and the M- A- willy-nilly, in a manner lying somewhere between ignorant and ill-informed?
This is, after all, just the kind of approach the Beauty Brains seem to avoid in relation to skin and hair and cosmetics.
Here’s an intro to some actual Medieval science: http://members.aol.com/mcnelis/medsci_index.html
And some factual real Medieval empiricists: Alkindus (al-Kindi), Alhazen (Ibn al-Haytham), Robert Grosseteste, and perhaps most famously, Roger Bacon.
blah Says:
Another similar marketing ploy is “green” beauty. Marketers will claim that using organic, naturally derived ingredients is better for the earth. However, I’ve seen all these products with giant lists of odd fluff ingredients like flower and herbal extracts in addition to the normal active ingredients (which may be plant derived). This seems illogical to me. To get just one of the herbal extracts into a formula, someone somewhere has to raze a plot of land, plow it, seed it, water it, harvest it, transport the product, extract the useful portion of the product and transport it again. The energy cost of this may be small if the extracts are widely available but they get weirder and weirder in an attempt to make products seem more exotic. So every fluff ingredient is an added environmental cost per unit product. Plus these products aren’t usually shipped in bulk due to low demand so they’re purchased online or shipped in small amounts to specialty stores. This also increases the environmental cost per unit product when compared with cheapo regular consumer products which can be shipped in bulk.
Finally, the natural way of getting a useful active ingredient isn’t necessarily the most energy efficient way to do it. For example, when comparing mineral oil and a plant derived emollient, I am not really sure that planting, harvesting and extracting that plant ingredient separately is really better for the planet than to use a readily available chemical byproduct.
Kristiina Says:
Loooove the Beauty Brains—excellent article…yet again
Keep up the good work!
Mikaella V. Says:
Congrats for your excellent post. Keep on sharing these type of important information with us.
Victoria Says:
Random, but I really like the image that you used with this post. Where is it from?
Sharon Says:
As a natural skin care formulator I find myself agreeing with most of the points in raised, especially the point about natural not always actually meaning natural. This is one of my biggest (if not biggest) bugbear with the natural skin care industry. Well actually it isn’t the natural skin care industry, it is the skin care industry trying to appear natural, which damages the reputation of the real, usually small, family run, dedicated natural skin care producers who create natural beauty products because they believe in simplicity and the power of pure botanicals.
Natural doesn’t always mean safe, again I totally agree which is why in the UK and EU there are regulations that need to be adhered before any cosmetic product can be made available to the public. Sadly though some of the smaller companies don’t know, don’t bother or just don’t pass the strict terms of the regulations yet still sell their products.
So it is important to check the credentials, read labels and educate ourselves to ensure we get proper natural and safe products that work.
Jenna Says:
Oh, I hate the fear-mongering that “natural” companies do. Yeah, some of those chemicals cause cancer. Wanna know why? Because those chemicals were INGESTED or INJECTED into lab rats at concentrations that border on 1-2 orders of magnitude (that’s 10x to 100x, to non-sciencey types) of what’s typical in cosmetic formulations.
And since every person is different, we might have different sensitivities to various chemical and natural products. Why is SLS often irritating? Because a small percentage of the population is allergic to it. An equal number of people cannot use many natural products because of the wheat-based ingedients due to gluten allergies.
Leslie Says:
You know, petroleum might be superior in function for the short-term, but in the long term can cause a lot of damage depending on how it’s used.
Like, it would be much better for me to moisturize my hair with aloe than with vaseline. Vaseline might protect from the drying elements, but also blocks out moisturizing elements like water.
No, not all “natural” products are all they are cracked up to be, but there is a reason why there is such a backlash against synthetics.
quick link: is natural beauty best? | All that & a . . . Says:
[...] See what the Beauty Brains have to say about organic, natural and green. [...]
Fuzz Says:
I love this article!!!! I wish you would post it once a month so no new people miss this one. There are so many important points. The gentle side is reminding people there is a difference between marketing claims and scientific claims. The hard-hitting part is irrational fear of science, chemicals, synthetics, etc. by so many people. Well done, Beauty Brains.
aloe health Says:
[...] on my skin gets absorbed into my body through my pores and isn??t it true that products that are allhttp://thebeautybrains.com/2008/06/18/natural-bias-on-the-beauty-brains/- Aloe Vera Health Supplements - FLP Aloevera - Forever Living …Aloe Vera, bee products and aloe [...]