D asks…As part of an anti-acne regimen, both my dermatologist and aesthetician recommended I start using the SkinCeuticals spray toner and Hydratin B5 Gel. I’m getting great results, but am not thrilled with the price of the moisturizer. Yes, it is concentrated and lasts a long time, but at $45/oz on eBay, it’s an awful lot of money. Is there a cheaper alternative with the same active ingredients?
Right Brain is ruffled:
We get concerned when dermatologists start recommending products. It is not because they don’t know 
what they are talking about when it comes to skin care, they do. It’s just that saving you money is rarely their concern. They would happily recommend an expensive toner when a less expensive one will work just as well. Add to this that many dermatologists get commissions off the products they recommend and it’s hard not to be cynical.
But you can’t blame dermatologists. They may know what ingredients are good for skin, but they can’t know all the products containing said ingredient. Thankfully, you have the Beauty Brains.
SkinCeuticals Toner
SkinCeuticals Toner
Here are the ingredients.
Water, Vaccinium Myrtillus (Billberry) Extract, Saccharum Officinarum (Sugar Cane) Extract, Acer Saccharum (Sugar Maple) Extract, Citrus Aurantium Dulcis (Orange) Fruit Extract, Citrus Medica Limonum (Lemon) Extract, Glycerin, Propylene Glycol, Calendula Officinalis (Calendula Extract), Chamomilla Recutita (Matricaria) Extract, Thymus Vulgaris (Thyme) Extract, Rosmarinus Officinalis (Rosemary) Extract, Hamamelis Virginiana (Witch Hazel), Glycerin, Allantoin, Panthenol, Isoceteth-20, Phenoxyethanol, Chlorphenesin, Methylparaben, Benzoic Acid, Citrus Aurantium Dulcis (Orange) Oil
If you ignore all the “fluff” ingredients which don’t do anything, you’re left with
Water, Glycerin, Propylene Glycol, Hamamelis Virginiana (Witch Hazel), Isoceteth-20, Phenoxyethanol, Chlorphenesin, Methylparaben, Benzoic Acid, Citrus Aurantium Dulcis (Orange) Oil
And if you toss out the ingredients that are just preservatives, odor modifiers and solubilizers, you’re left with
Water, Glycerin, Propylene Glycol, and Witch Hazel
You certainly don’t need to spend >$25 for SkinCeuticals Toner
Neither product is crucial for your skin routine if you’re using a good cleanser and a moisturizer. But if you like toners, you will probably be happy with the Nivea or some other store brand product. Just look for the ingredients Water and Glycerin.
SkinCeuticals Moisturizer
Oh my! $62 for 30 mL of product. Sigh…
Here are the ingredients
Water, Sodium Hyaluronate, Pantothenic Acid, Phenoxyethanol
This is truly a ridiculous waste of money. There is no evidence that topical use of Sodium Hyaluronate or Hyaluronic Acid will have any amazing moisturizing effect on your skin. No doubt it’s a good moisturizing ingredient. But there are much better products you could be using (and less expensive)!
We could be mistaken, but could find no peer reviewed study that demonstrates topical treatment of skin with Sodium Hyaluronate has any incredible benefit. (Ask your dermatologist if she could direct you to any).
But if you want to get an alternative, consider this Hydrating B5 Serum
We should point out that no big name skin care brand including Olay, Aveeno, or Neutrogena contain products like these. Since these companies employ the best skin scientists in the world, it’s likely that formulas like this don’t provide the best benefits.
Beauty Brains bottom line:
You don’t have to pay a lot for your non-prescription skin care products, even if it is your dermatologist telling you to do it. Just look at the first few ingredients and find a product that uses some of the same things. We would steer you towards big brands like Olay, Aveeno & Neutrogena since these are created by the highest paid, best cosmetic chemists in the industry. They also have the most rigorous testing to prove their products work.
{ 12 comments… read them below or add one }
Have you tried NuSkin products? Is there any truth to their claim that they have the best products?
I’m using NOW Hyaluronic Acid Serum for $10 – and it’s great.
I have a problem with your logic that says that because big corporations like Johnsons and P&G are able to employ the best cosmetic scientists in the world that they’re the brands to go for. If this is true, then why are there still a number of Neutrogena products (made by Johnsons) with no UVA protection in their sunscreen? Just yesterday I picked up one whose active ingredients were Ensuilzole and Octinoxate. That’s IT. That’s not so great.
There are a number of explanations. For example.
1. You’ve found old product. Products can be produced and last on store shelves for over 2 years.
2. They have a loyal following. The big companies are slow to adapt new technology when they have a successful product. Every change could result in annoying current customers. Instead of changing older, successful products, they launch new products with the new technology. Then they slowly phase out the old ones.
But what exactly is the problem with our logic?
I too find your reasoning questionable at best. Can you find me an article in a peer-reviewed journal that suggests that a) multinational corporate skincare manufacturers such as P&G employ “the best skin scientists in the world;” b) that these companies also employ the “most rigorous testing;” and c) that since these elite cosmetic chemists don’t include sodium hyaluronate in their products, it is probably not a viable or beneficial ingredient? C’mon.
While you work on that, here are some clinical trials, published in peer-reviewed dermatological journals, that demonstrate statistically significant (!!) efficacy of sodium hyaluronate/hyaluronic acid (HA) and its related compounds in a wide range of dermatological (not to mention ocular, oncological, and surgical) applications.
An overview of hyaluronic acid and its clinical uses; note their characterization of HA’s hygroscopic effects as “remarkable”
On the role of HA compounds in reducing free radical damage
Mechanisms by which HA augments the skin’s native self-defense mechanisms (this one’s quite technical, hope you’re well-versed in cell bio)
Note that the abstracts begin with definitive statements regarding HA (e.g. “…is a glycosaminoglycan that increases collagen production”). Needless to say, you can’t make such declarative statements in scientific journal articles unless the statement has been repeatedly, reliably, and consistently corroborated to the point where citing a source for said statement is unnecessary.
It is true that the high molecular weight (MW) of some HA compounds is a barrier to their topical efficacy. Higher MW compounds are frequently used in surgical cosmetic procedures (e.g. Restylane) for obvious reasons. However, low MW compounds exist and have been FDA approved for over a decade (e.g. diclofenac, a topical NSAID that employs HA as a vehicle for drug delivery). When micronized, HA readily penetrates the dermis, and since HA is native and uniform across organisms, it is easily utilized by dermal cells once present. Given the demonstrated efficacy of low MW preparations with respect to transdermal uptake, is it too vast a mental leap to presume that, once present in the intercellular matrix of the dermis, HA compounds will exert the same hygroscopic, collaged-repairing, and keratinocyte-promoting effects that have been repeatedly observed in vitro and with injectables?
Lastly, if P&G’s material chemists are really the brightest and their standards the most rigorous, why are their products continually called out for false advertising claims?
Would absolutely love a reply.
I suck at html tags; here again is the third article in the list:
Mechanisms by which HA augments the skin’s native self-defense mechanisms (this one’s quite technical, hope you’re well-versed in cell bio)
Just curious, couldn’t find anything on your site here about your own credentials and what would make you qualified as an expert on cosmetic science. Having the core compounds does not mean it will perform the same (without even considering the quality of the compound itself). There are other factors in optimally delivering a compound than just throwing the ingredient you want on there. I also wonder what are the profit drivers and purpose of this site, I’m sure it goes a bit beyond providing objective information with all the adds and links to e-commerce page.
Also, I think you omitted the fact that SkinCeuticals is part of the L’Oreal organization, the largest cosmetics company in the world last I checked, that also spends considerably more than any competitor on R&D.
this post was old but would still love a reply to the comments above. i like this site as it makes consumers aware of what is in the products but feel that some *biases are inherent in the posts, ie “highest paid, best testing chemist” or “Since these companies employ the best skin scientists in the world, it’s likely that formulas like this don’t provide the best benefits”.
These sentences gives a bad image to this site (unintentionally!) because it has a child’s logic to it. That’s like saying Nike is the best because all the top athletes use their products instead of, Nike has the top athletes because they pay the most endorsement money.
It would be better that the authors address comments from those who ask valid questions or rebuttals like the post here as it would give credibility to this site.
Hey REMLON,
The reason there still exist moisturizers without SPF is because not everyone can tolerate sunscreen on their skin, especially facial skin. Furthermore, sunscreen efficacy wears off after a couple hours (literally 2-3 hrs), so you’re left wearing unneeded, potentially harmful chemicals on your face ALL day. I’m one consumer who is constantly irritated by the addition of sunscreen to otherwise good, basic moisturizers. If you want sunscreen, add it on top of your moisturizer – the moisturizer will serve as the barrier for your skin, which is essentially all it does anyway.
Hi there,
The link to “Hydrating B5 Serum” no longer works. Could I have the product name please?
before i comment, the best B5 Hydrating Serum is from Medik8 – its better and much cheaper. Ive tried them all – even tried to make one – not easy and ended up costing me more anyway. i used to work as a blender many moons ago.
I like Beauty Brains – some very good articles on here but i do think on this occassion the logic does suck.
Whilst i would agree that large multi-national personal care companies employ good scientists, they are not the best necessarily. Like any profession such as doctors, lawyers or accountants – the very best actually leave the corporation and either start up their own brands of work as consultants for fledgling brands.
In addition, the problem with mass market brands is price. They have very little room for cost of premium ingredients. So even if the scientists want to add certain ingredients – they cant. And if they do – they generally only add small amounts. Like i said – i know!!
I would agree with Obkb – “There are other factors in optimally delivering a compound than just throwing the ingredient you want on there.” This is the most frustrating thing about pop-science. I have seen with my own eyes even the difference the order of addition makes to a formula let alone the plethora of other ingredients.
Beauty Brains – you have done much better in the past – this is not your finest thread.
Try EiroDerm!! its the best new skin care line on the market, has many of the same ingredients as skinceuticals except the technology is newer and it’s also cheaper!!