ElenaMilano asks…Vichy has created a much publicized rhamnose based anti aging line, called Liftactiv. They claim rhamnose is a very important patented discovery and that it stimulates the papillary dermis, causing it to produce new skin cells, collagen etc. Is it true or is it the usual marketing ruse?
The Left Brain responds:
Vichy, for those who may not be familiar with the brand, is the self-proclaimed ”number 1 skincare brand in European pharmacies.” Vichy is also owned by L’Oreal so they have access to deep pockets for R&D spending.
Liftactiv day cream
According to Vichy’s website, there are 13 Liftactiv products, 3 of which contain 5% Rhamnose. Here are ingredients for the day cream:
BUTYROSPERMUM PARKII BUTTER / SHEA BUTTER • RHAMNOSE • PRUNUS ARMENIACA KERNEL OIL / APRICOT KERNEL OIL • PENTAERYTHRITYL TETRAETHYLHEXANOATE • DIMETHICONE • ISOHEXADECANE • PENTYLENE GLYCOL • STEARIC ACID • STEARYL ALCOHOL • CERA ALBA / BEESWAX • PALMITIC ACID • PEG-100 STEARATE • GLYCERYL STEARATE • PEG-20 STEARATE • BIS-PEG-18 METHYL ETHER DIMETHYL SILANE • NYLON-12 • CI 77891 / TITANIUM DIOXIDE • MICA • TRIETHANOLAMINE • DIMETHICONOL • PHENOXYETHANOL • ADENOSINE • MAGNESIUM ASCORBYL PHOSPHATE • ASCORBYL GLUCOSIDE • POLOXAMER 338 • DISODIUM EDTA • CAPRYLYL GLYCOL • XANTHAN GUM • PENTAERYTHRITYL TETRA-DI-T-BUTYL HYDROXYHYDROCINNAMATE • A C R Y L A M I D E / S O D I U M ACRYLOYLDIMETHYLTAURATE COPOLYMER • POLYSORBATE 80 • PARFUM / FRAGRANCE
So what’s the big deal about this product? Aside from the standard “reduces the appearance of wrinkles” claims, here’s what Vichy’s says about Liftactiv:
“Our breakthrough formula features Rhamnose, a naturally derived plant sugar extracted in its purest form. Rhamnose in a 5% concentration, has been clinically proven to improve skin rejuvenation at the source; improving collagen production, elastin production and cellular turnover.”
These are pretty bold claims to make and would require significant research. Is there anything to back this up?
What does Rhamnose do?
According to a study from PubMed, in vitro lab tests on cell cultures (i.e., testing done in a “glass dish”) show that cell cultures treated with rhamnose and other similar compounds produced fewer aging byproducts (known as Advanced Glycation Endproducts or AGE). (1) These results suggest that rhamnose could be an effective anti-aging agent. Of course laboratory testing alone does not demonstrate that the benefit will be seen when used on real people, but surprisingly (at least to me) there is an in vivo study that backs up the laboratory testing.
Clinical testing
According to a paper presented by L’Oreal (2), the effectiveness of Rhamnose has been confirmed in by in vivo testing. A rhamnose containing lotion and a placebo lotion were applied twice a day for 8 weeks to the internal side of forearms of female volunteers between the ages of 50 and 7. Clinical and histological measurements were taken before and after treatment and the results showed “a significant increase of pro-collagen I expression at papillary dermis level and considerable epidermis thickening…” This looks to be a properly designed test but since I was unable to review the entire study protocol, I’m concerned that measured effects may be statistically “significant” but may not be large enough to be observable to the user. I’m still skeptical but it’s refreshing to have at least some basis for believing this technology works.
The Beauty Brains bottom line
We’re quick to call “Bull Sh*t” if there’s no evidence of a product providing a differentiated benefit. However in the case of Vichy’s Liftactiv, based on the limited information I’ve been able to find, it appears that rhamnose MAY provide a measureable anti-aging benefit that other products don’t. Whether or not you want to gamble $50 to find out whether or not you can tell a difference on your skin is up to you. (You may also want to keep an eye on other, less expensive, L’Oreal brands in case they decide to leverage this technology beyond Vichy.)
References:
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
There’s another study from L’oreál (with 10% of C-xyloside – is it the same thing?)
“Effect of C-xyloside on morphogenesis of the dermal epidermal junction in aged female skin. An ultrastuctural pilot study.
Abstract
A placebo-controlled randomized pilot study was performed on five postmenopausal women aged from 60 to 75 years. The women applied 320 mg (2 mg/cm(2)) of either placebo or 10% C-?-D-xylopyranoside-2-hydroxy-propane (C-xyloside) cream to each outer forearm twice daily for 3 months. At the end of the treatment, skin biopsies were collected from application areas on both forearms. Transmission electron microscope examinations revealed skin ultrastructural changes at the dermal epidermal junction (DEJ) after 10% C-xyloside application for 3 months. The morphological appearance of the DEJ showed strong improvements, with more homogeneous and regular lamina densa in the C-xyloside-treated compared to the placebo treated skin areas. The number of zones showing basement membrane re-duplication was indeed strikingly reduced on C-xyloside-treated skin. These ultrastructural results were further confirmed by a statistically significant increase in the expression levels of ?6-integrin the and laminin-332, as estimated by immunohistochemistry. Altogether, these data suggest that topical C-xyloside application in vivo may be efficient in inducing a better dermal-epidermal cohesion when such a junction is deficient, as is the case in photo-aged or chronologically aged skin. Moreover, a statistically significant increase in CD44 expression was noted in the epidermis of C-xyloside-treated compared to the placebo treated skin areas.”
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21454149
Vichy also has a serum with 10% of rhamnose: http://www.saninforma.it/Sezione.jsp?idSezione=14456&idSezioneRif=709
Ok, wasn’t it L’oreal who funded these studies? It’s not an uncommon phenomenon to design studies just to proof that some new, exotic ingredients ”work”. People became wiser and want scientific proof for their miraculous claims. One study is not a significant proof of something. ?t must be replicated not once in order to be sure something really works. This is how science works. They can swear it works and proven, but bias can fool them.
Here are far too many ingredients in cosmetic industry that have some kind of ”in vitro” evidence. Usually a research is done once and it ends there. We forget. After another interesting sound ingredient becomes trendy and a circle repeats.
Cosmetic companies started to use smarter marketing tricks, backing up their claims with science, but you should be skeptical. Even about science itself.
The first anti-aging cream guaranteed to work since the last anti-aging cream guaranteed to work!
Says it all really!
Good to know about the product.
Seems worth giving a try!