We often see the advice from cosmetic marketers and commentors on the Beauty Brains that natural products are better. They say people should avoid synthetic chemicals and stick with natural things. The truth is that such advice is simplistic, unscientific, and often just wrong. Consider the story of Ashleigh Morris.

Allergic to water

Ashleigh is a 19-year-old who has suffered from a skin disorder called Aquagenic Urticaria for the last 5 years. When her skin is exposed to water (like in a shower, pool, or bath) it reacts and forms sore, itchy red lumps that don’t go away for a couple of hours. The type of water doesn’t matter. It can be pure spring water, distilled or even tap water.

Allergic to everything

And how about the story of Laura Weaver. Her skin condition makes her allergic to almost everything. This includes compounds found in fragrances, but also includes natural things like dairy products, some fruits, wheat, and peanuts. The advice to use “natural” ingredients is terrible for Laura. In fact, she only gets relief by using products like Eucerin which are based on Petrolatum and Mineral Oil.

Beauty Brains Bottom Line

While most people are not allergic to any of the chemicals they are normally exposed to in cosmetics, some people are. These allergies can be to synthetic ingredients, but also natural things like fruit extracts, wheat, peanuts, and even water. Blindly following the advice of natural ingredient based cosmetic marketers is not recommended. Everyone is different and only through personal experimentation can you find what works best for you.

Do you have an allergy that makes your skin break out? Leave a comment and let the rest of the Beauty Brains community know. And if you’re not sure, read our previous post on how to tell the difference between irritation and an allergic response.

Here is a fascinating article proving just because someone is smart doesn’t mean their opinions should be accepted without question.

Researchers at Indiana University School of Medicine investigated whether some common beliefs were true. They specifically looked into topics that the general public and physicians traditionally believed to be true, but aren’t. Here is the list of myths and explanations of why they’re not true.

Six common myths

Shaving hair will cause it to grow back faster or coarser - NOT TRUE. This myth was busted by a 1928 randomized clinical trial that showed shaved hair did not grow back faster, darker or thicker.

Hair and fingernails continue to grow after we die - NOT TRUE. This is just an optical illusion caused by your skin drying out when you die.

People use only 10 percent of their brains - NOT TRUE. Through the use of MRI scans and other brain imaging techniques, scientists have demonstrated that you use all of your brain.

Eating turkey makes you sleepy - NOT TRUE. While the protein tryptophan has been shown to make you drowsy, turkey doesn’t actually have much more than beef or chicken. In fact, pork has even more.

People should drink at least 8 glasses of water a day - NOT TRUE. Your total fluid intake should be about 8 glasses but you count all the liquids you ingest including soda, coffee, and liquid from fruits and vegetables.

Reading in dim light ruins your eyesight - NOT TRUE. While it might temporarily decrease your eyesight acuity, there’s no proof that it causes any permanent damage.

Experts can be wrong

A study like this is exactly why science is great. Nobody holds a monopoly on truth. Some people may know more than you, but nobody knows everything. If you hear a claim on tv, the internet, or from your stylist, don’t automatically assume it’s true. Do a little research and find out what’s real before you start propagating myths. And if you do research a topic, try to avoid biased sources such as marketing information on company websites. They often manipulate the facts to get you to buy products.

Incidentally, this Beauty Brain learned the lesson about doctors being gullible a few years ago. A friend of mine was dating a heart surgeon who was a big believer in Feng Shui. That completely shattered my image of the brilliant doctor. Any skeptical mind can tell you there’s no proof that anything about that Feng Shui is true.

Now, I’m off to make some cookies.  I wouldn’t want Santa to have nothing to eat.

It’s amazing to me how far cosmetic companies will go to stretch the claims of their skin care products. Here are two examples which illustrate how extreme these claims can be.

Skin lotion protects from Acid

Here’s an interesting video by Skin MD lotion. According to them, you can put the lotion on and pour hydrochloric acid on your hand.

It’s an interesting and compelling demonstration. Of course, it’s not as impressive if you consider that when the scientist pours the acid on the rock (probably limestone), there is a neutralizing reaction that occurs. A neutralized acid is like pouring salt water on your skin.

As the man in the white coat says in the demo (despite what he shows), Skin MD will not protect you from acid burns.

Skin cream protects from radiation

This one is even worse. According to the Advertising Standards Authorities (ASA) in the UK, Clarins cosmetic maker was slapped with a fine for claiming that their skin cream could protect you from mobile phone & other radiation. They erroneously said that skin exposed to artificial electromagnetic radiation would age faster. Then they went on to imply that their lotion could protect you from it. According to Clarins

If electromagnetic waves can penetrate walls, imagine what they can do to your skin. Today, electromagnetic waves generated by a host of modern day electronic devices join a list of well-known pollutants which can damage skin.

Unfortunately for Clarins, the research that they submitted was soundly rejected by the ASA and any other legitimate scientist who saw it. Don’t worry Beauty Brains community, your skin is not being degraded by your phone. And that cell phone is not causing acne either. Geez!

What’s the most ridiculous claim YOU’VE seen from a skin care product? Share your comments with the rest of the Beauty Brains community. 

Lisa’s curious about chirality: I recently learned about products that are chiral. They do sound more beneficial (since I now understand chirality), but does that necessarily mean that the other products that don’t claim to be chiral are no good?

The Left Brain’s leftist reply:
You must be taking Organic Chemistry right now if you’ve learned what chirality means. It’s an interesting concept and one that this particular Beauty Brain had a difficult time grasping. Let me explain for the benefit of the rest of our community.

What is chirality?

Chirality essentially means that an object can’t be superimposed on its own mirror image. The easiest way to think about it is to look at your hands. They’re the same size and shape, right? But you can’t put your left hand in your right glove because they’re chiral. If that still doesn’t make sense, here’s a clever online game you can play that does a better job of explaining the concept.

The idea of chirality has implications for chemical synthesis and pharmaceuticals. Some chirally uniform drugs work better than others because the body has receptors that can only interact with molecules in a specific shape. So chirality is very important for medicine.

Can cosmetics be chiral?

Unfortunately, in cosmetics, chirality doesn’t really matter. There are no receptors on the outer layer of your skin or hair that will accept molecules from your cosmetics. They simply work on the surface and penetrate the skin slightly. They don’t interact with cells in the same way that drugs do. And if there isn’t this interaction, whether the molecule is chiral or not doesn’t much matter. So for skin cleansers, wrinkle creams, hair conditioners, styling products, and the vast majority of other cosmetics, it makes no difference.

But that doesn’t stop some cosmetic companies from claiming their products are chiral. One company in particular, called Franche, even references the fact that the 2001 Nobel prize in chemistry was awarded for the creation of a catalytic process to manufacture chiral molecules. But as far as I can tell, this really has nothing to do with the ingredients used in Franche cosmetics. For example, look at Franche’s Cleansing Crème Mousse. The only ingredient where chirality is relevant is D-panthenol. And that ingredient doesn’t do ANYTHING for hair from a rinse off product. So shame on them for trying to using misleading science to influence consumers. (Note: If Franche has any data to back up their assertions, we’d be more than happy to reconsider these comments.)

The Beauty Brains bottom line

Chiral cosmetics are a crock.

It’s hard to believe that these are the “biggest” skin care myths, but that’s what the TV show Extra wants you to believe. They are interesting myths and I’m wondering how many of you Beauty Brainiacs out there still believe these.

Skin Care Myths

1. Tanning beds are safe. (They aren’t.)
2. A 50 SPF is better than SPF 15. (It’s not.)
3. You can scrub away acne. (You can’t, scrubbing actually makes it worse!)
4. You can be addicted to lip balm. (Ok, maybe you can a little bit.)

I consulted the main Beauty Brains on this one and they added the following:

5. Mineral oil causes cancer. (It doesn’t.)
6. Cosmetics can make your eyelashes grow. (They can’t.)
7. Natural products work better than synthetics. (Not necessarily.)

-Mid Brain

Do YOU believe some of these skincare myths? Leave a comment and let the rest of the Beauty Brains community know what you think.

This press release from the FDA about Cryptosporidium parasites in Baby’s Bliss Gripe Water reminded me of the reasons to stay away from any herbal supplement and to be skeptical of any company that touts “natural” as a reason to buy. People who have dutifully given Baby’s Bliss Gripe Water to their infants now have the added benefit of knowing they may have given them a parasite too. If you are one of those parents who have a bottle with code 26952V and an expiration date of 10/08, return the product immediately.

Herbal Supplement Outrage

And then ask yourself why are you giving an unregulated, unnecessary herbal supplement to a child? As we previously discussed, Herbal Supplement Companies Are Not Regulated! And the FDA does not have enough resources to test every supplement product put on the market. You have no way to know whether the product is safe or not. Unlike food manufacturers, there is no law that requires independent testing of the products made and sold by herbal supplement manufacturers. It’s complete nonsense. These supplements can have real health effects and it’s only through shear luck that problems are discovered. Why is it that the FDA had to find the parasite when the company MOM Enterprises, Inc. couldn’t? Clearly something is messed up.

The Nonsense of Natural Products

I see that MOM Enterprises also sells a line of personal care products. Hopefully, they don’t rely on the ‘naturalness’ of their raw materials and they treat them to remove disease causing parasites, bacteria and viruses. These are the kinds of things that preservatives are designed to kill. Yes, preservatives protect us from the evil things found in Natural Products.

It is interesting that Baby’s Bliss has a Diaper Cream they claim to be “100% natural”. Then they show in their list of ingredients…

• Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride
• Cetearyl Olivate (and) Sorbitan Olivate
• Cetyl Alcohol
• Stearic Acid
• Glycine
• Zinc Oxide
• Dimethicone
• Fragrance

Where in nature can you find Dimethicone? I know it’s derived from sand but you have to go through a lot of chemical processing to make Dimethicone.

This product isn’t 100% Natural. It’s processed. And that’s a good thing. Processed products are safer products!

Beauty Brains bottom line

When you don’t process and chemically alter natural things you end up with PARASITES or bacteria or other disease causing microbes. That’s not something you want.

And if you are in the United States and you’re giving herbal supplements to your children, you’re taking a huge risk! The products are unregulated and in this Beauty Brain’s opinion, unsafe for children.

In part 1 of this post Scatter Brain blogged on what you need to know about “Angel Dusting” a practice that involves adding very low levels of certain ingredients just to make the product more attractive to consumers. In part 2, she gives you tips on what do do about it.

How to read an ingredient list

So, how do we protect ourselves from paying for ingredients that are listed yet negligible? The answer is not that simple. First, find out if possible the therapeutic amount of the ingredient you want in a product. Then look on the product’s label at the order the ingredients are listed. The Federal Trade Commission mandates that ingredients on cosmetics must be listed in descending order of predominance. The higher on the list, the greater the likelihood the product contains a therapeutic amount of your ingredient.

Not my cup of tea

This issue gets murkier (sorry pun intended) when you start discussing botanical or herbal products that are extracts or infusions. Think about making a cup of tea. You can steep it a second or two and have practically clear liquid though there is “tea” in the liquid, or you can steep it for hours until it’s dark and cloudy. In fact, you might say that this strong infusion is a real tea party. However, even though tea, not water, is the desired ingredient, either cup of tea could be legally listed as an “infusion of tea” on a product label. And to complicate things more, it’s possible that the percentage of liquid not the percentage of actual tea would determine how far up the ingredient list “infusion of tea” would appear but more about “order of ingredients” in a second.

What else you should know

There are just a few exceptions to this rule. If the cosmetic is also a drug, active drug ingredients are listed before cosmetic ingredients. Ingredients present at a concentration not exceeding 1% may be listed in any order after the ingredients that are present at more than 1% in descending order of predominance. Color additives of any concentration may be listed in any order after the listing of the ingredients that are not color additives.

Secret Weapon

And finally, the name of an ingredient accepted by the FDA as a trade secret need not be disclosed on the label. Instead of declaring the name of that ingredient, the phrase “and other ingredients” may be used. This one is a real bummer but necessary I suppose.

Very simply put, a little clever sleuthing about an ingredient and its efficacy and/or therapeutic amount and knowing how the federal government mandates the listing of ingredients on product labels can help keep you from buying something bogus.

Did you find this helpful? How do you feel about Angel Dusting? Let us know at the Beauty Brains.

Scatter Brain is a real-life copywriter for hire. If you’re interested in contacting her with business opportunities, please write to “Scatter Brain” care of thebeautybrains@gmail.com.

“Angel Dusting: The Marketing Devil Makes Them Do It”

Part One of a Two Part Scatter Brain Expose

I’m sorry to disappoint you, but this is not an expose? on the illicit drug habits of advertising professionals though I’ll admit it is an interesting topic. Instead, I’ll trust you to know which ad copy was produced whilst someone was smoking something “funny”. But, all “funny” stuff aside, this is an expose? on one of the more scandalous marketing practices of some cosmetics companies known as angel dusting, fairy dusting or window dressing.

Two Kinds of “Angel Dusting”

Illegal drugs and storybook creatures aside, Angel Dusting is the practice of adding minuscule amounts of certain ingredients just so that they can be listed on the product label. Some companies use Angel Dusting in a harmless way just to get your attention. They try to entice you into buying the product by adding a touch of a popular and easily recognizable appealing ingredient. This type of Angel Dust ingredient is usually not functional, but it makes women feel good about the product because they find the ingredient attractive. Other less reputable companies abuse this practice by deliberately misleading consumers. They claim to be using a functional ingredient, but they don’t add enough to be truly functional.

Deliberately misleading

Let’s say that ingredient X is the wonder of the age and really does reduce fine lines and wrinkles; not just the “appearance” of fine lines and wrinkles. However, ingredient X costs $100 per ounce and it takes ½ ounce to actually work its magic. Cosmetic Company Y figures that they can add just a smidgen of ingredient X to legitimately list it on the label, charge a lower price but still make a huge profit because the predominant ingredient in their product is distilled water. Now, because ingredient X is listed on the label, Company Y will sell this product like hotcakes. Even so, the consumer has no idea that there isn’t enough ingredient X in this product to reduce an enlarged pore, much less a fine line or wrinkle.

Creative marketing

The other kind of “angel dusting” occurs when a cosmetics manufacturer adds a non-efficacious ingredient because research or perception has proven that consumers desire this ingredient even thought it basically does doodley squat. By the way, doodley squat is a big vocabulary word that means, “It doesn’t do a darn thing”.

For example, let’s pretend that urban legend, folklore or an old wives’ tale has convinced you that smearing chocolate on your face will decrease the signs of aging. Your mom did it, your grandma did it and now you think you need to do it too. Scientists at the cosmetics company know for a fact that chocolate tastes great but it doesn’t do a thing for your skin, however they add chocolate to their face cream formula anyway because even though it’s an ineffective ingredient, consumer perception says otherwise. Of course, chocolate may very well be a wonderfully effective skin-care ingredient, I’m just using it as an example because frankly it’s something I’d love to smear on my face…especially around the mouth area.

How to avoid being tricked

Chocolate yumminess aside, how do you avoid paying for unnecessary ingredients in this scenario? Come back for part two of my Scatter Brain expose where I’ll discuss how to read ingredient labels so you don’t get tricked.

Scatter Brain is a real-life copywriter for hire. If you’re interested in contacting her with business opportunities, please write to “Scatter Brain” care of thebeautybrains@gmail.com.

One goal of the Beauty Brains is to find lies, myths, and cons in the beauty industry and expose them with through the shining light of science. Our hope is that the entire Beauty Brains community will become skeptical consumers not easily duped by exaggerated advertising, chemical bashing, scare tactics, and knee jerk reactions. We believe thinking is beautiful.

That’s why this story about what Americans believe about cancer is interesting. According to research by the American Cancer Society a large number of people believe many unsubstantiated claims about cancer.

Cancer misconceptions about cosmetics

1.  14.7% of Americans believe that personal care products can cause cancer.

Through the efforts of “Natural” cosmetic marketers and political action groups like the Environmental Working Group (EWG) it’s no wonder so many people fall for this. People seem to believe chemicals are evil and leading us to an early death. Just read some of the comments on our posts about mineral oil to understand how passionately some people believe.

But the independent scientists who research these questions say it’s a myth. Based on the best evidence available, we know cosmetics and personal care products do not cause cancer. Stop worrying about it.

2. 67.7% believe that the risk of dying of cancer is increasing.

The truth is that cancer rates in the United States have actually been DECREASING since the early 1990’s. Your risk of cancer is actually going down. It’s something to remember the next time your organic ingesting, vegetarian friend scoffs at you for enjoying a cheeseburger.

3. 6.2% of people believe the underwire in bras can cause breast cancer.

Really!? I figured this myth would’ve been “busted” long ago.  Sigh, a skeptical Beauty Brains’ work is never done.

Beauty Brains bottom line

As critical thinkers you must always question your basic beliefs. Think about everything you passionately believe. Is it really true or does it make you feel good to think it’s true? Either way, skeptical thinking can quell your fears.

Here’s a follow up to a post I wrote on Clarin’s 3p Screen Mist, a spray that supposedly protects your skin from electromagnetic radiation from cell phones and other sources.

Does Clarins Really Protect You From Radiation?

There are two basic flaws with this idea. First, it’s ridiculous to think that a skin care product such as this could actually provide significant shielding from dangerous radiation. Second, there’s no proof that cell phone radiation is harmful to your skin in the first place.

Is Cell Phone Radiation Bad For You?

According to NewScientist, a study conducted by the University of Essex has shown there is no evidence that cell phones cause fatigue, anxiety or headaches. These are symptoms typically associated with Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS). In this study, researchers found that people who suffered from EHS couldn’t tell if the cell phone was switched on or not which suggests that the symptoms are not caused by radiation at all.

The researchers said that even though radiation is not really causing the problem, the symptoms are a real problem for those who suffer from this syndrome. Some people even cover themselves and their homes in aluminum foil stop what they feel are dangerous rays. It’s sad that they feel this way, but it’s wrong that they blame their cell phones and it’s wrong that Clarins is feeding on this fear to sell a product.

Should Clarins Be Ashamed Like Smashbox?

So, I’m sure don’t really need to spend $40.00 for 3P Screen Mist. But I’m not sure who should be more ashamed: Clarins for this product or Smashbox for the way they marketed their O-glow blush.