ASA vs NAD

This story prompted a number of comments and emails. One astute reader named Pam, pointed out that the British equivalent of the NAD is the Advertising Standards Authority, or ASA. Her comment was very timely considering we just received a press release that described an ASA survey of how well products in Great Britain comply with the rules in the UK. (Keep in mind that unlike its US counterpart the ASA only has authority over claims in the media like TV, radio, print and websites. They do not cover claims made on packaging; that task is handed by a different regulatory group.

In their survey, the ASA examined 445 cosmetics advertisements from July through September 2007. They looked at a total of 53 TV ads, 25 radio ads, 12 direct mailings, 93 online ads, 4 posters, and 258 press ads. Their primary focus was on skin creams, acne treatments, makeup up perfumes and men’s cosmetics. About 32 of these or about 7% were found to be in violation of the advertising codes.

They found that most of the problems were with non-broadcast media (non TV or radio ads) and that skin creams were the worst offenders.

Biggest lies

• Anti-aging claims were not supported.
• Skin regeneration claims did not have adequate evidence.
• Medicinal claims were made for products that were not granted the proper authorization by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRAA)
• Skin firming and toning claims were not properly supported
• Claims related to products producing healthy skin had inadequate support.

The Beauty Brains bottom line

Overall, the report found that most products met the legal requirements for cosmetic claims, but skin creams did pose a problem. In general, the ASA thought this was a positive move in the right direction compared to what had previously been seen.

Do we have any UK readers out there? Do you think the ASA does a good job of keeping protecting you from false claims? Leave a comment and share your thoughts with the rest of the Beauty Brains community.

Women in their 40s report more issues with their skin than any other group - TRUE

20% of you thought this was the fake but it’s true. In a recent skin survey by The Segmentation Company, a division of Yankelovich, Inc., eighty-four percent of women said they had at least one issue with their skin. Women in their 40s had the most problems averaging about four skin care issues. So, if you’re in your 30s now, don’t look for your skin issues to go away any time soon. On the plus side, in your 40s you’ll have much more experience dealing with those problems.

Data suggests the smell of rotten eggs can increase human lifespan - TRUE

This one tricked most of you. A whopping 59% were certain that this was a yarn, but it wasn’t. The headline is based on research from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center that showed worms exposed to a small concentration (50 parts per million) of hydrogen sulfide (rotten egg smell) lived up to eight times longer than their counterparts breathing normal air. According to the researchers, humans and worms share similar longevity genes so the technology could theoretically be applicable to humans. Of course, we’ll all smell a bit funny.

Eating tomatoes can protect skin from sun damage - TRUE

Only 11% of you found this too unbelievable but it isn’t. Apparently, tomatoes can protect from sun damage. A research team found adding five tablespoons of tomato paste to the daily diet of 10 volunteers improved their skin’s ability to protect against harmful UV rays. This is significant because the tomatoes were actually ingested, not slathered on the surface of their skin. With the way that the rates of skin melanoma have been steadily rising, encouraging everyone to eat more tomatoes is a great idea. And really, who doesn’t want a good excuse to eat more pizza?

Male interviewers were more biased for attractive interviewees than female interviewers - FALSE

Over 90% of you thought this was true but this research shows, it’s false. It turns out that female interviewers were actually more biased by attractiveness than male interviewers. They gave attractive looking male and female interviewees more high status job packages than their average looking counterparts. Female interviewers also gave preferential treatment to attractive men over attractive women. On the other hand, they gave average looking men lower status job packages than average looking women. Male interviewers did not seem to be biased by attractiveness when it came to offering high or low status job packages.

How did you do? Were you able to sniff out the beauty BS? Leave a comment below and let the Beauty Brains Community know.

Pinching your pennies? Look like a million while saving money and gas with over 200 cheap chic online finds at StyleBakery.com.

Smarter Fashion shows us a great deal on a lovely sunflower yellow silk dress.

SheFindshelps you get past your fear of pairing prints with a step-by-step guide on how to pull off multiple prints.

SeenON! is shopping the red carpet from the Hills 3.5 Live Finale!

Sunglasses don’t just look good: they help protect Girlawhirl’s eyes and eyesight.

The Beauty Brains share a saucy secret about female enhancement creams.

Fore Brain’s fast answer:

The quick answer is that SPF (aka Sun Protection Factor) is generally a multiplier of your skin’s ability to resist burning. So if normally your skin burns after 12 minutes of sun exposure, applying sunscreen with an SPF 10 will increase the exposure time to 120 mins before you will get burned. This should help you pick out a proper SPF for your skin. Unfortunately sunscreen quality isn’t all in the SPF, so read on for other factors you should look for in a good sunscreen.

UVA UVB UVWhat?

Sunlight in outer space is composed of radioactive rays, which get filtered out by the atmosphere layers of the Earth. Of all the dangerous rays that the sun emits, the only ones that reach our skin are the UV rays. These rays fall into many categories but the ones we care about when discussing skin damage are UVA and UVB.

When they reach our skin, UVB rays stimulate Vitamin D production, appearance of moles, and can lead to sunburn with overexposure. There are more UVB rays in sunlight in the summertime when the sun is closer to the earth. UVA rays, are not as well known as UVB, and are responsible for tanning of the skin, as well as negative effects of sun exposure like as skin ageing and melanoma (a dangerous type of skin cancer). Unlike UVB, UVA rays are generally present at consistent levels throughout the year.

How do we protect ourselves from UVA and UVB?

This is where sunscreen comes in. Developed in the mid 1900s the aim of sunscreen is to limit sun overexposure and therefore minimize the negative effects and risks associated with sunbathing. The SPF rating that comes on sunscreen bottles is determined by an FDA required in vivo test which involves exposing volunteers’ skin to the sun until it sunburns and then evaluating the protection factor that the sunscreen gave that skin. The general rule is that the SPF is the multiplier of your skin’s normal resistance to sunburn, so if normally your skin would be sunburned after 12 minutes of direct sun exposure, with proper application of and SPF10 sunscreen, it will only get sunburned after 120 minutes.

A note about SPF ratings though. Some studies have shown that sunscreen’s protection factor doesn’t rise as evenly above SPF30 as it does in the ratings below. So for a long time sunscreens in the US were only allowed to be labelled 30+ because the numbers above 30 don’t represent sunscreen’s effectiveness the same way that SPFs 30 and below do. Recently this number has been raised to 50; however, you do need to keep in mind that still SPF50 isn’t twice as good as SPF25 as the number might have you believe.

But what about UVA?

Unfortunately, since the SPF test is mainly for the sunburn prevention properties of sunscreen, and those arise only from UVB, the official FDA test doesn’t shed any light onto how much UVA protection a sunscreen provides. Currently there are several skin pigmentation change tests available to test UVA activity and protection (since tanning is a result of the UVA rays stimulating melanin production and release), but they are not a requirement for sunscreen labelling in the United States. This is quite unfortunate, since UVA rays cause more long-term damage to skin like ageing and melanoma which is quite dangerous.

If you do want UVA protection in your sunscreen, look for products labelled as UVA/UVB broad spectrum, and don’t forget to check the ingredients; zinc oxide, titanium dioxide, avobenzone, and ecamsule (aka Mexoryl) are all effective at blocking UVA and have been approved by the FDA.

The Beauty Brains bottom line

So what is the recommendation here? In my research of sunscreen ingredients, I was very disappointed to come across many theories of some sunscreen compounds being carcinogenic, photomutagens, and reactive oxygen species, meaning that upon deep penetration into the skin they can cause some serious harm to us. This, combined with the fact that many sunscreens are poor UVA blockers, means that sunscreen doesn’t give us the ultimate sun protection which we have all come to rely on so heavily. So my recommendation is this: Try to find a facial moisturizer with UVA blocking compounds I listed above to use year-round to avoid signs of skin ageing, pick a skintype-appropriate sunscreen containing both UVA and UVB protection for the summer, and remember: the best way to minimize skin damage associated with sun exposure is to avoid it all together so wear clothing to shield your skin since the best sun block is a physical one.

Fun Fact: UV rays can be used to kill bacteria and are sometimes used to disinfect drinking water.

References:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunscreen

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=46376

http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/special/sunscreens/summary.php

Hansona, K.M., Grattonb, E., Bardeena, C.J., (2006) Sunscreen enhancement of UV-induced reactive oxygen species in the skin. Free radical biology and medicine, 41, (1205-1212).

Active ingredients: What’s in the product that gives it a sexual sizzle?

[Note: As you'll see when you read this list, many of these products are based on L-Argenine an amino acid that has been linked to the production of nitric oxide, a chemical that helps promote sensation down-you-know-where. However, these studies were done on L-Argenine in the blood, not from a topical application like these products provide. Therefore, we're skeptical. Other ingredients like menthol and niacin cause a mild irritation that creates a tingling sensation.]

Proof: What kind of data does the company present to back up their claims?

Cost: Is the product a big rip off or little rip off?

Ok, having said all that, let’s take a look at the top 10 female enhancement creams:

1. Alura

Active Ingredients: L-arginine, Menthol

Cost: $15 for 10 applications ($1.50 per use)

Proof: None provided

Worth trying? Nope. This one’s almost double the price of some of the others and doesn’t seem to offer any added benefit.

2. Climatique

Active ingredients: L-Arginine, Niacin, and Menthol. We’ve talked about L-arg and Menthol above. Niacin can provide a topical sensation.

Cost: $24.95 for 20 to 30 uses. (About $1.00 per use)

Proof: According to the website: “Original Climatique was evaluated by the research department of world famous Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality. Focus groups, clinicians and sexual scientists agreed with the women of all ages that Original Climatique deserved an unqualified recommendation for use as a sexual enhancer and a pleasure product.”

Worth trying? Hard to tell. I’m not sure what this endorsement means and the niacin scares me a bit – maybe too much sensation if you know what I mean

3. Orexia

Active ingredient: menthol

Proof: None.

Cost: $49 per jar of unknown size

Worth trying? No way am I paying 50 bucks for menthol!

4. Senstra

Active ingredient: L-Argenine

Proof: Same as #1 and 2 above.

Cost: $27.95 for 2 oz.

Worth trying? Nothing compelling here. Keep scrolling.

5. Vazoplex

Active ingredient: They won’t tell us! There’s nothing on the website that describes what’s actually in the product. A huge red flag!

Proof: You’re kidding, right? They won’t even say what’s in it!

Cost: $19.00 for a month supply. How many times would YOU use it in a month???

Worth trying? Forget it!

6. V Cream

Active ingredient: L-argenine, menthol, Damiana, Maca, Ginseng, Ginkgo Biloba.

Proof: None.

Cost: $44.00 per jar of unknown size.

Worth trying? More of the same.

7. Venus Touch

Active ingredient: Arginine and Ornithine, more nitric acid stimulation via amino acids.

Proof: Nothing substantial.

Cost: $19.95 for 20 to 30 uses (<$1.00 per use)

Worth trying? I’ll pass.

8. Vigel

Active ingredient: L-Arginine

Proof: There are references to clinical studies on L-Arginine but they don’t indicate how the L-Arginine was applied. Could have been ingested? Can’t tell for sure.

Cost: $24.95 per bottle (approx. 30 applications) (< $1.00 per use)

Worth trying? Well, at least it’s cheap!

9. Vigorelle

Active ingredients: Damiana Leaf, Suma Root, Motherwort, Wild Yam, Ginkgo Biloba, Peppermint Leaf. (Peppermint has an effect similar to menthol.)Cost: $59.95 for 30 applications ($2 per use)

Proof: None.

Cost: $59.95 for 2 ounces

Worth trying? No thanks, due to lack of proof and high price.

10. Zestra

Active Ingredients: Borage Seed Oil, Evening Primrose Oil, Coleus Extract, Vitamin C, Vitamin E, and natural fragrance.

Proof: Surprisingly, this is the only product that claims to NOT work through irritation. Unlike niacin and menthol, Zestra uses a different mechanism. Here’s what they say about their study results: “The Phase 3-type study evaluated the efficacy and safety of Zestra(R), compared to placebo oil in 256 women diagnosed with acquired mixed interest/desire/arousal/orgasm disorders in conditions of home use in conjunction with sexual activities. “Zestra was well-tolerated, and no serious adverse events (SAEs) were associated with study participants’ use of the product,” David M. Ferguson, PhD, MD, FACCP, the study’s clinical director, said.”

Cost: $17 for 9 uses ($1.80 per use)

Worth trying? Could be. Zestra is a bit more expensive per use, but it’s the only product that seems even remotely legitimate in my opinion. I’d bet my money on this one.

The Beauty Brains bottom line:

I’m not convinced there’s substantial research showing ANY of these really do anything beyond providing some surface tingling. But if you really want to try one, it looks like Zestra could be the best of the bunch.

What do YOU think? Have you tried any of these? Would you? If you would, would you tell anyone? Let’s find out! Leave a comment and share your salacious stories with the rest of the Beauty Brains community.