- This topic is empty.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
-
Posts
-
I’ve been researching to write a blog post about this claim, but I’d like you guys to share your opinions.
From what I know and learned after some research, there was never any legislation regarding this claim in particular, and it actually only serves as a “guideline” for the consumer. It doesn’t guarantee anything. Besides, now that animal testing has been banned in cosmetics (happily), these claims must be substantiated in human testing, with no standardized protocols.From the products you know, and the feedback you have from pacients, how much does it mean? Do you have any considerations to add?This is a very tricky subject. First of all, you’re correct that there is NO legislation regarding this claim. (But that’s true for most cosmetic products, the FDA in the US does not regulate specific claims.)
We’ve also read that even the best comedogencity tests aren’t all that accurate.So where does that leave the consumer? Not in a good place, unfortunately. At best I would look at a non-comedogenic product as one that doesn’t include the “worst offenders” when it comes to causing clogged pores.That’s what I think. I mean, it was formulated “not to be bad”…
But how often you feel that a “non-comedogenic” product happens to aggravate acne? I’ve experienced that with suncreen, for example, which tends to be particularly problematic…
Does reading the ingredient list help, anyway?
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.