A Guide to Informed Skincare: The Meaning of Clean, Natural, Organic, Vegan, and Cruelty-Free
Abstract
The number of cosmetic and personal care products marketed as clean, natural, organic, vegan, and cruelty-free continue to expand, raising questions from patients about the meaning of these product labels. Dermatology providers should be aware of the validity of the marketing terms and educate patients on the safety of personal care product ingredients. Herein, we explore the meaning of clean, natural, organic, vegan, and cruelty-free and address the safety of commonly banned ingredients in the informed skincare market. J Drugs Dermatol. 2022;21(9); 1012-1013. doi:10.36849/JDD.6795.
... Additionally, we must consider the attractiveness of a product like tallow as it is naturally derived from animals and how this plays a key role in the rise of its use in the skincare industry. With the rise in demand for "natural" products in skincare, an increasing number of products are being marketed as "natural" or "clean," calling into question what these terms really mean [11]. These terms can be used as a marketing ploy by the cosmetic industry to deem synthetic or lab-created ingredients as "toxic" or "chemicals" that are harmful to the skin. ...
... The words "clean" and "natural" are unregulated marketing terms that can be used to describe any product free of ingredients deemed unacceptable by a particular company. The most common ingredients targeted include parabens, petrolatum, formaldehyde releasers, and phthalates because of possible hormone disruption [11]. Companies such as Toups and Co. found a way to use tallow as the main ingredient in their moisturizers. ...
There is a surge in the skincare industry marketing the use of natural ingredients as efficacious agents. Although this has been popular in the Eastern hemisphere for a while, Western countries are starting to put more emphasis on naturally derived products. This paper chose to analyze the current research available on tallow, which is a solid fat derived from animals. Tallow has long been used as a neutral cooking fat, ingredient in soaps, biofuel product, and now ingredient in skincare products. The purpose of this scoping review was to look at the current research pertaining to the therapeutic benefits of tallow on the skin. Using the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, a scoping review was conducted using two databases: EMBASE and PubMed as sources of evidence. The searches for studies were conducted using the following key terms: (tallow) AND (skin or dermatology or dermatitis or emulsion or cosmetics or eczema). Papers were excluded if they were not in English, if they did not mention the effects of tallow on the skin, and if they did not use tallow rendered from an animal. Date ranges and geographical locations for articles were not part of our inclusion or exclusion criteria. We focused on the following five research questions: Does the composition of tallow make it better suitable for use on skin? What is the benefit of using tallow on skin? Does tallow have therapeutic properties for skin conditions? What side effects does tallow have on the skin? Is tallow reef-safe? While there is much evidence supporting the use of tallow as an ingredient in animal feed, cooking, soaps, and biofuels, there are significant research gaps in how it can be used on human skin. Our search on PubMed and EMBASE resulted in a total of 147 studies being screened with 19 fitting our specific criteria. Of the 19 studies, there were comparative studies, basic science studies, and animal studies. After reviewing the studies to answer the objectives in this paper, we were able to find information that supported the first three objectives; however, more research is still needed. Specifically, more research is needed that is geared towards tallow as a cosmetic product in humans. The fourth objective, which was to answer the side effects of topical tallow, had the most discrepancies between the sources. The fifth objective also found supporting information; however, only two sources were found. Overall, there needs to be more research with controlled variables on the side effects of topical tallow. Different research designs that could be explored include case studies, randomized controlled trials, cross-sectional studies, and qualitative studies.
... La industria cosmética se ha visto obligada a experimentar una importante transformación hacia productos más saludables, naturales, orgánicos, tanto en valores como en prácticas, a través de la investigación y el desarrollo de nuevas formas de producción sostenibles (Schroeder, 2019;Abad, 2020). Esto incluye la reducción de residuos (NielsenIQ, 2023) y los productos que no testan en animales o cruelty-free (Urban et al., 2022). ...
La creciente preocupación por el bienestar animal ha provocado en los consumidores un aumento del interés por los productos sostenibles. Como consecuencia, la industria de la belleza se encuentra cada vez más comprometida con los productos libres de crueldad animal o cruelty-free. Este cambio hacia un consumo ético y responsable se ha visto impulsado por el auge de las redes sociales y los influencers. En particular, plataformas como Instagram han desempeñado un papel relevante en la difusión de mensajes relacionados con la sostenibilidad a través de estos líderes de opinión. Para comprender cómo los influencers de belleza comunican los contenidos cruelty-free y cómo influyen estos mensajes en sus seguidores, se desarrolla una investigación que utiliza la triangulación metodológica. El diseño metodológico incluye un análisis de contenido, un cuestionario y entrevistas en profundidad. Los resultados del estudio indican que el esfuerzo comunicativo de los influencers beauty son limitados y no alcanzan un impacto significativo en la prescripción de productos cruelty-free. Las conclusiones recomiendan ampliar las estrategias de comunicación en otros medios digitales para incrementar el nivel de concienciación de la esfera pública para un cambio social sostenible.
... Vegan cosmetics is defined as a range of beauty products free from animal-derived ingredients. Commonly excluded ingredients in vegan cosmetics are lanolin, honey, beeswax, collagen, albumen, carmine, cholesterol, and gelatin (Urban et al., 2022). They also have not been tested on animals (Dos Santos et al., 2023). ...
Vegan cosmetics have become more popular among consumers due to increased environmental awareness and health consciousness after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to investigate the influence of beauty vloggers’ credibility on consumers’ purchase intention toward vegan cosmetics. An integrated research model was built based on the source credibility and stimulus-organism-response theory. Data were collected from a questionnaire survey with 382 Vietnamese consumers at the minimum age of 18 who had experience watching beauty vloggers reviewing vegan cosmetics on YouTube. Partial least squares structural equation modeling was applied to analyze the collected data. The results show that the beauty vloggers’ expertise, trustworthiness, and physical attractiveness all positively impact cognitive and affective attitudes, influencing consumers’ purchase intention. Furthermore, these factors positively impact consumers’ intention to purchase vegan cosmetics. Therefore, cognitive and affective attitudes partially mediate the relationship between the beauty vloggers’ credibility and consumers’ purchase intentions. Given that the direct and indirect effects point in the same direction, these mediators are classified as complementary. This study contributes to deeper understanding of consumers’ intention to purchase vegan cosmetics recommended by beauty vloggers. Acknowledgment The authors would like to thank the Posts and Telecommunications Institute of Technology (PTIT) and the International School, Vietnam National University (VNU), Hanoi, Vietnam, for providing research assistance.
... From a sustainability and acceptance perspective, >8 kg of silkworm pupae must be killed to obtain 1 kg of raw silk [157]. The cosmetic industry considers silk fibroin as a nonvegan product, which limits its use in a growing market [158]. Using biotechnology to produce recombinant fibroin in microbes or plants would overcome these ethical issues and potentially mitigate some sustainability challenges tied to fibroin production. ...
... On the one hand, there are health benefits of following a vegan diet, on the other hand, anti-vegan communities focus on negative health effects, such as missing nutrients (Gregson et al., 2022). Still, the discourse on vegan products clearly has expanded from food to cosmetics and the number of products on the market labelled as vegan is increasing (Urban et al., 2022). So, besides the recipe focus, we here find a discourse that also covers a veg*an lifestyle (including food and cosmetics). ...
With the rise of the clean beauty trend in the cosmetics and personal care industry, consumers’ interest in cosmetic ingredients, especially preservatives, continues to grow. Paraben, previously the most used preservative in cosmetics, has been excluded from many products owing to its potential risks. Therefore, a movement to lower the content of various preservatives is ongoing. One approach to achieve a suitable level of preservation is to use multifunctional ingredients as preservative boosters. In this study, we aimed to confirm the synergistic antimicrobial interactions between various cosmetic ingredients and 1,2-hexanediol, a preservative introduced as a substitute for paraben, using the checkerboard assay. We also measured the antagonistic effect by measuring the fold changes in the minimum inhibitory concentration of 1,2-hexanediol. Niacinamide, a form of vitamin B3, showed synergistic antifungal activity with 1,2-hexanediol, which lowered the content of 1,2-hexanediol in the oil-solubilized toner formulation. Among the substances, 50000 ppm of methyl methacrylate crosspolymer elevated the minimum inhibitory concentration of 1,2-hexanediol against bacteria and fungi by 2‒8 times. Through this study, we suggest applying the synergistic effects of various cosmetic ingredients in the formulation as a method to effectively reduce the content of preservatives.
Formaldehyde and methylene glycol may be used safely in cosmetics if established limits are not exceeded and are safe for use in nail hardeners in the present practices of use and concentration, which include instructions to avoid skin contact. In hair-smoothing products, however, in the present practices of use and concentration, formaldehyde and methylene glycol are unsafe. Methylene glycol is continuously converted to formaldehyde, and vice versa, even at equilibrium, which can be easily shifted by heating, drying, and other conditions to increase the amount of formaldehyde. This rapid, reversible formaldehyde/methylene glycol equilibrium is distinguished from the slow, irreversible release of formaldehyde resulting from the so-called formaldehyde releaser preservatives, which are not addressed in this safety assessment (formaldehyde releasers may continue to be safely used in cosmetics at the levels established in their individual Cosmetic Ingredient Review safety assessments).
Background
Facial allergic contact dermatitis caused by cosmetic products is common. New allergens in cosmetics continuously emerge.
Objectives
To investigate characteristics of patients with facial dermatitis between 2010–2019 including patch test results from cosmetic-related allergens and a new test series with cosmetic-relevant natural ingredients (CRNIs).
Methods
A retrospective study analyzing demographics, clinical characteristics according to MOAHLFA, and patch test results to 27 cosmetic-relevant allergens in facial dermatitis patients.
A prospective study evaluating a screening test series with CRNIs in consecutive facial dermatitis patients for one year. These patients received a questionnaire for collecting extra characteristics e.g. concerning quality of life.
Results
Of 8740 tested patients, 2292 (26.2%) had facial dermatitis. Of these, 30.6% had cosmetic-induced facial dermatitis. The most common cosmetic-related allergens were fragrances and preservatives. The most common patch test positive CRNIs were hydroperoxides of limonene and linalool, and propolis. Potato and peanut were rare, but the most common prick test positive CRNIs, however without any relation to the use of cosmetic products. Facial dermatitis affected nearly all patients′ quality of life and caused limitations to their daily life.
Conclusion
Updated management and quick diagnosis of facial dermatitis is important to avoid negative impact on patients′ quality of life.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Clean beauty, also known as natural skin care, is having a moment. From 2017 to 2018, the natural skin care market grew by 23% to 1.6 billion dollars, accounting for over 25% of the 5.6 billion dollars of annual skin care sales in 2018.¹ Staunch warnings from influencers such as Gwyneth Paltrow, whose blog Goop warns readers “Do you want antifreeze (propylene glycol) in your moisturizer? We’re going to guess no,”² have ignited fear in consumers who are now hungry for skincare that is safe and nontoxic. However, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has failed to define clean and natural, leaving these labels open to interpretation by nondermatologist retailers, bloggers, and celebrities who have set out to define clean beauty for themselves. While the clean beauty movement has demonized hundreds of compounds, in this Viewpoint, we argue that an arbitrary designation of clean or natural does not necessarily make products safer for consumers.
The addition of chemical additives to consumer cosmetic products is a common practice to increase cosmetic effectiveness, maintain cosmetic efficacy, and produce a longer-lasting, more viable product. Recently, manufacturers have come under attack for the addition of chemicals including dioxane, formaldehyde, lead/lead acetate, parabens, and phthalate, as these additives may prove harmful to consumer health. Although reports show that these products may indeed adversely affect human health, these studies are conducted using levels of the aforementioned chemicals at much higher levels of exposure than those found in cosmetic products. When cosmeceuticals are used as per manufacturer's instructions, it is estimated that the levels of harmful additives found in these products are considerably lower than reported toxic concentrations.
Certain phthalate esters have been shown to cause reproductive toxicity in animal models. For this reason, the FDA has been monitoring the use of phthalate esters in cosmetics. In this study, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) conducted a limited survey of 84 adult-use and baby-care cosmetic products for the presence of five phthalate esters: dimethyl phthalate (DMP), diethyl phthalate (DEP), benzylbutyl phthalate (BBP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), and diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) (Figure 1). The analytes were extracted from a cosmetic product/Celite mixture with hexane, and the extract was then analyzed using reversed-phase high-performance chromatography (HPLC) on an instrument equipped with an ultraviolet radiation (UV) detector set at 230 nm. The analytes were separated on a Partisil octadecylsilane (ODS)-3 column (250 mm × 4.6 mm I.D., 5μm). The mobile phase consisted of a mixture of 50% water, 34% acetonitrile, 13% 2-propanol, and 3% methanol that was changed linearly (35 minutes) to 15% water, 55% acetonitrile, 25% 2-propanol, and 5% methanol and held for an additional ten minutes. Spiked recoveries in antiperspirant and nail color ranged from 88% to 104%. Thirty-one of the 60 adult-use cosmetic products were found to contain at least one phthalate ester. Twenty products contained DEP and 11 nail products contained DBP. Concentrations of DBP ranged from 123 μg/g to 62,607 μg/g. Concentrations of DEP ranged from 80 μg/g to 36,006 μg/g. Five of the 24 baby-care products contained DEP at concentrations ranging from 10 μg/g to 274 μg/g.
Body Care, and Personal Care Products | Agricultural Marketing Service
Cosmetics, Body Care, and Personal Care Products | Agricultural Marketing
Service. Accessed January 20, 2022. https://www.ams.usda.gov/gradesstandards/cosmetics-body-care-and-personal-care-products
- A F Fransway
- P J Fransway
- D V Belsito
- J A Yiannias
Fransway AF, Fransway PJ, Belsito DV, Yiannias JA. Paraben Toxicology.
Dermatitis. 2019;30(1):32-45.