SEVEN VISIBLE SIGNS OF STUPIDITY
I’m sitting here looking at a magazine ad for a hair shampoo that boasts it now contains “liquid crystals”.
Huh?
It’s the inclusion of catatonic polymer poly diallyldimethyl amnonium chloride with lyotropic liquid crystalline materials in every bottle. Apparently they also use liquid crystals in pool thermometers and semiconductors…Too technical for you?
Then how about conditioner with “natural cement”? It’s an “active ceramide-cement serum” that “fills gaps and seals damaged hair fibres”.
It’s bit like grouting only, like, for your head.
Nano-capsules, antioxidants, super-charged humectants, amino acids, antimicrobials, glycan receptors, glycolics, extracellular matrixes, liposomes…
Have you any idea what these terms mean? And why the manufacturers of beauty products think women are seduced by such techno-babble? Can’t we just go back to the days when face creams boasted honey and wheat germ?
Too late. It was back in the 1930s when the US chemical company DuPont first began using blokes in white lab coats to sell us the “miracles of science” in our everyday products. They started out making gunpowder, gave us Nylon, Orlon, Dacron, Lycra and Kevlar and now make herbicides…and Glypure, used in hair, face and nail products.
These days the cosmetic industry selects from more than 5000 different ingredients and delivers them in a bewildering array of technologies.
Remember those ads for the Ponds Institute? Whenever I saw the boffins wandering around in their white lab coats I could only marvel at the dedication of a team who seemed to be working on launching the first moisturiser into space. (Of course it was all fantasy – there never was a such a place as the Ponds Institute.) Whoops, Lee Tulloch reckons there was, she drove past it in Connecticut , USA!
That’s not to say, however, that aren’t teams of scientists beavering away looking for the Holy Grail of skin care. Ever since the pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies joined forces to create “cosmeceuticals” (which contain biologically active ingredients) the science has become increasingly baffling. And the products remain untested by the US Food and Drug Adminstration.
The new discipline of glycobiology- the role of glycans (sugar chains) in the metabolism of cells – is the latest frontier. And, sure enough we’ll be there to buy the stuff.
It’s estimated that the global market for anti-ageing products will be worth $291 billion by 2015.
What do you make of the claims made by cosmetic companies for their products?
Here are just a few of the more nutty ones I’ve collected over the years:
With “complex hydrospheres of liposomes and ceramides” this “time complex” cream “speeds your skin even further forward in the race against age”. Apparently through the wonders of quantum mechanics your face arrives at the dinner party long before the rest of your body gets there.
| Page 1 of 2 | next >> |
27 Responses to this article
-
Marilyn August 20, 2012
yes, it’s crap, but reading it gives women hope. Bit like a spell. If it doesn’t give you hope, at least it gives you a laugh.
-
Joanne August 20, 2012
I can’t believe you actually take the time to read the ads Wendy. What annoys me is the claims of natural botanicals, organics etc., then you look at the ingredients and it’s about 0.5% of the total product, with the rest being just sorbolene and a myriad of unknown chemicals.
We just renovated our bathroom, so I had a major chuck-out, the amount of half-used tubes and jars was ridiculous and not one product ever lived up to the claims (not to mention the amount of hideously excessive packaging that was thrown out when the item was first purchased).
Over the past couple of years I’ve done a huge amount of wellness research and It’s all very snake oil to me. The most ironic thing being that toxins not only age you, but are known to contribute to cancer and almost all mainstream “beauty” products are choc full of toxins.
Like most large companies, as long as the dollars keep rolling in, then the ethics will keep flying out the window. -
Van Essa August 20, 2012
I’ve started making my own hair conditioners using honey, eggs, avocado and some olive oil and I tell you what, it is a joy to get back to natural products. There are many sites on the wonderous wide web to help you make your own face creams as well. It doesn’t take much time to mix up and the results are just plain joyful. I refuse to put anymore money towards these conglomerates.
-
Dorothy @ Singular Insanity August 20, 2012
I am befuddled and amused by these ads. Why would I want to put all those technically sounding chemicals on my skin?
So I don’t.
-
Anne-Marie Ladegaard August 20, 2012
Great read as always, Wendy and I couldn’t agree more with you! What a load of crap and why oh why can’t women just accept their looks and their age?! Nothing in a jar or tube or whatever will ever change how you look! Your genetics and the way you think and what you eat/drink has a lot more to do with looks!
-
Jillli August 20, 2012
What about the ads that promise “visible results”!
Doesn’t that go without saying? Why else would anyone buy a beauty product?
-
Charlotte August 20, 2012
Nice work Wendy. I am ashamed to admit that I have in my possession a bottle of goop that claims it is “The first skincare with LR 2412, a molecule designed to propel through skin layers. On its path, it triggers a cascading series of micro-transformations.”
On this goop’s website there is also an amusingly abundant use of asterisks.* Like, not just one but *** and ** to show how very scientific it all is.
I don’t know why I have it, except I was buying a lipstick, and then the woman started yapping at me, and then, blah blah blah. It smells nice, I guess. I haven’t noticed any molecules being propelled out of my face, and the cascade must be of exceptionally micro micro-transformations ….
*may contain bullshit
*** quite a lof of it
** as shown in clinical trials involving idiots -
Maria Hannaford August 20, 2012
Ha, this is exactly why I ditched conventional products and came up with my own completely natural beauty routine. And wrote a guide about it. http://econest.blogspot.com.au/search/label/Natural%20Beauty%20Guide
-
pauline w August 20, 2012
I love face creams and will happily shell out for any new ones that catch my eye. I have to say that I have had ‘visible results’ and don’t look too bad for my age.
I don’t look at the ingredients too closely but refuse most things that have the first ingredient as water.
I buy obscure brands, not the cosmetic houses overpriced, over packaged ‘goop’.
In earlier times there wasn’t the technology to actually transport anything into the skin, but now the molecules are getting smaller, and thanks to medical technology, it is possible for ingredients to penetrate the skin. (That’s why dermal patches work for hormones, nicotine etc)
The biggest sign of ageing I have learnt is not wrinkles but skin tone. If you skin is free from pigmentation or sun damage, the wrinkles don’t seem too bad. I have started using Meladerm (not a cosmetic) and I have seen a difference in 2 weeks to my skin tone. I am loving it so much that I have ordered some for my daughter in the lead up to her wedding in 2 months.
-
Sam W August 20, 2012
“Aqua-spheres” – aka “drops of water.” I can get those from my bathroom tap, pah!
-
sami August 20, 2012
This is why I only buy from places like Lush or etsy.com, then I know that the products are made of ‘real’ stuff and, vitally, not tested on animals/containing animal products. If there’s something on the label that has a chemical sounding name I don’t want it. I read somewhere that if you wouldn’t eat it then you shouldn’t put it on your skin. Stuck by that rule since then!
As a benefit, I save money. I don’t want to pay $100 for a moisturiser! Try $7 instead! And it supports small business a lot of the time. Nice
-
catecat August 20, 2012
As if the pseudo-scientific twaddle wasn’t enough, there is usually a fair bit of French on the label. Maybe ‘ Le Crappe’ sounds better than…….
-
Gudrun August 20, 2012
I highly recommend searching Paula Begoun and her Cosmetics Cop and Beautypedia websites. She has an ingredients dictionary which tells you what all that stuff actually is and if there’s any real science to support it. She also points out that not all natural ingredients are good or safe for skin. And she cuts through the freaking-out over “chemical” ingredients too, just because something has a long chemical name doesn’t mean it’s toxic – dihydrogen monoxide anyone?. I would never buy some of those “natural” cosmetics which claim “no preservatives” – who wants to smear potentially bacteria-laden lotion all over their face?!
-
The Huntress August 20, 2012
LOL Did you ever see The Chaser when they were doing CNNNN with their “Esteem” branded cosmetic product ads? Hilarious.
-
Benison O'Reilly August 20, 2012
Yeah, I always loved ‘five times more radiant’ claim. What is the unit of measurement of radiance anyway?!
The classic dubious claim when it comes to skin care, hair care and supplements (another area rife with BS) is the phrase ‘clinically proven’. I’m a science writer and scientists never, ever, say that – that’s marketers pretending to be scientists, but I guess it impresses the gullible.
However, I may have succumbed to some of that Dead Sea mud -hot guy with French accent was the salesman. Lust makes you do very stupid things.
-
Tracey Hindmarsh August 20, 2012
Very funny read Wendy (and I am “in the business”). I do agree with Pauline W, she has some good points. There is a lot of rubbish out there but also a lot of great stuff!
-
SonyaMath August 20, 2012
I live in hope that even one of these products gets the result they claim. I am a product junkie. Imagine how amazingly beautiful we would all be if the products did what they claim!!
-
SandsOfTime August 20, 2012
I love the use of ‘up to’ with statistics. ‘Increases lash length by up to 70%’ – so if yours only increase by 2%, that’s within the range ‘up to 70%’ isn’t it?
-
Kerry Hudson August 21, 2012
I agree wholehearedly Wendy, I remember one famous brand having copper in their face creams then it was extracts of cherries. What in gods name could copper or cherries do for any-one. I use Sorbolene with glycerine on my skin, about $7 for a big pump pack from supermarket. On my face I wash with Cetaphil, rosewater from middle eastern shop for toner about $3 a bottle that lasts months and Vitamin E moisturiser also from supermarket, under $5 for a tub that also lasts forever. I refuse to make these cosmetic companies any richer.
-
ellenni August 21, 2012
hah all i did was stay out the sun for 50 years. i was 16 when i first realised the sun was doing its worst so i just gave it a miss. i dont use anthing except soap yes i said soap and water but just once a day to clean my face. no creams – nothing, zilch, nada. i have been blessed with good skin and i dont mess with it. as a dermatologist said back in the 60′s all you need to do is keep the moister in and any cream will do that. but i spend a fortune on perfume – go figure.
