More Moisture! Review of e.l.f. Hydrating Water Essence

Affiliate Links

I have to admit, I've been skeptical of e.l.f.'s skincare line ever since it came out a couple of years ago. At the time that it launched, most of the products looked very basic and uninspiring, but priced higher than I would expect for basics from e.l.f. (which seems to be true of many of their products lately). Nevertheless, earlier this year I ended up buying the e.l.f. Hydrating Water Essence, so I'll explain why I think it's worth it.

I picked this up after searching for a hydrating essence to add to my routine. Now, I know there are lots of Korean and other Asian essences out there, and some of them have been recommended to me on good authority, but despite a few forays, I still haven't delved completely into Asian skincare. It just seems like a whole other field of study I'd have to master, and I have enough research on my plate at the moment. This e.l.f. essence have the advantages of being easily accessible (ULTA, Target, etc.), and only costing $10 for a huge 5 oz. bottle.

I got interested in adding an essence to my routine after looking enviously at all the people who seem to have achieved beautiful, problem-free skin apparently through applying layer upon layer of moisture. I'm sure there's more going on there, but having moved to hotter and drier climates this year, I figured that more hydration surely couldn't hurt. (Yes, I'm kind of using "hydration" and "moisture" interchangeably here, but technically they are different.) As it turns out, I do believe my deep dive into increased hydration has helped my skin. I don't think it has made permanent, dramatic changes, necessarily, but I think the increased moisture has done some good things, like decrease the appearance of the hollows under my eyes. For example, compare this photo from last September, when I asked for advice about reducing that sunken eye look:

A post shared by Lyn (brutally honest beauty) (@brutallyhonestbeauty) on Sep 13, 2017 at 7:44am PDT

With this one in similar lighting from February:

A post shared by Lyn (brutally honest beauty) (@brutallyhonestbeauty) on Feb 2, 2018 at 11:46am PST

Or this one I just posted today. The improvement in my under-eye area isn't the same as if I'd got fillers, of course--it's not preternaturally smooth and it's better some days than others--but the overall plumping effects of increased moisture in my skin are noticeable.

Now, I'm not saying that this e.l.f. essence is solely responsible for these differences. It's just one of many hydrating and moisturizing products I've been using in my routine (steps outlined here), but I've been using it consistently for a couple of months now, and I like it.

Oddly enough, e.l.f. does not emphasize what I would consider the more interesting ingredients in its marketing of this essence, the ones that tend to be lauded by skincare-obsessed people on Instagram and Reddit. It doesn't seem to be aimed particularly toward us weirdoes. Instead, they note that it is:

A lightweight and nourishing essence infused with moisturizing effects of purified water, coconut water, algae, and coffee.

Ok. The moisturizing effects of water and some other stuff. Let's look at the complete ingredients.

Water (Aqua), Glycerin, Dipropylene Glycol, Trehalose, Niacinamide, Chondrus Crispus (Carrageenan) Extract, Coffea Arabica (Coffee) Extract, Cyclodextrin, Sodium Hyaluronate, Sodium PCA, Urea, Polyquatemium-51, Triacetin, Cocos Nucifera (Coconut) Water, Coceth-7, PPG-1-PEG-9 Lauryl Glycol Ether, PEG-40 Hydrogenated Castor Oil, Disodium EDTA, Xanthum Gum, Phenoxyethanol, Caprylyl Glycol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Fragrance (Parfum) 

So it contains glycerin, trehalose, niacinamide, and sodium hyaluronate, and you're going to talk to me about algae? I mean, carrageenan is a fine ingredient, which is probably mainly in there to thicken up the essence a bit, but I assume they're trying to get you to think of the magical algae in La Mer products by highlighting that one. And sure, coffee extract is a good antioxidant, so thumbs up there. My research into coconut water in skincare is less conclusive, but it seems like it might have some moisturizing properties.

Overall, e.l.f. seems to be using exactly the opposite marketing strategy for this product that The Ordinary uses. They emphasize the ingredients that sounds familiar, natural, and generally pleasant, instead of the others that are effective, but "scary," scientific-sounding chemicals. As a result, I think they are going to miss out on some of the skincare nerd market, so I'm here to draw your attention to some of the other fun shit in there.

Glycerin is just straight up one of the most effective humectants out there, so seeing it second on the list is a good sign in a hydrating essence. It's also nice that they haven't canceled out any of its effects by including drying alcohol like some other "soothing" and "cooling" products out there do.

Trehalose is particularly interesting, because for some reason e.l.f. chose not to emphasize that this essence contains the mystical powers of *~~*~mushrooms~*~~*. A missed opportunity--especially since living in L.A., which tends to be on the cutting edge of health woo bullshit, I've been seeing miraculous (non-hallucinogenic) mushroom extracts all over the fucking place. Trehalose in skincare, however, seems not to be nonsense. It has hydrating, and possibly antioxidant, properties.

Niacinamide is one of my favorite ingredients (though patch test, because not everyone's skin likes it). It's a vitamin B that can help with enlarged pores, lines and wrinkles, uneven skin tone, and, in my experience, acne.

Sodium Hyaluronate is a form of hyaluronic acid, another of my favorite ingredients. This form is generally considered more effective than regular hyaluronic acid. It's a fantastic humectant that always makes my skin very, very happy.

There are other nice ingredients in there, and nothing that particularly worries me, but I thought I'd just highlight those four. Because there is so much water (it's the first ingredient), the concentration of each of these ingredients is going to be lower than in a serum, naturally--but do note that they all appear near the top of the ingredients list, well above the fragrance. The fragrance in this product is noticeable when you apply it, and it's a floral, sort of rose, scent, but it's mild. I can't smell it once it's on my skin. I'm guessing it would be okay for all but the least tolerant of fragrance, but it's something to keep in mind.

As for a review of this essence in actual practice, it has a thin, runny texture, a bit thicker than water. I dispense a few drops into the palm of my hand, rub my hands together, and then spread it on my face. It absorbs in a couple of minutes, but you can apply several layers if you want more of that bouncy, hydrated feeling, and it will continue to absorb. It doesn't cause any sensation on my skin other than comfortable hydration. Other products apply well on top of it. I even like the packaging, which tends to be a factor that's pretty low in importance in my assessment of things. It looks pretty and it's functional, with just a small opening for drops to be shaken out. I really have no complaints!

I also used the e.l.f. essence to make my own soothing/hydrating mist, by mixing it about half and half with water in a spray bottle, and it works very well for that purpose, too.

I've been using my bottle now since early March, almost every night, and I've finished less than a quarter. of it I have a feeling it will easily last me a year. $10 for a year is pretty great. This e.l.f. Hydrating Water Essence is a great example of an effective product with top-of-the-line ingredients at a good price. That's pretty much the best I can hope for from e.l.f. Now I'm wondering if any of their other skincare products are worth a second look. Thoughts?

Oh, in case you're wondering what makes a hydrating essence different from a hydrating toner? Nothing.

Psychotic skincare

I just read this article from The Outline that's going around, and my eyes rolled back so far that I think they're permanently stuck back there. It is not wrong about some things? Sure. There's no such thing as perfect skin; women are disproportionately pressured to improve the condition of their skin; and skincare obsession can become an excuse for hyper-consumption and wealth display (I've actually written about that before). But other parts of the article are, to paraphrase, fucking psychotic--it's the typical backlash that you tend to get against typically feminine consumerism (or feminine pursuits in general). You know, where the misogyny is disguised as some sort of feminism. And I'm saying that as someone who fully acknowledges that there is A LOT of bullshit out there when it comes to beauty marketing.

Anyway, there were too many individual lines that had me groaning to quote them all here, but if one in particular stands out to you, please comment on it below. Or if you agree with some or all of the article--either way, I'd love to hear other people's thoughts! I'm still mulling it all over and sighing.

(Ok, just one. The whole "skin has survived forever, why are we doing stuff to it now?" is a lot like the old "women have been giving birth forever, why do they need hospitals now?" Groan.)

Thoughts on skincare, aging, and indulgence

A post shared by Lyn (brutally honest beauty) (@brutallyhonestbeauty) on Aug 24, 2017 at 9:52am PDT

A recent move from Michigan to Texas (which is my excuse for the prolonged hiatus here) has me thinking a lot of about skincare, beginning with how I need to adjust my usual routine to suit the new climate I'm now living in. Thinking about my goals and preferences when it comes to looking after my skin leads to all sorts of other tangential pondering about skincare in general. For instance, my skin has actually been quite good since I arrived at my new (temporary) home, and yet I'm still motivated to use all sorts of products and to try new things.

And what exactly constitutes "good skin" anyway? Or "good enough" (if such a thing exists)? For instance, I haven't been breaking out much, to the extent that I was a bit surprised to get my period, since I hadn't had my usual harbinger of cystic chin acne this month. So less acne = good, for me, ok. The texture of my skin has also been pretty nice: soft and smooth, pores aren't too enlarged. So I guess those are also things that matter to me for some reason.

On the other hand, I've been noticing lines more, whether or not they are more pronounced than they used to be or it's just because I don't have other issues to distract me from them. In a particularly ridiculous moment, I found myself browsing Instagram for closeups of faces of women younger than me to confirm that the wrinkles under my eyes weren't abnormal.

Skincare is obviously a hobby and a fascination for me, but I don't approach it without a generous amount of ambivalence. When you start looking at skincare products and reading about skincare routines, you realize that if you adhere strictly to much of the advice out there, you'll discover that there is apparently not a single person on the planet whose face doesn't have a flaw to fix. Whatever happened to "normal" skin? We're too oily or too dry--or both. Too much redness or dark spots. Pores are too big or too much acne. Too flaky or too shiny or not shiny ("dewey") enough. Too saggy or not soft enough. Too light or too dark. Too dull and not bright enough. Too many lines or too much puffiness. It's endless. It can be really hard to conclude that your skin is just fine.

Even our old gurus, like Paula Begoun for instance, who used to say that "not everyone needs a moisturizer," are going to try to sell us all moisturizers (and eye creams and essences . . . ). I'm not immune to this. When I was younger, I never used moisturizer, and my skin felt fine. Now I moisturize with different products a couple of times a day. Sure, skin often gets drier as we age, but do I really need all that? Or have I just got used to it? My mother almost never moisturizes, and her skin is neither dry nor oily. Again, remember "normal" skin?

But I have all these products, and they're fun to use (most of the time) so I use them. The pleasure we derive from our beauty routines isn't a bad thing. It's no more frivolous to have this as a hobby than to tinker with cars or knit or play video games. But it's a slippery slope from hobby into luxury and self-care. These are not always bad things either. Getting myself ready for work in the morning could be considered a form of self-care, because I get to sit quietly for 20 or 30 minutes and carry out my routine and start the day in a less stressed and more focused state of mind. But I think there's a difference between that and feeling like my problems can be alleviated with a little consumerism and that if I've had a rough time I deserve to treat myself to a new purchase. (I've written about self-care and consumerism before, and also see this Buzzfeed article about self-care and influencers.)

I try not to judge people who collect things, whether they're Funko dolls or exfoliants. But outside of those people who have the disposable income to collect one of every enticing skincare product, there's definitely some worrying overconsumption happening. Again, I'm not immune or exempt from this--I am quite aware of how much perishable shit I own, because I had to pack it up and move it with me across the country (THREE backups of PC 2% BHA liquid? Really, bitch?). If you follow skincare enthusiasts (or collectors, as you could call them) on Instagram, however, you're likely to be confronted with #shelfies of dozens of products and to see their morning and evening routines consisting of 5-8 products each, which change significantly every day. Again, they're obviously having fun, but seeing that over and over can create the impression that a "proper" skincare routine requires a lot of purchasing.

There are also, of course, the trendy and exorbitantly-priced products and brands that tend to appear regularly in these photos alongside glowing reviews. I've found, nevertheless, that there's little correlation between effectiveness and price when it comes to skincare. Some expensive things are great, and some are terrible. Some cheap things are great, and some are terrible. But the self-care, "treat yourself" mentality suggests that you're doing it better if you buy something luxurious (i.e. pricey) than merely something that's effective and pleasant to use, but cheap. In reality, you can have beautiful, well-cared-for skin (according to whatever definition you choose) even if you only own a handful of affordable products. Say sunscreen, moisturizer, and a serum in the morning, and cleanser, exfoliant, and moisturizer in the evening. Or less. Maybe you don't need to moisturize!

Returning again to that definition of good skin, it's a tricky concept. Most skincare products seem designed to do one of two things: to make skin "clearer" (less red, smoother, smaller pores, fewer pimples) or to reverse/prevent aging (again with the pores, fewer lines, tighter skin, fewer dark spots, etc.). Obviously there is significant overlap between these categories. But I wonder, did you ever notice someone's pores before you got interested in skincare? Did you ever notice your own pores? All faces have pores of varying sizes! Try looking at images of beautiful celebrities that aren't airbrushed to death and allow yourself to feel some relief that porelessness is not an achievable (or desirable!) goal.

Natalie Portman, Hollywood Reporter, May 2015

Saffron Burrows in Mozart in the Jungle

Anti-aging rhetoric is even more insidious and polarizing. (Allure magazine recently made the choice to cut it out.) A lot of the things we try to "fix" with skincare are things that happen naturally and inevitably to our skin as we age. And there are a lot of factors that affect them other than which or how many skincare products you use: genetics, skin type, time spent in the sun, environment, stress, and so on. What's wrong with looking your age anyway? Part of the problem is that it's hard to know exactly what "looking your age" means, because we are now used to seeing celebrities in their 70s who look younger than Audrey Hepburn did when she died at 63, because of all the subtle (or not-so-subtle) clinical procedures they've had done. And increasing use of sunscreen, probably. There's also the gendered/sexist aspect of anti-aging pressure, which tells us that men look better with a few wrinkles and women don't. Women don't get to be rugged. So when I slather on the sunscreen every day, there's a part of me that feels shitty for buying into all of that (I could pretend I'm doing it solely to prevent skin cancer, but let's be real--plus that doesn't explain the rest of my skincare hoard).

So all this rambling thought leaves me wondering why exactly I enjoy playing around with skincare products as much as I do when the whole concept can be so fraught. I have to admit to myself that vanity is a part of it, but I don't think that explains it all, because if I really just wanted to look better, surely I'd learn to style my fucking hair already.

I've narrowed it down to two other things: science and control. I like that skincare is a kind of experiment I can perform on myself. I like learning about all the many ingredients out there and what they can and can't and might do. I'm a researcher by profession and by nature. I especially like debunking the bullshit claims that brands and their devotees make--that's really what got me interested in all of it in the first place (see, again, Paula Begoun).

But another motivation that's been increasingly evident for me is the desire to try to exert control over some aspect of my life. That's something most of us need, and if, like me, you've been on the academic (or any!) job market during in the last decade, you might feel it more than others. I can't control what I will be doing or where I will be living or how I will be living a year or even 6 months from now, most of the time, but maybe I can control what happens to my face. (Maybe I can't. But it's somehow gratifying to try.) This is different from my interest in makeup, which I see as more of a low-stakes, low-energy creative outlet.

Anyway, if you've managed to follow my stream of consciousness here, I'd love to hear your perspective. Do you even give a shit about skincare? (I don't assume that everyone who reads here does.) Why or why not? Are your feelings conflicted at all, like mine clearly are? If so, what is it that bothers you the most about the marketing and conversation and media that surrounds skincare? If you're 100% into the whole skincare thing, what is it about it that fascinates you?

To reference an outdated meme, [my] fave is problematic.

(I'm also open to suggestions for adjusting routines to hotter and/or dryer climates. Ahem.)

A very good explanation of why you don't need to freak out about parabens (from Lab Muffin)

Read this! Short version: the scare science about parabens is not sound, and it's much worse to have your cosmetics become contaminated because they have no preservatives, or ineffective ones, in them--but there's a lot of other interesting science at the link too, presented in Lab Muffin's typically clear and entertaining way!

I Heart Hyaluronic Acid

Disclosure: Affiliate links. Product provided free for review.
Okay, I'm back for real this time. A massively busy week was capped off with a nasty cold, which I am finally recovering from. The combination of those two things meant I had no brains left over for blogging. My apologies if you have left a comment around here recently and didn't get a response. This is why! Now I have a huge backlog of ideas (and photos), so I hope to get back into the swing of things.

I want to talk about a skincare ingredient that's become one of my favorites in the last couple of years: hyaluronic acid. It's something that occurs naturally in skin tissue, and it has healing properties. It also a extremely effective humectant, meaning that it has the ability to hold moisture. Apparently one gram of HA (hereafter, because I am likely to spell it wrong repeatedly, otherwise) can hold up to six litres of water. It has anti-oxidants and and helps with inflammation. It's basically unicorn magic, okay? I mean, science. Unicorn science. You can read more about it here.

I find it difficult to judge the long term results of skincare products most of the time, partly because I don't know what my skin would look like if I hadn't used them. But this stuff is promising in the long run, and it has short term effects that I really like. HA helps the skin feel smoother and softer. That's my favorite thing about it. When I apply a product with HA in it, my skin feels "really fucking nice," as I've said before.

Because HA is a humectant, that means it draws moisture from the environment. Ideally, it will draw moisture from the air and put it on your skin. But if the environment is so dry that your skin has more moisture in it than the air, it can actually draw moisture out of your skin. This fact probably explains why when I first tried a serum with HA in it, I wasn't impressed. I was living in an apartment where I couldn't control the heat, and it was always cranked all the way up. That winter it was regularly -30 outside, and I still had to crack my windows open in order to be comfortable. SO DRY. It's the same winter I tested the Neutrogena hand cream that is mostly glycerin--another humectant--and wasn't impressed. Yet when I travelled to Seattle for a weekend and used it there, suddenly it was more effective. So if you live in desert-like conditions, your results may not be spectacular. Otherwise, I recommend giving HA a shot.

My current HA is a Vitamin C serum (pictured above) from a company called Maple Holistics, who sent it to me, along with a shampoo and conditioner, for free. This is one of only two times I have ever been sent what could be termed "press samples." Now you know I'm not much for "natural" nonsense when it comes to skincare. Even weirder, Maple Holistics markets some of their beauty products as "homeopathic," which . . . I'm not even going to get into that. What could that even mean? But the proof is in the ingredients, I think. The Maple Holistics Vitamin C Anti-Aging Serum ingredients list looks like this:

Water, Vitamin C (Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate) 10%, Vegetable Glycerin, Hyaluronic Acid, Aloe Barbadensis Leaf, Vitamin E Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate, Algae Extract, Pullulan Xanthum Gum, Hydroxyethylcellulose, Caprylhydroxamic Acid, Glyceryl Caprylate

Looks good! I actually can't really say much about this stuff as a Vitamin C serum. I've never had much luck with Vit C in skincare. Either it doesn't do anything for me, or I just don't have the issues it's meant to help with (my skin is already "bright," etc.). Plus, the first ingredient is water, and Vitamin C works better in formulas without water. However, ignoring that, this is great as a HA product. I smooth on a few drops in the morning, and my skin feels lovely. You can see from the photo above that I've almost finished my bottle. I've been using it since about September, 4-5 times a week, so I've tested it pretty thoroughly.

At under $12 for an ounce of product, it's not a bad price, either. In fact, you can test it out for free in return for an Amazon review (info here). Amazon is actually a decent source for products with HA in them. There are a lot of smaller companies out there selling stuff like this. The potential downside is that a lot of them trade free product for reviews, and even though they specifically request "honest" reviews, most people seem to be paranoid that a negative review will mean no more free stuff. (I hope you can trust that I am not one of those people, because I have amassed very little free stuff after years of negative reviews here. Which maybe means that concern is not so paranoid . . . ) Anyway, I would advise caution when looking at the options available on Amazon. Maybe assume the ratings are inflated or at least read the reviews with fewer stars.

If you don't want to venture into uncharted (or weirdly-charted) Amazon territory, there are HA options from more mainstream brands. For example, I recently read good things from auxiliary beauty about CeraVe's PM Facial Moisturizing Lotion, which contains HA. It costs about $13 for 3 oz. and contains other good things like niacinamide and ceramides. That seems like a particularly affordable option. If you want something separate from a moisturizer, there's the Paula's Choice Ultra-Light Super Antioxidant Serum (that I reviewed before), which has a bunch of other promising ingredients. Not cheap, though. Or if you have a regimen that you already like and just want to add HA to it, there's Paula's Choice Hyaluronic Acid Booster (damn, I had to spell it again), which allows you just to add some drops to whatever product you're already using. I've tried it and it seemed effective. It's also not cheap, but it should last a long time, since you only use a couple of drops at a time.

Whatever source you get it from, I do recommend giving a product with hyaluronic acid a try. It combines making your skin feel awesome immediately with (probably?) having excellent long term effects.

ADDENDUM: Please see this additional short post about another benefit of HA.

Anyone else a big fan of this stuff? Are there other good (affordable) sources of HA out there that you've tried?

How to find a dupe the scientific way (from The Beauty Brains)

The Beauty Brains suggest using the ingredients list of products like mascara to find dupes (step-by-step instructions on their page, using Benefit's They're Real as an example). I've done similar things with skincare products, but admittedly I've never tried it with makeup. It does seem like it would work better with a product like mascara than, say, lipstick or eyeshadow, where there would be more factors to take into account besides ingredients.

Have you searched for dupes this way? Does it work?

Lab Muffin speculates on what caused the problems with the Mentality polishes

Here's a very scientific and fascinating exploration of the possible causes of the reactions people have been having to Mentality nail polishes, if you can't get enough of that saga.

If you want "natural" sunscreen, you might have to compromise

I don't totally understand why people want everything to be "natural," other than because it sounds vaguely better than "unnatural," if you don't think about it too much. But some people do, so fine. If that's your thing, you should still wear sunscreen - and you're in luck because zinc oxide is pretty natural (though there is nothing wrong with chemical sunscreens - here's one I like). The downside is that zinc oxide tends to be quite opaque, so it can leave a white cast on the skin. Some formulas add tints or other active sunscreen ingredients to mitigate that whiteness, but then maybe it's not so natural anymore.

Other companies, like Jessica Alba's The Honest Company apparently just decreased the amount of zinc oxide in their "ultra-pure" natural sunscreen from 20% to 9.3%, because people didn't like the texture and appearance, while keeping the SPF 30 label on the bottle. Most other zinc sunscreens contain 18-25%. Keep in mind that the FDA has rules about SPF, but it relies on companies themselves to test their own products. The Honest Company says that they added "other ingredients" - unspecified - to compensate. But those other ingredient are not sunscreens, so they're not going to maintain the SPF. That's nonsense. And judging from consumer complaints, that solution did not work, because people have been getting literally burned by this shit.

So if you want all natural zinc-based sunscreen, you're going to have to compromise: either it's going to be less esthetically pleasing or less effective. Of course there are lots of great zinc sunscreens out there that work well, but they tend to have scary added "chemicals" (OH NOES) in them.

(Note: The Honest Company's sunscreen is marked Out of Stock on their website, so hopefully that means they have pulled it from their online store to reformulate.)

Please ignore the EWG when they tell you not to use your sunscreen

I've made this point a million times by now, probably. I don't care. It's worth reiterating. The Environmental Working Group is not a reliable source of information about cosmetics safety or science in general. It is a lobbying group that was started by personal injury lawyers. Think about the implications of that for a minute. So when they give you a list of "dangerous" sunscreens to avoid, ignore it. Find a more credible source like, say, the Skin Cancer Foundation.

A quick summary of what the Skin Cancer Foundation says: despite the claims of the EWG, there is no evidence that using sunscreens that contains oxybenzone and retinyl palmitate will harm you. You know what causes a proven, serious risk of cancer? Sun exposure without protection.

You already knew that. Just making sure. So use whatever full spectrum sunscreen works best for you.

Should you use apple cider vinegar as toner? (Help me out, here!)

This is a tough one to answer! When I google "apple cider vinegar toner," I get a lot of hits from bullshit websites lauding it for getting rid of toxins and being natural - the same sources that are going to tell you to use coconut oil as sunscreen or ingest essential oils. (Do not do either of those things, please.) Lots of people apparently think you should put apple cider vinegar on your face, but not many (any?) of them can provide an explanation of why, or at least one that isn't full of shit. "It's good for your pores/acne/balance/wrinkles/glow/dark spots/fish scales." Okay, but why?

Here is a post that talks about some of the potential dangers of using ACV on your face, including chemical burns (warning: graphic injury photos). ACV has some anti-bacterial properties, so maybe that could help with acne. But there is also good bacteria on your skin, so you don't want to annihilate it all. I'm guessing that back when people used harsh, alkaline soaps, an acidic toner like this could help to restore the pH balance of your skin. Using something overly basic (in pH terms) on your skin could also make it more prone to breeding bad bacteria, which the ACV might then kill. Maybe? But most cleansers now have a gentle pH, so that's not particularly necessary. And the pH is too high for ACV to be an effective exfoliant.

I'm not going to tell you not to use ACV on your face, so long as you are careful and dilute it well with water. I also can't recommend it, though, because I have found absolutely no evidence as to how it might be beneficial. When I google "apple cider vinegar toner science" most of the results include some variation of: "while no scientific research verifies these claims . . ." or, "I don't need scientific evidence to know it works, because . . ." Uh huh.

(ACV might be good for your hair, though.  Or maybe not. That's a whole other thing, anyway. Also, you can use it to make a safe mask if you mix it with clay with a higher pH.)

Anyone have an better information to share on the topic? I mean something other than anecdotal stuff. My usual sources are coming up dry.

HELP! I'm covered in chemicals! (Politicians working with EWG to introduce bill increasing FDA oversight of "personal care products")

I don't think this is a bad idea, as such. I'm a fascist commie Canadian who thinks the government should get more involved in everything, clearly. I just wish it were backed by decent science, not by Environmental Working Group's food-babe-style scare tactics. The association with the EWG (a lobby group - sorry "nonprofit consumer health advocacy group" started by personal injury lawyers) just taints the whole fucking thing for me. Did you know that women put 168 chemicals on their bodies everyday *cough*mostareprobablysafe*cough*? Are they counting water?

You can find a good critique of the EWG's "scientific" methods here, which doesn't really even address their hysteria. (Here's another critique with good links from something called the Yummy Mommy Club? But a useful article, anyway.)

All About Hyaluronic Acid (from The Beauty Brains)

This is interesting and useful. I have a couple of products that contain hyaluronic acid, and I really like them (like the Paula's Choice serum that I reviewed a while back). I like finding a breakdown of how "miracle" ingredients really work and then being able to decide for myself if they're worth the hype. I knew hyaluronic acid was a humectant, but not much else. I have had problems with products that are high in glycerin (another humectant) actually drying out my skin in winter (the Neutrogena hand lotion, for example), but I haven't noticed that with hyaluronic acid, and I used the serum mentioned above all winter. Overall, it seems like a effective ingredient with some promising science behind it.

This is why your beauty products need FUCKING PRESERVATIVES! (Recall of Nourish Organics Lotion and Face Cream)

If you have either the Nourish Organics Face Cream or the Nourish Organics Face Lotion, check the UPC, because they may contain mold. More info from Wegmans here.

For more on preservatives in skincare, click here.

ETA: The samples Ipsy sent out a while back are apparently fine; it's just the 1.7 oz containers that are a problem. Good thing, because I used my sample a few months ago. I'm glad it wasn't contaminated.

Can alcohol ever be ok in skin care products?

I seem to become more middle of the road in my approach to ingredients the more I learn about them. I still don't want anyone trying to trick me by putting a bunch of shit in a product that isn't going to do me any good, but I'm not so paranoid that I think a little bit of fragrance is going to turn me into an old hag, necessarily, anymore.

Alcohol is one of those ingredients, like fragrance or preservatives, that gets demonized in skin care (though the people worried about fragrance and the people worried about preservatives tend to belong to separate camps). A lot of skin care products contain alcohol. But does it actually serve a useful purpose, or is it just in there to improve the product's texture while ultimately producing damaging results?

Here are some different perspectives from sources that I think are generally smart and reliable (i.e. not the EWG):

Alcohol is always bad (except fatty alcohols).

Alcohol is fine.

Alcohol can serve a purpose in small quantities.

At this point, I am not bothered by a little alcohol somewhere near the second half of the ingredients list. However, if you're trying to sell me a fucking $95 serum that has SD alcohol as the second ingredient (after water and followed by boring ingredients like glycerin and silicone), I'm going to have to pass, thanks anyway.

What's your take on alcohol on your face, not just in your glass?

Why you shouldn't make your own sunscreen (from Lab Muffin)

I ranted about this once before, but here is a really thorough explanation of why trying to DIY sunscreen is a terrible idea.

Can your skin sense how oily it is and adjust its oil production accordingly? (from Lab Muffin)

No.

Cool new scientific skincare site

It's called Skincare Addiction, and it looks pretty great so far. Read a blog by people who actually have time to update it! That's, like, the best kind of blog!

Does nail polish go bad? (from Pretty Girl Science)

No.

L'Oreal's FTC settlement for deceptive advertising of the Youth Code/Génefique lines (from Truth in Advertising)

I hope we all assume that most skincare advertising claims are bullshit of some kind or another, but I guess this goes beyond slippery, confusing marketing language into actual deception. A jar of goop that can manipulate your genes? I seriously hope not. Or if so, I would like to rub the gene for being able to do math on my face or find some lotion that will kill my hereditary anxiety.

Oh, and L'Oreal doesn't have to pay a cent as the result of this settlement, despite having made well over a billion dollars from selling this crap.

All about parabens (from Of Faces and Fingers)

This is a spectacularly useful post about the function and safety of parabens in cosmetics, in which the author collects information from a variety of sources and evaluates the reliability of those sources. For example, she provides a nice critique of the Environmental Working Group (EWG), which is the source of many of the OMG TOXIC POISON CANCER scares that come up in relation to makeup and skin care ingredients.

Here is a summary of the post's conclusions, but I highly recommend reading the entire thing. It's fascinating and informative.

So to sum up - my conclusion is based on several key points I've touched on over the 4 headings:

1. The bulk of scientific data shows that parabens are safe, and they are determined to be safe for us in almost all jurisdictions.  2. The scientific literature that fuelled the anti-paraben movement can't prove causation, and in any case the authors themselves say that they can't draw a link and further study is needed.  3. Your body breaks down parabens applied topically through urine and bile.  4. Parabens are used in tiny concentrations at less than 1% in cosmetics and skincare  5. Paraben alternatives are not necessarily safer, or more effective.  6. Parabens are broken down naturally in our environment.

I just really love smart, critical writing about cosmetics.