Pond's

Vitamin Limpiador Facial Micelar Detox Carbón Activado Y Té Verde

The other reason is that it’s mild and works very well combined with other cleansing agents and surfactants. The art of cleansing is usually to balance between properly cleansing but not over-cleansing and cocamidopropyl betaine is helpful in pulling off this balance right. 

Oh, and one more nice thing: even though it’s synthetic it’s highly biodegradable. 

More info on CAPB on Collins Beaty Pages.

Also, if your skin is sensitive, fragrance is again not your best friend. It’s the number one cause of contact allergy to cosmetics. It’s definitely a smart thing to avoid with sensitive skin (and fragrance of any type - natural is just as allergic as synthetic, if not worse!). 

If you are into chemistry (if not, we understand, just skip this paragraph), the reason is that electrolytes (you know, the Na+ and Cl- ions) screen the electrostatic repulsion between the head groups of ionic surfactants and thus support the formation of long shaped micelles (instead of spherical ones) that entangle like spaghetti, and viola, a gel is formed. However, too much of it causes the phenomenon called "salting out", and the surfactant solution goes runny again. 

Other than that, salt also works as an emulsion stabilizer in water-in-oil emulsions, that is when water droplets are dispersed in the outer oil (or silicone) phase. And last but not least, when salt is right at the first spot of the ingredient list (and is not dissolved), the product is usually a body scrub where salt is the physical exfoliating agent. 

BTW, lye is not something new. It was already used by ancient Egyptians to help oil and fat magically turn into something else. Can you guess what? Yes, it’s soap. It still often shows up in the ingredient list of soaps and other cleansers.

Sodium hydroxide in itself is a potent skin irritant, but once it's reacted (as it is usually in skin care products, like exfoliants) it is totally harmless.

As for cosmetics, the CIR (Cosmetic Ingredient Review) concluded that the amount of BHT used in cosmetic products is low (usually around 0.01-0.1%),  it does not penetrate skin far enough to be absorbed into the bloodstream and it is safe to use in cosmetics.

There is also some research showing that citric acid with regular use (think three months and 20% concentration) can help sun-damaged skin, increase skin thickness and some nice hydrating things called glycosaminoglycans in the skin. 

But according to a comparative study done in 1995, citric acid has less skin improving magic properties than glycolic or lactic acid. Probably that’s why citric acid is usually not used as an exfoliant but more as a helper ingredient in small amounts to adjust the pH of a formulation. 

SAP (the vit C derivative, not the enterprise software, obvs) is a promising derivative that has great stability up to pH 7. The challenge with it though is skin penetration. Unfortunately, it seems to be limited, or to quote a great article from the Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology "topically applied ascorbyl phosphate salts are, at very best, poorly absorbed in comparison with AA". Regarding conversion to AA, there seems to be no data about it, so we can neither deny nor confirm it.

We have better news regarding the three magic abilities of vitamin C: there is in-vivo (tested on real people) data showing that SAP does have photo-protective (aka antioxidant) properties, though less than pure AA. SAP might also aid collagen boosting; in-vitro (made in the lab) data shows that it works, but is less effective than another vitamin C derivative, called MAP (that seems to be as effective as pure AA). As for skin-brightening, there is a trade publication with in-vivo data showing that SAP can fade brown spots. 

Another thing SAP might be able to do is to help with acne. A 2005 study showed in vitro (in test tubes) that 1% SAP has a strong antimicrobial activity on evil acne causing P. acnes and it also showed in vivo (on real people) that 5% SAP can strongly improve the inflammatory and non-inflammatory lesions of acne vulgaris. In fact, the results were comparable or even slightly better than with 5% benzoyl peroxide. 

And there is even more regarding SAP and acne. A nice double-blind study from 2009 showed that  5% SAP reduced the inflammatory lesions by 20.14% and 48.82% within 4 and 8 weeks respectively and when combined with 0.2% retinol the results were even better. With this combination treatment, the improvement was 29.28% after 4 weeks and 63.10% after 8 weeks of application. 

Aside from research studies, anecdotal evidence also supports SAP being a promising vitamin C derivative. One of the best-selling (vitamin C) serums in Sephora is the Ole Henriksen Truth Serum, while on Amazon it's the OzNaturals Vitamin C 20 Serum. Another popular choice is the Mad Hippie Vitamin C serum, and all of these contain vitamin C in the form of SAP. 

Overall, we think SAP is a goody!  In terms of anti-aging, it's probably not as effective as pure Ascorbic Acid, but it's totally worth a try. However, if your skin is acne-prone, SAP is your form of Vitamin C and it's a must-try.

Another great thing about panthenol is that it has anti-inflammatory and skin protecting abilities. A study shows that it can reduce the irritation caused by less-nice other ingredients (e.g. fragrance, preservatives or chemical sunscreens) in the product.

Research also shows that it might be useful for wound healing as it promotes fibroblast (nice type of cells in our skin that produce skin-firming collagen) proliferation. 

If that wasn’t enough panthenol is also useful in nail and hair care products. A study shows that a nail treatment liquide with 2% panthenol could effectively get into the nail and significantly increase the hydration of it.

As for the hair the hydration effect is also true there. Panthenol might make your hair softer, more elastic and helps to comb your hair more easily. 

As Dr. Fulton (the scientist behind both Retin-A and RP) puts it in his patent paper,  "Other esters of vitamin A obtained from, for example, palmitic acid and acetic acid do not have the therapeutic advantages found with vitamin A propionate ..... Presumably, the [Retinyl Palmitate] molecule is so large, it is not able to transdermally reach the necessary part of the skin for activity. Similarly, vitamin A acetate is too small molecularly and therefore easily recrystallizes from any solution.....vitamin A propionate is the appropriate molecular weight and configuration to both remain in a stable solution and to be transdermally delivered to a site where it is active." So while the effectiveness of other retinol esters is highly questionable, Retinyl Propionate seems to be the most effective retinol ester molecule, and it "unexpectedly provides all the benefits of vitamin A acid but minimizes the negative side effects", at least according to Dr. Fulton, the inventor of the molecule. 

We know what you are thinking! This sounds great and all, but what about some proof? Some backup data not from the inventor himself?  We looked into it and found three studies working with Retinyl Propionate.

In a 2007 study by Dr. Draelos, she references a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial that compared the effectiveness of 0.15% retinol with 0.3% Retinyl Propionate. Both actives were effective in reducing the appearance of facial wrinkles and hyperpigmentation and the 0.3% RP worked a bit better. 

Another research that was done by Procter & Gamble combined multiple anti-aging actives including niacinamide, peptides and 0.3% of Retinyl Propionate and they compared this regimen with a 0.02% tretinoin regimen. They found that the cosmetic regimen was tolerated better, worked faster and gave comparable results. All this sounds very promising for RP, however, it is hard to know how much the other actives contributed to the positive results. 

Last, but not least there is a study from 1998 that tested a 0.15% Retinyl Propionate cream and after 24 weeks found no statistically significant difference between the effects of the retinyl propionate cream and the placebo preparation for any of the clinical parameters of skin photoaging. However, after 48 weeks, the 0.15% RP worked wonders for actinic keratoses, a rough, scaly patch caused by UV damage (its name contains actinic, but it is not acne, has nothing to do with it (!)).

So, it seems that the minimum effective dose of Retinyl Propionate is larger than 0.15% which is not surprising given that it has to do three conversion steps to reach the active form, retinoic acid. But 0.3% RP (or more, obvs) seems to be an effective dose, and even though the proof is not as solid as it is for retinol itself, if you are looking for a more gentle alternative, or if you are in the mood for experimentation, Retinyl Propionate looks like a noteworthy alternative and the most promising option among retinol esters.

A Contact Dermatitis article from 2007 names BP-4 as an emerging allergen, as it was the most frequently positive chemical UV filter and third most frequently positive ingredient overall among the 35 substances patch tested in the study (13 positives of 1693 people tested).

Anyway, it doesn't matter if it reflects or absorbs, Titanium Dioxide is a pretty awesome sunscreen agent for two main reasons: it gives a nice broad spectrum coverage and it's highly stable. Its protection is very good between 290 - 350 nm (UVB and UVA II range), and less good at 350-400 nm (UVA I) range. Regular sized Titanium Dioxide also has a great safety profile, it's non-irritating and is pretty much free from any health concerns (like estrogenic effect worries with some chemical filters).

The disadvantage of Titanium Dioxide is that it's not cosmetically elegant, meaning it's a white, "unspreadable" mess. Sunscreens containing Titanium Dioxide are often hard to spread on the skin and they leave a disturbing whitish tint. The cosmetic industry is, of course, really trying to solve this problem and the best solution so far is using nanoparticles. The itsy-bitsy Nano-sized particles improve both spreadability and reduce the whitish tint a lot, but unfortunately, it also introduces new health concerns. 

The main concern with nanoparticles is that they are so tiny that they are absorbed into the skin more than we want them (ideally sunscreen should remain on the surface of the skin). Once absorbed they might form unwanted complexes with proteins and they might promote the formation of evil free radicals. But do not panic, these are concerns under investigation. A 2009 review article about the safety of nanoparticles summarizes this, "to date, in-vivo and in-vitro studies have not demonstrated percutaneous penetration of nanosized particles in titanium dioxide and zinc oxide sunscreens". The English translation is, so far it looks like sunscreens with nanoparticles do stay on the surface of the skin where they should be.  

All in all, Titanium Dioxide is a famous sunscreen agent and for good reason, it gives broad spectrum UV protection (best at UVB and UVA II), it's highly stable, and it has a good safety profile. It's definitely one of the best UV-filter agents we have today, especially in the US where new-generation Tinosorb filters are not (yet) approved. 

Limonene's nr1 function is definitely being a fragrance component, but there are several studies showing that it's also a penetration enhancer, mainly for oil-loving components.

All in all, limonene has some pros and cons, but - especially if your skin is sensitive - the cons probably outweigh the pros.  

A study made in the UK with 483 people tested the allergic reaction to 3% oxidised linalool and 2.3% had positive test results.