Dr Barbara Olioso's Blog

Find out how the recession has affected the premium beauty market

I used to be on top of the brands on the market, at least in the natural and organic sector, but now I have to say I lost track, there are so many! Plus with the recession I see the market changing very quickly, with a polarisation between cheap brands and high end ones. So when I found out about  Imogen Matthews 's report for the premium beauty market I thought it would be very interesting and useful for people within the industry to know about it, because as you know good information can save you lots of time, energy and money. The report goes beyond the usual numbers and figures and it is implemented with consumer research to understand consumers' drivers and attitude to cosmetics. The report has just been launched. To know more about it visit Imogen's website

Preservative free cosmetics: are we talking about the daisy flower or my dear friend Daisy?

I have recently attended a lecture by Professor Michael Cork entitled "Killer Cosmetics - from bacterial contamination to skin barrier breakdown", kindly organized by the Society of Cosmetic Scientists in the UK.

Professor Cork is head of the academic unit of dermatology research at the Sheffield university and has worked on severe cases of infants skin rashes caused by microbiologically contaminated skin products. He also explained in a visual and clear way the key mechanism behind the skin barrier.

However I feel I ought to comment on one of the major messages of his lecture: preservative free cosmetics are dangerous whereas products preserved with parabens are very safe.

I approached Michael after his talk to inform him that there are several products on the market which are microbiologically safe and yet preservative free, and his answer was very much based on the chemical function of preservative (the daisy flower) rather than the marketing definition of preservative free (Daisy my friend). They are called the same thing but actually they are different. Let me explain to you.

The chemical function of a preservative is essentially to kill bugs, so if you mean that (daisy the flower) and you say preservative free cosmetics you actually mean a product with no antimicrobial protection whatsoever.  There are 2 types of products that fall into this category: oil based ones (no water) and water based ones with really no antimicrobial agent (it is very rare to come across this worst case scenario. Professor Michael was mentioning contaminated products from Libia and Iran).

Then there is my dear friend Daisy: the legal definition of a cosmetic preservative which comes from what is listed on Annex VI. If a cosmetic ingredient is listed on this annex it is called officially a preservative. This means that you can have a cosmetic ingredient which is not listed on this Annex and still act as a preservative (daisy the flower). And if you use this ingredient to protect your cosmetic from the bugs attack you can claim it to be preservative free and still provide to the public a safe product (providing it has passed the relevant tests required by law).

This is a great example of the gap between some scientific definitions and legal definitions, where you can use the same label or name meaning two different things depending on the point of view. And this gap can be used in a misleading way to reinforce a message or it can cause confusion in people not aware of it. Professor Michael was also stressing the need for education, on which I agree totally, however how it can be done is still a mystery to me (if you have suggestions please tell me).

In my opinion the essence is to ensure that the preservative free cosmetics you buy have been manufactured by a reputable company that complies with the law and makes sure that it is microbiologically safe.

Just had the lab results on the Japanese Honeysuckle and it is totally free of all parabens (methyl, butyl, propyl, butyl, benzyl).