Home › Cosmetic Science Talk › Formulating › Do you think there are active ingredient in cosmetics?
-
Do you think there are active ingredient in cosmetics?
Posted by OldPerry on December 15, 2016 at 2:58 pmI tire of seeing the term “active ingredient” when advertising cosmetics. Shouldn’t this term be reserved for drug products? That’s what I ponder in this post on cosmetic active ingredients.
Similarly, other cosmetic marketing terms I find problematic include…
Organic - to a chemist, this means contains hydrocarbons
Chemical free - it’s notBut perhaps I’m being too harsh. What do you think?
Chemist77 replied 8 years, 2 months ago 6 Members · 12 Replies -
12 Replies
-
As far as I’m concerned there are active ingredients, because it’s possible to show via photos that there has been real change. It’s only the FDA that won’t accept that. In Japan a cosmetic can also have quasi-drug status (such as Apprecier from Showa Denko). However ‘organic’ is nonsense and chemical-free even worse.
-
Certain products from CLR Berlin show quasi drug usage, surely it is based on certain studies I suppose.
-
I would prefer it if we could make a distinction between API’s (Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients) and “Active Ingredients. Since it’s not likely that the FDA will change its nomenclature, though, I think it would be better for the cosmetic industry if all of us stopped calling ingredients that do something specific “Active Ingredients”. Sadly, I don’t see a chance in hell of that happening without legislation or federal rulemaking. I suppose a sufficiently aggressive/activist FDA could ban the use of the term outside of pharmaceuticals, but I’m not going to hold my breath.
The term “chemical-free”, in my opinion, is flat-out fraud and criminal deception. I am upset enough about this that yes, I think it should actually be a prima facie felony to use this term on any labelling and/or advertising.
And as long as I’m ranting here, I think the term “organic” needs to be replaced by the term “certified organically grown”.
-
There is no such thing as a Cosmetic Active Ingredient from an FDA regulatory labeling perspective. If there is an Active Ingredient listed it must be one of the ingredients specified in the FDA Monographs for OTC drug products. So, the term is being co-opted by the cosmetics industry and it’s just marketing jargon. That’s not to imply that certain ingredients do not have a beneficial effect when used, but they cannot be labeled as “Active Ingredient”
Organic is a specified term and you must go through a certification process to use the term Organic with the USDA NOP seal or the NSF seal. There is an NSF category for labeling “Made With Organic Ingredients” at 70%+ certified organic ingredients. This is a well-established protocol.
Chemical-Free is just marketing jargon.
I would not worry about any of this too much unless there is outright deception … that’s what we have regulatory agencies for. Consumers can complain and if appropriate, the FDA or FTC can take appropriate action.
-
I would not worry about any of this too much unless there is outright deception
This makes me laugh (at myself). I was told recently that being a Brit, I am damaging my sales by not making exaggerated claims. Here in Mexico, of course, everyone makes exaggerated claims. Said person commented:
“You’ve got a shampoo that you say might help people losing their hair? Tell them that if they use it for 6 months they’ll regrow it!” -
Totally agree the “active ingredient” term is confusing
I think the German language has a better definition;Arzneistoff = pharmazeutischer Wirkstoff = active ingredient
In cosmetics only the term “Wirkstoff “is used. (“working” substance)
-
(Laughing) It took Facebook more than an hour to approve it as a boosted post, I have the feeling there was some argument about it! (grin)
Anyway I targeted two other cities, Guadalajara and Mexico, specifically to see if this kind of promotion works.
Log in to reply.