-
who push misconceptions ?
it’s not the suppliers of raw materials who push misconceptions
not youtubersand not the pseudoscientificit’s the manufacturers who do it themselveswhen he writes on their packagesshampoign without sulfatshampoign without parabeenNatural conndisiers without dehyquartscreams without preservativesWith these lies sow suspicion among peopleAnd so they force us to lie to sell our productsBecause we must say our product is natural 100% -
17 Replies
-
smok said:“And so they force us to lie to sell our productsBecause we must say our product is natural 100%“Let me fix that for you … what you really mean to say is “I lie to sell my products by misleading consumers telling them that my products are 100% natural when I know they are not and I am forced to lie to consumers because I think other companies that I compete against also lie to consumers”
People like you are dangerous and should not be making cosmetic products if you are knowingly selling adulterated, mislabeled products and misleading consumers. There is no excuse for that.
Think about the implications of your attitude next time you eat packaged food if you think lying to consumers is acceptable.
-
WE ARE ALL DANGEROUS
and we should not be making cosmetic products
even who d’ont writes on their packages 100% they try To convince the people that the syntehtics products is good for the health and no has an undesirable efect on our health -
smok said:“we should not be making cosmetic products”
Actually, you should not be making cosmetic products … why don’t you do the world a favor and simply stop making adulterated products and stop lying about your products. Having integrity is quite simple … more so than being deceptive. May your next bite of canned meat be spiked with dog shit as filler.
-
Anyone can make cosmetic products as long as they only use them on themselves.
There is another angle to this. Demand creates supply, not the other way around. Consumers don’t want to buy petrolatum, glycerin and lanolin emulsion. They want “the miracle broth” (ref to Creme de La Mer). There are plenty of ways to sell cosmetics without lying to customers. For example, Lush call their cosmetics “handmade”. Their formula’s look like examples from Harry’s 8th edition dated 2000. TEA stearate and parabens, yet customers love it. My point is you don’t need to lie to the customer and call your product natural. Natural skincare is like 15% of the market.
-
i wanted to say we all we should not be making cosmetic products
i do not make adulterated products i only use sles in my sahmpoo and write natural product -
i wanted to say e all should not be making cosmetic products”
i do not making adulterated products i use sles in my shampoo like every one in the world and i wrhite i dont say it is a synthetic product -
@smok, look, what you are doing is not ok. I understand that you feel pushed into it and I feel your frustration. However, you don’t need to claim your SLES shampoo is natural to sell it. It is all about marketing.
I noticed this advertisement in the London tube recently:
I went to a store on the same day to see the ingredients’ list. It’s a clear SLES/CAPB shampoo without fragrances and colourants. The ingredient list is like 7-8 ingredients, much shorter than regular shampoos. They saved money on materials and managed to make it a part of their marketing story. There is no single lie in this ad. Fewer chemicals. Indeed fewer ingredients = fewer chemical because everything is a chemical. Don’t lie to your consumers. Just get creative with your marketing.
-
ngarayeva001 said:Anyone can make cosmetic products as long as they only use them on themselves.
There is another angle to this. Demand creates supply, not the other way around. Consumers don’t want to buy petrolatum, glycerin and lanolin emulsion. They want “the miracle broth” (ref to Creme de La Mer). There are plenty of ways to sell cosmetics without lying to customers. For example, Lush call their cosmetics “handmade”. Their formula’s look like examples from Harry’s 8th edition dated 2000. TEA stearate and parabens, yet customers love it. My point is you don’t need to lie to the customer and call your product natural. Natural skincare is like 15% of the market.
what can you do if live in country who evryone says my product is natural and without parbens and presevatives??
-
smok said:
what can you do if live in country who evryone says my product is natural and without parbens and presevatives??
The whole notion of your argument is that you think that your competitors are advertising that they do not use parabens and preservatives and you are using that as justification for saying your products are natural when you know they are not.
Do you actually have evidence that your competitors are in fact using parabens and no preservation?
Regardless, this is not justification in any way for your own false advertising. In fact, it is a marketing opportunity for you to prove that you are truly natural … oh, let me correct that … you can’t claim truly natural because your products are not all natural … you just falsely advertise them as such. Nix that idea.
To answer your question: Be honest in your advertising … it’s real simple
-
It is very difficult to create a naturally compliant and well-performing product. It requires a lot of knowledge and experience, access to expensive materials and access to a lab to test your samples. But it doesn’t mean that it’s the only way to sell your product. Have a look at the ingredients list of products in the luxury segment. The most expensive products in the world are formulated in a traditional way with silicones, sulfates, PEGs, acrylates and synthetic esters. The consumer wants aesthetics of the application, beautiful packaging, and a dream in a bottle. Give them a beautiful and effective product, create an appealing marketing story, keep your poor SLES in the formula and don’t mention synthetic/natural thing. An average consumer is very very uneducated.
-
MarkBroussard said:smok said:
what can you do if live in country who evryone says my product is natural and without parbens and presevatives??
The whole notion of your argument is that you think that your competitors are advertising that they do not use parabens and preservatives and you are using that as justification for saying your products are natural when you know they are not.
Do you actually have evidence that your competitors are in fact using parabens and no preservation?
Regardless, this is not justification in any way for your own false advertising. In fact, it is a marketing opportunity for you to prove that you are truly natural … oh, let me correct that … you can’t claim truly natural because your products are not all natural … you just falsely advertise them as such. Nix that idea.
To answer your question: Be honest in your advertising … it’s real simple
even those who use natural raw materials like plant extracts that have no efectscosmetique it’s liars
Maybe you are one of them but I will not sue youBecause I have no right to do so -
Wrong. There are standards for a reason.
-
Well here is a deal with consumers, although there are ingredients that are proven to have skin benefits, not many want to use them. Take retinol as an example, for it to work work, it should be at a concentration that will cause irritation and peeling. A consumer should wait for a couple of months until the skin overcomes that shock. And I am not even talking about prescription tretinoin. Not too many people want to have patchy skin for 2-3 months. They just want a promise, hope in a jar, and those plant extracts create a story. Personal responsibility is key.
But saying that your sulfate-based shampoo is natural is not the same as saying that aloe vera gel soothes the skin. The first is simply not true, the second is a matter of perception (that gel is cold it creates a calming feeling on irritated skin). Do you see the difference?
-
ngarayeva001 said:Well here is a deal with consumers, although there are ingredients that are proven to have skin benefits, not many want to use them. Take retinol as an example, for it to work work, it should be at a concentration that will cause irritation and peeling. A consumer should wait for a couple of months until the skin overcomes that shock. And I am not even talking about prescription tretinoin. Not too many people want to have patchy skin for 2-3 months. They just want a promise, hope in a jar, and those plant extracts create a story. Personal responsibility is key.
But saying that your sulfate-based shampoo is natural is not the same as saying that aloe vera gel soothes the skin. The first is simply not true, the second is a matter of perception (that gel is cold it creates a calming feeling on irritated skin). Do you see the difference?
ok thanks
this perception developsfirst the gel is cold it creates a calming feeling on irritated skinand after after a while he becomesanti irritation a moment after Completely eliminates …..did you see our dean( PHARMA) what he said about plant extracts
-
Interesting discussion. I agree and disagree with a variety of things that have been posted here.
@smok - I agree that cosmetic marketers do push misconceptions. Some of these are worse than others. But they are not alone. The NGOs like the EWG push misconceptions about product safety, the media also does in an attempt to write more interesting stories, and of course, consumers (you tubers, bloggers etc.) also do. I think you are mistaken because Raw material suppliers definitely push misinformation. I just saw marketing material for an ingredient that claimed to “stimulate collagen production.” This isn’t something that a cosmetic ingredient should do.
I also disagree with you that you are forced to lie to sell products. I understand how you might feel that way and there are definitely competitor’s out there who stretch the truth for sales, but blatant lying is rarely done.
However, I agree with you that the claim “natural” is inherently dishonest. Cosmetics are not natural. People who claim 100% natural may not be lying from their perspective, but I consider it a lie. There are no shampoo bushes or lipstick trees. Natural cosmetics do not exist which makes the claim dishonest, to me. I understand organizations have come up with standards and their own definitions of “natural” but that doesn’t make it any less dishonest to me.
The difference is that I wouldn’t lie about products just to sell them. Therefore, you won’t see me selling a 100% natural product.
I will add that this reminds me of Professional Bike Racing. Lance Armstrong won all his races because he was cheating. Nearly everyone else (who finished near the top) was also cheating. When your competitor’s cheat and are successful, it’s understandable to want to follow the same strategy.
-
@ngarayeva001 - I disagree about the honesty of the Sanex ad. I’m sure they have claims substantiation for all the claims they make so from their perspective they aren’t lying. But I think that ad is dishonest. First, they may not actually be using fewer chemicals. From my perspective, the number of chemicals in a product is the number of molecules used. And reducing the number of ingredients used won’t have much impact on that. The claim should be “choose fewer different chemicals in your shower gel.” I would also ad that choosing fewer different chemicals does nothing to ‘free your skin” at least as to how I would define that phrase.
I’d also say that the Zero% claim is dishonest. They have written in a way to give the impression that their product has Zero % chemicals. I know they haven’t said that but if you polled consumers after reading this ad, it wouldn’t be surprising if they thought it had zero chemicals in it.
In my view, this ad is dishonest even though it might not have a single lie in it.
-
@Perry, I totally see your point. That ad caught my attention so much that I stopped by a drug store on my way home the same day to check the ingredients’ list and wasn’t disappointed (I probably look like a crazy person reading labels in a store smiling). On the other hand it’s very hard to talk to an average consumer using common sense. They want a story.
Log in to reply.
