ECKART Trend Color Forecast of Spring/ Summer 2014
Eckart GmbH
Eat less chocolate, start going to the gym, cut down on the alcohol, boycott paraben-containing cosmetics…
January 1 will have seen a number of resolutions for the coming year. Although we are familiar with resolutions relating to diet and fitness, number four may have been adopted with more festive fervor this year than the cosmetics industry would have wished for.
Although much of this can be put down to misinformation and media hype, the blame does not totally lie at the door of ignorance and scare stories.
Many companies have been quick to pick up on the mileage of plying the concerned consumer with ‘free from’ products, particularly in the case of parabens, even though the official line is that they pose no health risk.
Beiersdorf, for example, offers a number of paraben-free products including its basic skin moisturising cream that comes in the iconic blue tin with the white Nivea scroll. However, the company is by no means 100 hundred percent paraben-free.
Arguably, if the German personal care giant really believed parabens were a danger to human health it would not be offering them in any of its products.
Why then is the personal care company advertising one of its flagship products as paraben free? Because a growing consumer base - and therefore growing potential retail dollars – are looking for paraben-free products.
Beiersdorf is by no means alone, many of the major players now offer ranges that are marketed on the back of their paraben-free status, alongside paraben-containing formulations.
Consumer choice
The usual line here is ‘choice’. Consumers should be able to make an informed choice about whether they want to purchase paraben-containing cosmetics or not.
However, informed choice is impossible if there is no information. And, although the body of research, particularly animal studies, is growing, there is little evidence to suggest the compounds have any negative health effects on humans.
Furthermore, companies offering ‘free from’ products are inevitably fueling the idea that such ingredients should be avoided.
After all, one could be forgiven for thinking that if such a large number of companies are taking them out of products there must be something wrong with them, right? Well no, not if the rest of that company's brands still contain them.
New anti-paraben consumer
The paraben-free products offered by many of these companies are likely to push more consumers to adopt an anti-paraben stance, in turn making the majority of products offered by the company unacceptable to this new consumer group.
When the tipping point is reached, and the industry is forced to seriously defend its use of an ingredient that is currently supported by large bodies of evidence, the plaintive cry of misinformation and media scare stories may fall on deaf ears.
Clearly, resolutions are not always kept, but the industry may well find itself forced to look the way it deals with contentious ingredients during the course of 2010.
15 comments (Comments are now closed)
I also dare to defend Parabens
But is it really necessary to do so?
If we look deeper into the subject I am quite sure that not more than 5% of formulators and scientists have a seriously critical opinion on parabens. And I would dare to say that they have not the biggest influence as we can see that the respected opinion leaders in the field are all here, writing comments to defend parabens. Well, why not?
However I think that every article about it (also the pro-paraben ones) is fuelling the debate, so also the defenders should think about if it is worth putting so much effort into this battle with people, they say, have nothing to say.
There are just a few points that could be seen in a more open way also by the pro-paraben fraction.
First I believe that talking about such ingredients, even criticising them, by no means leads to a serious limitation of raw materials and the flexibility to formulate as I read in one of the comments. I think the opposite is true, because everybody can see, that there are new options coming into the market, not only alternative preservation systems (that, by the way, have been around for decades and have been tested and considered as safe as many listed preservatives by experts), but also new ingredients being brought onto the list of allowed preservatives. Thinking about new ingredients (also alternatives to whatever preservative) is scientific progress and nothing to worry about.
Second I totally agree with Dene, defending the safety of parabens and saying that everybody can read the label - as long as people have the patience of finding one ingredient among many with funny chemical names (for non-chemists this is not so easy maybe). And has everybody ever tried to read labels with grey letters on yellow labels in very small fonts? Not always easy. That's why some manufacturers put such claims on the front, and by the way, if one does a store check, it is quiet difficult to find these products that claim to be paraben free, because there are not many.
And third I think that the free from-labelling not necessarily implies that these ingredients are dangerous. I agree that some people who want to, will believe so. But on the other hand, ever thought that fat or sugar etc. are a danger to health? In fact they are essential components for our nutrition, every human being needs them. But still there are so many food products labelling that they are sugar-free or have only reduced fat content etc. Is that really a problem for for the food industry and are sugar producers or oil mills defending their product and criticizing such labeliing? No, because there is no need for it.
Consumers like product diversity, so let us relax, produce different cosmetics with different (and I agree: with no misleading) claims and labelling - and let the consumer decide what she or he wants to buy.
Report abuse
Posted by Fernando Ibarra
07 January 2010 | 23h01
I dare to defend parabens!
Congratulations, Katie, on an excellent, well-reasoned article. I also concur with many of the comments it has provoked. My main concern is based on the comment of Barbara whose company uses "paraben-free" preservatives to err on the side of caution for customers with problematic skin types. There is not, and never has been any measurable concern about the risks of using parabens on skin. In fact, if you look at the more wide-ranging papers on irritation and sensitisation, by which I mean those that review bodies of work with preservatives rather than just reporting a few cases, you will find that parabens are easily amongst the least likely to elicit a skin response. I would certainly err on the side of caution if you are using potassium sorbate as a "paraben-free" preservative, as studies have demonstrated this to be around 2 - 3 times more likely to cause sensitisation than parabens. Not a lot of people know that!
I would like to emphasise the point about "paraben-free" marketing being misleading. It is an unnecessary label claim (as are all "free-from" claims) as it implies that there is a problem with the ingredient (as clearly argued in the original piece). If people want to use products that do not contain parabens, they can look at the INCI list. That's what it's there for! This applies to any cosmetic ingredient - look at the label - this is how the choice should be made, and not by putting misleading/ambiguous claims on pack copy.
Report abuse
Posted by Dene Godfrey
07 January 2010 | 15h52
Who dares to defend parabens?
Even if there are no risks linked with a potential hazard, the marketing of hazards and the potential scaring of people will increase the credibility of the spokespersons. Furthermore, less shadow will fall on those spokespersons even if they market incorrect information, whereas the opposite is true for those trying to manage potential hazards and fails. They will be remembered and blamed!
Report abuse
Posted by marie loden
07 January 2010 | 09h02
Who are the winners in the paraben-play with the consumers?
Katie, thanks for your interesting perspectives on the "paraben-free" story.
Why are the consumers worried about the use of paraben-containing products? The effects are neither observed in humans, nor are they confirmed by quality-assured animal studies? Are the following stakeholders winners of such a worry?
1. Scientists get publicity when they find unexpected results on wide-spread substances. The publicity raises questions, which increase their research fundings.
2. Consumer organizations, media and bloggers etc find interesting cases which are used to promote their “intellectual properties”. This will increase their “business”, i.e. number of members, readers, followers etc.
3. Companies, e.g. raw material suppliers, get opportunities to easier increase their sales of alternative preservatives. The market entrance of small cosmetic companies promoting “paraben-free” is facilitated. Giant cosmetic companies protect their market share by giving the consumers a possibility to select “paraben-free” cosmetics.
4. The authorities will have an easier task in their regulatory work by asking for more data. Their asking for more studies will also be seen as trustful by the society.
How to eliminate the root cause to unnecessary worries or unsafe cosmetic products? The slow court process on parabens is unsatisfactory.
KR Marie Lodén
Report abuse
Posted by Marie Loden
06 January 2010 | 18h14
Much Ado About Nothing
It's always surprising to see how much emotions are involved in the topic of preservatives. Indeed there is little (and doubtful) scientific evidence for any danger implied in the use of parabens. But why criticize manufacturers who offer both - and talk about it? If consumers want to avoid ingredients (even if the danger is infinively small) they should have the choice and be able to buy even the same brand (e.g. in blue tins) if they like.
There are a lot of car manufacturers who sell large limousines and small cars with less fuel consumption. Are they hypocrites because they offer both? Or food producers who offer conventional and organic products?
Nobody (or only uneducated people) is saying that one is better, healthier than the other, but consumers like to choose, that's what our whole economy is build on.
There is even a word for this kind of differentiation of products, it is called marketing.
Report abuse
Posted by Fernando Ibarra
06 January 2010 | 17h37
For Money or Skin Health ?
I was just wondering is this all about money or the formulation of products that are good full stop. It seems just like everything else it has become more about personal opnion and fads than about good consumer products that do what they say on the packaging and no side effects later. So whether paraben or paraben free it matters not as the products is what it is supposed to be good bad or ugly.
Report abuse
Posted by Abiodun
05 January 2010 | 19h56
Parben free
I work in the natural skin care business, My company does use preservatives for our water based products but the preservatives we use are paraben free. We have opted to err on the side of caution for our customers who may have problematic skin types. For our powdered masks they do not contain presevatives and are sold as is. We believe that water based products have to be presereved but the choice is entirely up to formulators like myself. We are also SLS free.
The bigger companies are giving consumers the oppourtunity to buy what they want its a free world. Unless we want to force everyone to buy paraben filled products they should be given another alternative. Yes it is a question of CHOICE!
Barbara
Report abuse
Posted by Barbara
05 January 2010 | 19h42
New Version of The Emperor's New Clothes
The so called preservative free or paraben free cosmetics is the 21th century version of the emperor's new clothes, the problem is who is the emperor.
Report abuse
Posted by XuePeng
05 January 2010 | 03h10
Do it, but do it right!
I too work for a skin care company and, yes, we are moving toward naturally preserved products. But we are moving slowly, and carefully.
Not for us the mad rush to "paraben free". Much lab time is being spent in ensuring that we do not sacrifice anything else within the product functionality just to be able to make the "me too" claim.
As you point out, the consumer based "fear, uncertainty and doubt" being spread by the fashionable, but questionable, marketing claims of the "free" vendors does the industry no favours.
However, our professional clients, and those of other quality skin care manufacturers like us, are more than comfortable continuing to use products containing parabens for the time being. They know what they are and why they are in skin care products.
Yes, they will embrace new "natural" formulations but only when, and if, such products demonstrate that they are suitable, effective replacements.
Report abuse
Posted by Ian R
04 January 2010 | 20h47
AGREED - But can consumers minds be changed?
Thanks for the article Kate - I'm in full agreement and would love to see the pendulum swing back in favor of preservatives in our products - but working in the industry with so many manufacturers, I find that once consumers grasp an idea and make a decision about it - it is difficult for manufacturers to change consumers' minds.
Perhaps with more mainstream articles like this one!
Will we ever see the day where manufacturers tout the ingredients that are helping to maintain the integrity and stability of cosmetic formulations? Afterall - they are just as necessary as the active, natural and organic ingredients!
Thanks again - I could go on for pages on the subject - and it could beg other questions - what about sulfates etc?
Report abuse
Posted by Taya
04 January 2010 | 19h46
Preservatives-free
Preservatives-free could be the relevant question or the next logical step where all these marketing claims push the cosmetic world. Preservatives-free means short conservation time, short time after opening, shorter production, more expensive products, etc...
Nice direction where the marketing push us!
By chance the pseudo-green creams did not progress in 2009 like.... in 2010?
Report abuse
Posted by Etie2ne
04 January 2010 | 19h03
Thank you!
I am a product manufacturer/retailer. I love your your article and it pointed out something that I am doing that I will most likely stop. I have a card that says, among other things, sulfate free, paraben free...I never looked at how it might be perpetuating the "fear of parabens" movement. Thanks for pointing that out!
Report abuse
Posted by Jennifer Hardaway
04 January 2010 | 18h58
Hear-Hear
Thank for this article. I own a small skin care boutique, and I've done the research. I have no problem w/ a customer inquiring about parabens in cosmetics. It the know-it-all regurgitators of everything they read on the internet as "facts" that I have no patients for. What I tell these KIAs, is this "Any cosmetics that's on any store shelf must have some kind of preservative in it, do you prefer a preservative w/ years of studies behind it as safe in it current minisule state in your cosmetics or something that has no (long-term) studies behind it and only Gods knows what its side effect will be in a couple of years?" Then I watch their KIA eyes search desparately for an answer, that never comes. I agree that the industry need to start educating the public instead of giving in to the unproven claim made by these so call cosmetic watch companies who are in the business of scare. And for that one study or whatever it was that found paraben in one sample of breast tissue, my question to them is yea and what else was in that breast tissure? I subscribe to one of these cosmetic watch companies, and every emial I get from them is always begging for money, and pointing out the danger of one thing or another, and if you don't give us money then we can't continue this work of keeping you safe, blah, blah, blah.
Report abuse
Posted by Claudia
04 January 2010 | 18h54
Paraben-free
Well said Katie - it had not occurred to me to defend the use of parabens by citing major companies that advertise paraben-free alongside other products of theirs that contain them but it highlights the hypocrisy behind such claims. The cosmetics industry is its own worst enemy in the way it jumps on every "Free-from" bandwagon hoping to make a few sales by fuelling consumer fears.
Report abuse
Posted by John Woodruff
04 January 2010 | 18h38
"free" claims
All these stupid claims do is convince cosnumers that cosmetics are not safe and governments should pre-approve all ingredients before they are used. If that happens (and there is a movement to have this happen) there will be no new ingredients and most current ingredients will disappear as the cost will be too high based on the volumn sold.
Report abuse
Posted by David C. Steinberg
04 January 2010 | 18h25
Read all comments (15)