Tuesday, June 23, 2009

NEWS ~ Well Known Over the Counter Products Not Performing

My time as an Esthetician has taught me many things I did not know before. I use to be one of those people to watch a tv ad on the latest new & improved products and run out to purchase in most cases. As you and others like me know, it was usually a vain attempt because rarely did these products do as they claimed. Which brings me to this NEWS post. Just remember, there is no other proven product like one that can be proven by experience. Doesn't matter if the "name" on the product is well known or has been around many yrs. All these over the counter manufacturers are confined by FDA in the amount of any controlled ingredient!!
Ok let me put it this way.... Say you want a product for exfoliation and you want it to continue to work throughout the day. You would want a salicylic product. FYI .. the FDA only approves the use of this controlled ingredient in a small amount for over the counter sales!!! This would hardly be worth your hard earned money! Not only is it a waste of your money but its a waste of your time and effort. Not to mention disheartening when you do not see results you were promised. Below are some promises made by over the counter product lines that are now in court battles. So please remember, its best to get your products from well experienced professionals that use products on a daily basis with clients. Try going to your nearest spa or facialist for you answers and purchase products through them instead. Make good use of your money and your time and watch the results HAPPEN FOR REAL!!

Cosmetic scientists ask if cosmetics of the future could replace surgery

By Katie Bird, 20-May-2009
Related topics: Formulation & Science

In 30 years time will consumers be popping pills, applying creams or going under the knife in the fight for eternal youth?

This question was put to a panel of speakers at the recent Cosmetic Science Conference organised by the UK Society of Cosmetic Chemists.
Prevention rather than cure

Dr Tony Chu from Imperial College London, claimed the days of cosmetic surgery were numbered and would be increasingly replaced by non-invasive cosmetic procedures.
Chu said prevention of aging is taking over from treatment and this implies that consumers of the future will choose preventative skin care products over the knife.

This view was echoed by fellow speaker Dr Stefanie Williams, a dermatologist from European Dermatology London, who said prevention could include the increased use of sunscreen and the improvement of sun protection products via the addition of antioxidants.
The panel discussion had been opened by key note speaker Dr Tony Rawlings from AVR Consulting who discussed the efficacy of existing cosmetic products and what can be expected in the future.

Not as effective as surgery
He maintained that cosmetics will never be as effective as surgery but they do have significant physiological effects.
“The bottom line is that we have no chance of matching surgical procedures. We can never be as effective as botox, but cosmetics can and do have important physiological effects,” he said.
According to Rawlings, L'Oreal has illustrated that even the simplest of products such as petroleum jelly has some effects on gene expression.
He went on to outline a number of products that have been shown to be as effective as non-invasive cosmetic procedures such as microdermabrasion.
Clinical studies performed on Neutrogena Advanced Solutions showed that there was almost no difference in efficacy between the at home kit and the microdermabrasion offered by the clinic, he said.

In addition, direct seller Oriflame has been investigating exfoliation without the associated stinging sensation on the skin using neutralised salicylic acid, Rawlings added.
For Rawlings a realistic target for cosmetics formulators would be to match the efficacy of retinoic acid.

“We are still a long way off matching retinoic acid, but it is a more realistic target and holds value for the future,” he said.
The discussions of the morning also questioned the value of the term cosmeceuticals, with many delegates believing there is little difference between these products and those that fall under the term cosmetics.

In The News ~ Complaints of over the counter products
L'Oreal taken to court in Sweden for marketing claims

By Katie Bird, 18-Jun-2009
Related topics: Anti-ageing, Products & Markets, Cosmeceuticals, Skin Care

L’Oreal is being taken to the Market Court in Sweden for claims about anti-ageing products that the Consumer Ombudsman (KO) says it can’t substantiate.
The KO, a government body that can defend the interests of the consumer against companies in court, claims that marketing for L’Oreal’s Lancome High Resolution and Vichy LiftActiv Pro are not backed up by scientific evidence.
According to KO, the Lancome adverts claim the product can smooth out wrinkles by up to 70 per cent.

In the case of Vichy, the KO said that L’Oreal claims the product is ‘the source of healthy skin’ and can reduce wrinkles by up to 43 per cent.
Such strong marketing claims, which border on those made for pharmaceutical products, should be backed up by strong evidence, according to the KO.

It maintained this evidence has not been provided and is taking the matter to the Market Court (Swedish court solely dealing with cases relating to marketing) to stop the campaign.
In addition, the KO said it is calling on the Market Court to clarify the kinds of evidence required for this type of marketing claim.
Support from consumer association

Consumers Stockholm (KFS), the largest consumer association in Sweden, has welcomed the move, saying it is time the cosmetics market was held accountable to existing rules and regulations.

In 2006 the KFS called for cosmetics marketing to adhere to a number of requirements which it believes are as relevant today as they were three years ago.
These include making sure all claims on a cosmetic’s effect are double blind tested against a placebo or a control and not relying on in vitro tests as a measure of product efficacy.
In addition, KSF calls for the use of test subjects that are relevant to the target group and those featured in the advertisement.

Furthermore, the consumer association has called on the Drug Administration and the Consumer Agency to allocate the necessary resources to review the advertising and marketing of cosmetics to make sure they are consistent with existing rules.

Estee Lauder in trouble over 'instant' wrinkle filler

By Katie Bird , 07-Jan-2009
Related topics: Products & Markets

Estée Lauder is the latest company to run into trouble with the UK advertising standards agency (ASA) for making claims about its product that could not be supported.
The print advert claimed that by using the Tri-Aktiline Instant Deep Wrinkle Filler consumers would “Start to see your wrinkles disappear INSTANTLY!”.

Other claims appearing in the advert included: “After 4 weeks of continued use: 83 percent reported improvement in the appearance of lines. After 8 weeks of continued use: clinical studies measured a 45 percent visible reduction in wrinkle depth and length.”
According to Estée Lauder the claim was based on a clinical test on 25 women using photo imaging techniques. The company explained that Tri-Aktiline was formulated with polymers that act as fillers for the lines and wrinkles in the skin, hence the instantaneous effect.
Unsubstantiated claims

The company submitted the study to the ASA. However, after seeking expert advice, the regulatory body concluded it was not sufficient to support the claim. Criticisms of the trial included the fact that it was non randomized, not blind and did not contain a control group.
Estée Lauder also conducted a consumer evaluation study on 50 women, concluding that ‘68% of participants reported that Tri-Aktiline was either extremely, very, or somewhat effective in immediately filling-in fine lines or wrinkles.’

According to the ASA, however, full method and results of the consumer study were not submitted so this cannot be taken as supporting evidence.
Estée Lauder has been asked by the ASA not to publish this advert again in its current form.
New guidelines should help
The case comes shortly after the publication of guidelines by the UK cosmetics trade association the CTPA with the aim of reducing the number of clashes between cosmetic companies and the regulatory authorities.

The new guidelines, published in October 2008, were written with input and advice from the ASA and aim to clarify the properties of a cosmetic, the types of claims that can be made and what evidence is needed to back these up.
The guidelines are available to download for free on the CTPA website.

Avon falls into advertising trouble for anti-ageing claims

By Guy Montague-Jones, 10-Oct-2008
Related topics: Products & Markets

Avon has fallen foul of advertising rules in the UK for failing to substantiate anti-ageing claims made in support of a new exfoliant.
In a TV advert for the Anew Clinical Advanced Dermabrasion System Avon had invited consumers to “dial up the intensity every two weeks” and watch “fine lines fade”.
Questionable claims

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) took issue with these claims and after consideration ordered Avon not to broadcast the advert again in its current form.
In defense Avon had presented evidence to the ASA but the watchdog ruled that it was not robust enough to justify the claims made.
The ASA said the ad implied that the product could remove lines and not just reduce the appearance of wrinkles and that a cumulative or persistent effect could be observed.
Inadequate evidence

Two tests were submitted to the ASA but the expert consulted to evaluate the methodology and results judged them both to be inadequate.
The first was carried out on the arm skin which the expert did not believe was a good model for facial skin and the second, a home-use test, was neither double-blind nor controlled.
In addition to these concerns surrounding the design of the tests, the expert also said the actual reported change in the appearance of fine lines was in his view very slight.
As for the “dialing up” claim, the ASA noted that the product mix could be controlled by changing the aperture to make it more abrasive but felt that the advert gave the impression that the product had a cumulative and persistent effect on the skin. It found no scientific evidence to justify this impression.

A number of large beauty companies have found themselves caught in the net of the ASA for making misleading beauty claims including Johnson & Johnson and Unilever in recent months.

Stem cell cream gets into marketing trouble

By Guy Montague-Jones, 09-Jul-2008
Related topics: Formulation & Science, Color Cosmetics, Cosmeceuticals, Skin Care

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ruled against Basic Research for failing to substantiate anti-ageing claims attributed to its "stem cell" cream.
The Utah-based company came into conflict with the UK watchdog over a magazine advertising feature for its Amatokin face cream, by Voss Laboratories.
Elaborate product history

The literature made strong claims about the product's efficacy and explained the rather unusual origins of its active ingredient, polypeptide #153.
Voss Laboratories claims the ingredient was "developed in Russia at the "super-secret" Research and Production Center for Medical Biotechnology (a high-security medical lab located 62 miles north of St. Petersburg, surrounded by razor wire and machine-gun-toting armed guards... no kidding)."

Where the ASA challenged the company was in relation to unsubstantiated breakthrough claims.
Breakthrough claims questioned
Voss Laboratories claimed Amatokin "rejuvenates the skin and makes you look younger … a lot younger" but failed to submit studies demonstrating the effectiveness of the cream.
It pointed to trials regarding the cosmetic role of its key ingredients but the ASA said these positive conclusions could not be extrapolated to apply to the cream.
The watchdog said it was impossible to determine whether the ingredients were tested in the concentrations and quantities in which they would be used in Amatokin.

Besides unsubstantiated claims, the ASA said the advert was likely to cause confusion between competitors' products because it mentioned rival "stem cell" creams in a manner that suggested they were also marketed by Voss Laboratories.
These products using stem cell technology are part of a new generation of cosmetics developed using so called "high science".
They have courted both controversy and excitement with the ASA warning in its 2007 compliance survey on cosmetic products that future breaches were likely to surround this new family of products.

Cosmetics referring to cell regeneration, DNA stress and stem cells are all likely to have a hard time with the ASA.
The watchdog said it has seen more and more similar claims in adverts for new products since its latest survey was completed in September last year.

Johnson and Johnson in trouble over anti-ageing advert

By Katie Bird, 17-Sep-2008
Related topics: Anti-ageing, Products & Markets

Johnson and Johnson is the latest cosmetics player to be criticised for its ‘unsubstantiated’ advertising claims.
The UK’s Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has asked Johnson and Johnson (J&J) to discontinue its recent print media campaign for an anti-ageing formulation, as it was deemed to be misleading to the consumer.
Misleading statements
J&J’s advert for the RoC CompleteLift face cream claimed the product provides ‘Measurable lift in just 8 weeks’.

This statement was accompanied by a footnote stating that ‘CompleteLift has been developed to make skin feel firmer and reduce the appearance of wrinkles. It has not been proven to have a physical lift effect.’
According to J&J, these two apparently contradictory statements were included in order to highlight the temporary, rather than permanent, lifting effect provided by the product.
However, the ASA disagreed, deciding that readers may misinterpret the statements and be confused by the seemingly opposing sentiments.
Unsubstantiated claims

In addition, the agency decided that the claims made by the US-based giant about the efficacy of the product could not be substantiated.
The advert stated that the product was ‘clinically proven to work in just 8 weeks of use’, accompanied by a footnote referencing a clinical study.
At the request of the ASA, the company submitted details of the clinical study, which the ASA gave to an expert to consider.

J&J’s clinical study was found to be lacking on a number of counts, according to the ASA, including a lack of information regarding the methodology.
For this reason the agency concluded that the advertisement’s claims could not be substantiated and stated that the advert must not appear again in its current form.
Skin creams are the worst offenders amongst the cosmetic products that breach the ASA’s code, according to figures released by the body earlier this summer.

Out of a 455 beauty adverts that were examined by the ASA last year, overall compliance with the code was 93 per cent compared to only 81 per cent for skin formulations.
The agency described this as ‘somewhat disappointing’ however it said the figures were not so bad as to imply that the industry was not working responsibly.


Skin Perfection's & Beauty Tips © 2008 Template by Exotic Mommie Illustration by Dapina