“This moisturizer is perfect for someone with oily or combination skin because it is oil-free.”

I can’t tell you the number of products touting this claim when they indeed do contain oils, or waxes that feel oily, or other ingredients that can clog pores. They may not be oils you recognize, like plant oils or mineral oils, but they are nonetheless in there, with names you may not have heard. Regardless, hearing that a product is oil-free still gives you no information about what it may or may not do to the skin. What is most confusing is that ingredients known for causing breakouts may not leave a greasy feel on the skin. Surprisingly, one of the greasiest ingredients, mineral oil, has been shown in study after study to not cause breakouts, although it can still feel greasy. Go figure. The fewer skin-care products a woman with oily or blemish-prone skin uses, the better off her skin will be.

I recently attended a Webinar (online seminar) put on by Allergan, the pharmaceutical company behind the upcoming lash-enhancement prescription product Latisse. As those who read my Lash Wars blog entry know, Latisse is poised to become the hot lash product women nationwide will be clamoring for.

There is no doubt Latisse will work to make eyelashes longer, thicker, and darker, with maximum results visible after 4 months of daily treatment. The Webinar was full of impressive before-and-after pictures from the 278 women who participated in the clinical trials that led to FDA approval of Latisse for eyelash growth. I imagine anyone watching the Webinar and bemoaning the state of their small or sparse lashes is eagerly awaiting this product—I know I would be and as someone who had used the Jan Marini version that was confiscated by the FDA I can vouch for how impressive the active ingredient can be!!!

Allergan certainly isn’t taking the sorry state of the U.S. economy into account—a 30-day supply of Latisse will set consumers back $120. With ongoing use, you’re looking at spending over $1,400.00 per year to maintain impressive lashes. Ouch! While some women won’t bat an eye at the cost, I’m sure others will pause before contacting their physician about a prescription for Latisse (it’s shipping now and expected to be widely available by the end of March). I was willing to spend that much on a 10-year supply when I bought up all the Marini product I could after it was no longer available.

Granted, applying an already excellent mascaras to lashes that have been made longer and thicker will produce greater results, but when is enough enough? Considering the average drugstore mascara we rate highly costs around $8 and lasts for 3-4 months, you’re spending a minute fraction compared to using Latisse and renewing your prescription every month and using Latisse doesn’t mean you will no longer want to use mascara. And that’s what Allergan said during the Webinar: 90% of the women involved with the clinical trials for Latisse reported that they will still use mascara even though their lashes were now longer, darker, and thicker. The folks at Allergan were quick to point out that Latisse is not trying to compete with the $1 billion + mascara industry (U.S. sales figure). Rather, Latisse improves the “lash canvas” and mascara is the “paint”. I like that analogy, but it shouldn’t have to cost this much to improve your lash “canvas”!

To further put the price issue into perspective, consider that Lumigan, the anti-glaucoma eye drops that contain the same active ingredient (bimatoprost) as Latisse, costs around $81 per bottle. Since glaucoma is a medical condition, these prescription eye drops are likely covered by most health insurance plans. Not Latisse. I can’t imagine the health insurance provider that is going to deem longer, thicker eyelashes as “medically necessary”! Maybe you should ask your ophthalmologist if you can just use a glaucoma medication which would last far long and be far cheaper. Okay just teasing, well sort of.

All of this comes down to how much you’re willing to pay for improved eyelashes—if using an excellent mascara can get you close to the results you want (and many of them can) you have to come to the conclusion that a prescription for Latisse isn’t worth the hit to your beauty budget. But expect to be very, very tempted to give it a try, I know I was!

I receive several emails per week from Beautypedia subscribers. Most of these messages concern products we’ve reviewed on the site, which is to be expected. The gratifying news is that most of our subscribers find value in our reviews and end up telling us that they have finally found products that work really well for them. But every now and then an email arrives that makes me wonder how emotionally attached some people are to the products they use. One arrived recently: a subscriber asked about a cleanser and moisturizer from a well-known spa brand that she was using. Both products received an unhappy face because they contained irritating fragrant plant oils that aren’t helpful for skin. The woman still asked if the products were any good or not. No, they’re not—and the “why” is right there in the review!

After thinking about her message a bit more, the subtext became clear: despite our review, she simply liked the products and wanted validation. She stated that the cleanser felt good and removed her makeup, while the moisturizer had a texture that she really likes. My response was that yes, the cleanser is capable of doing what you expect, but so can many other cleansers that don’t expose skin to fragrant irritants and also cost a lot less. As for the moisturizer, a great texture can be created from basic ingredients (such as thickening agents and emulsifiers); that doesn’t make it a state-of-the-art product or make it capable of performing as claimed or worth the price.

The frustration is that this well-intentioned subscriber wanted to know why the products work well for her since we wrote that they were problematic. I reminded her that unless we had information to the contrary we wouldn’t know smoking was problematic until a long time after we began the habit.

I was encouraged that this woman was willing to change products, but could also tell she really didn’t want to. I wasn’t sure what to tell her other than to experiment with cleansers and moisturizers we rate highly and see if she notices a difference (she certainly could find some less expensive options—the duo she was using cost over $60). I hope she takes my advice and keeps in mind that just because a product doesn’t seem to be visibly irritating skin, it may very well be doing just that if it contains ingredients known to be irritating. No one should have to tolerate irritation when the offending ingredients offer no benefit for skin (they may smell good, but that’s not a wise way to choose skin-care products).

Many of you read or heard the news story relating to a class action lawsuit settlement in which the cosmetics industry agreed to provide $175 million worth of free products to consumers whether or not they purchased from any of the brands cited in the lawsuit. I found out about the pending lawsuit in 2004, when the legal firm filing the class action against several major department store chains and several of the cosmetic companies sold there called me for my opinion on the topic. By the way, I declined to comment, and I’ll explain why in a moment.

The issue was price-fixing of cosmetics, including fragrances. As all of us know from simply shopping at most any department store from Macy’s to Nordstom or Neiman Marcus, cosmetics never go on sale. Department stores always run sales and clearances in all areas of the store….except cosmetics. What the suit alleged, and what seems blatantly clear, is that cosmetic companies don’t allow department stores to sell their products below the suggested retail price. Why? No doubt because doing so lowers the prestige such companies as Dior, Chanel, Clarins, Estee Lauder, and Lancome strive to maintain.

Somehow a Lancome or Clinique antiwrinkle cream isn’t as special or elite if it’s 20% off the retail price. Cosmetic companies want women to believe that the expensive products they proffer are worth every penny and of course that means it can never go on sale. How do you reduce the price of a miracle cream or lotion? What those companies want you to believe is that you can’t look younger or more beautiful or like your favorite celebrity on a budget.

All major U.S. department stores are part of this settlement; beginning on January 20th and running for the next week, you can stop by Nordstrom, Macy’s, Saks, Bloomingdale’s, and many others to obtain one free product, no proof of purchase required. The catch? Only a select group of products are part of this settlement, and they were chosen by the cosmetics companies affected by the lawsuit.

Further, not all stores will have free items available from each brand. Nordstrom may offer freebies from Clinique and Estee Lauder, while Dillard’s will have freebies from Guerlain and Chanel. No rain checks will be issued, so it’s first come, first served—and you can expect to wait in line for this perk, possibly as long as an hour.

The list of eligible free items is available at www.cosmeticssettlement.com. Personally, I was disappointed to see most of the products contain fragrance or are simply fragrant body lotions, throwaways for the cosmetics companies and not their best sellers. The skin-care and makeup products are a mixed bag, with many skin-care items not being full retail size but rather deluxe sample sizes. It’s as if the cosmetic companies disassembled their gift sets and used those products to give away as part of the settlement.

I suppose this is consoling or at least exciting for some consumers but the bigger picture is that this week of free cosmetic loot isn’t going to change anything. The cosmetic companies settled with a cash payment to the attorneys and this giveaway to the consumer. They admitted no wrongdoing. You are not going to see sales for Crème de la Mer anytime this millennium.
Department store cosmetic companies will still be charging too much for their wares, and women will continue buying them under the mistaken notion that expensive means better in the world of cosmetics. All it takes is a new product with a slightly different claim, a few eye-catching fashion magazine ads or mention in an “editorial” and a celebrity endorsement to get many women to the cosmetics counters over and over again.

Of course there are some excellent products sold from department store lines; the reality is that in most cases spending the extra money isn’t going to make you $20, $30, or hundreds of dollars more beautiful. I’m afraid all this settlement will accomplish is dangling a shiny carrot in front of consumers to distract them just long enough so they don’t notice that, come February, it’s back to business as usual and the attorneys got their take because their concern wasn’t the consumer. Cash or charge, ma’am?

Kevin Katechis and Paula Begoun

My team and I recently reviewed the retinol products sold under the Green Cream brand. Despite lots of consumer interest in these products, I reported that none of them were worth the expense or even mild curiosity because all of them contained way too much alcohol. Retinol is a great ingredient for skin, and its many benefits are well-documented. However, Green Cream’s attempt to offer their own retinol products is a dismal failure, at least in comparison to numerous retinol products from other brands. Kevin Katechis, the founder and president of Advanced Skin Technology, the company behind Green Cream blogged that I was “factually incorrect” in some of my statements, I would like to respond and offer the following information point-by-point:

• I incorrectly stated that Advanced Skin Technology company that makes Grean Cream does not sell pre- and post-surgical treatment products. Another company with the same name Advanced Skin Technology does.
• Mr. Katechis did not like my criticism of his company only offering retinol products. While retinol is a “performance-based” ingredient as Green Cream claims, so are countless others, including basic staples like cleansing agents, dozens of antioxidants, and even plain old glycerin. Katechis mentions in his blog that retinol has successfully treated over 150 skin ailments. Quite a boast, and one that isn’t supported by abundant research. A medical study search doesn’t even bring up even close to that number. I’ve seen research showing retinol is primarily helpful for wrinkles, sun damage, and limited research about a couple other problems such as psoriais, but that’s about it. I would love to see the research Katechis has because it isn’t in the scientific literature.
• He was confused that on one hand I commend Dr. Terezakis (the physician who formulated Green Cream) for keeping things simple and then state that it’s bad their product range is so limited. I clearly state in my review a simple approach to skin care isn’t a bad philosophy, but then I explain that Green Cream may be simple but the products are badly formulated due to their alcohol content.
• Katechis also took issue with my statement that his company was trying to skirt the issue of alcohol in their products by listing it as ethanol. He’s right that ethanol is the technical name for common alcohol, but incorrect that the FDA requires cosmetic products that contain alcohol to be labeled as “ethanol”. They only require drugs to be labeled that way and cosmetics must be labeled as either SD Alcohol (followed by a number), or denatured alcohol or in the EU as alcohol denat, a cosmetics company cannot just list ethanol.

What the FDA does state on their Web site is “If a cosmetic is also a drug, the label must list first the established name of the drug ingredient(s) and the quantity, kind and proportion of any alcohol, in compliance with sec. 502(e) of the FD&C Act, as “Active Ingredients” and then the remaining ingredients, in compliance with § 701.3(a) or (f), as “Cosmetic Ingredients.” The problem? None of the Green Cream products are considered drugs! That means ideally the ethanol should’ve been listed as SD-alcohol followed by a number indicating how the alcohol was denatured (made to taste bad if ingested) or ethanol denatured.

• Lastly, Katechis sent links to a handful of studies concerning retinol and/or retinoic acid and the use of ethanol (alcohol) as a vehicle for delivering retinol to the skin. He states that if alcohol is not used, retinol will sit on the surface of skin and be more irritating. What nonsense! Alcohol functions as a solvent and a penetration enhancer, which means that yes, it can help retinol get into the skin more efficiently. But its volatile characteristics and biological profile are irritating and drying for skin and alcohol causes free radical damage, so essentially all you’re doing is carrying that irritation and free radical damage deeper into skin.

There are several other ingredients that help retinol penetrate better without making it potentially more irritating. I reviewed all of the studies he sent and none of them were specifically about alcohol (ethanol) being a necessary factor required for retinol to perform as expected or be less irritating. The studies simply used alcohol in a solution, which is common to many types of lab and animal experiments. One of the studies was about retinoic acid and L-ascorbic acid (vitamin C) as being a more potent combination for sun-damaged skin, while another examined retinol’s effect on covered vs. uncovered skin. The retinol was suspended in an alcohol base, but that had nothing to do with the functionality of the retinol, so the rationale that alcohol is needed for the best retinol performance is not factual. In fact, I would suggest the research about alcohol shows that because of its inherent negative effect on skin it would hamper the retinol’s effectiveness. Virtually all of the products I’ve reviewed containing retinol do not use alcohol, and prescription retinoids almost never use alcohol. Katechis’ statement about alcohol being necessary to prevent the retinol from sitting on top of the skin doesn’t explain why so many retinol products offer controlled-release formulas for the purpose of, you guessed it, minimizing irritation that can occur when retinol penetrates too quickly. The blog goes on to question my credentials and mention that I’d write more accurate reviews if I actually bothered to understand ingredients and how they work, plus, of course, try the product. My credentials are outlined on my Web site and always detailed in my books and on my Web site Beautypedia.com. But most importantly, in my review I cite the studies I used to base my opinions on. You can use that for my credentials more so than anything else. And as I have stated numerous times before, I won’t review a product based only on my personal experience with it. All that would tell my readers is how a particular product worked for me, based on my skin type, the climate where I live, and my personal preferences, which may not be yours. Such information may be nice for some people to know, but I prefer to analyze a skin-care product based on its ingredient list, claims, and what published research says about both. I am willing to bet that had I wrote a favorable review of the Green Cream products, my credentials and research wouldn’t be questioned. Shortsighted comments like that only tend to occur when I don’t like products. When it comes to retinol products, there are dozens of them that I review favorably—and all of them are preferred to any of the retinol products from Green Cream.

Can a friend tell a friend she doesn’t like her hair?  makeup?  shoes? outfit?  Some might say, “Who are we to judge?”  My response, “We’re women, and we all have an opinion about how other women look!”

After reading hundreds of fashion magazines and watching countless celebrities walk down the red carpet, we judge other women’s appearance all the time. Who wear’s this dress better?  Brittany, Nicole, Kate?  We comment and critique appearance all the time, but it seems to be okay only if it’s a stranger or a celebrity or someone we’re “gossiping” about, not someone we care about.

As a psychologist, what I find most fascinating is that I can tell my friends something I don’t like about their husbands, their jobs, their kids, or the way they handle splitting a restaurant bill, but I can’t tell those same women to lose the black hair dye, stop over-bleaching their hair because it looks like straw, or change foundations because the one they use makes them look like they’re wearing spackle.

How do I tell a dear friend that her bulky unplucked eyebrows look like a forehead moustache, or tell another friend that her thick gray mane that she thinks makes her look like a feminist, actually makes her look like she’s ready to go out Trick or Treating.

So, what’s a beauty critic to do? Just ask my sister, which is why she reviews products and not the way women look?

My recommendation is to be open to feedback. Talk to your friends whose beauty sense and compassion you trust and ask them “What do you really think?”  Then listen openly, undefensively.  You don’t have to take anyone’s advice.  You can do whatever you want.  But, most importantly, know that if a friend doesn’t like something about the way you look, it doesn’t mean she doesn’t love you.  Quite the contrary, I believe loving friends tell each other what they think.  And always remember, that whatever you might do, hair grows back, roots grow out and makeup washes away.

I had an interesting discussion with a producer of an infomercial last week. Because of confidentiality I can’t tell you which one, but it really doesn’t matter because they are all the same and they all lie through their teeth the same. This producer knew that the script she was going to be videotaping was mostly misleading or untrue. Don’t get me wrong, she was very nice and she appreciated my research and critique of the topic, but of course there was nothing she could do about it. And nothing I could do either.

There are things I put up with in the world of beauty that just drive me crazy, and I mean a lot of things. Of course I put up with it because what else can I do? I can’t struggle with everyone I encounter (well I could, but there just isn’t enough time!).

One of the more irksome moments outside of the industry is the number of women I encounter who love bragging that the skin-care products they use that are all natural. Once they tell me what products they are using I know there is no way in hell what they are putting on their face is all natural or even part natural, except for the 70% to 80% water content the product contains. There just isn’t time to explain why what they believe isn’t true.

Or women who insist that they simply love the $$$$ anti-wrinkle product they are using. I bite my tongue because what I want to say that I can’t say is, you’ve got to be kidding. Can you really be that clueless? And of course the answer is yes, lots of women are that clueless. There is no way that product is worth the price (and it’s often in a jar package which makes it practically useless). No one should love anything that costs that much money when it’s just a moisturizer and often it isn’t even a well-formulated one at that. What does it take for women to realize that expensive doesn’t mean better in the cosmetic industry? There just isn’t time to explain this to the women I meet who don’t know my work.

What most women don’t realize is how everyone in the beauty business knows how the marketing and advertising for cosmetics is all BS. They all talk about it. They all know it. They shrug their shoulders and say, well it’s a living. Or they laugh about it. Either way, they meet women every day that are being suckered into products that can’t possibly perform as the claims on the label assert.

See what I mean about frustrating?

Over the past several years I have done media interviews and speaking engagements to women’s groups around the world. I have done presentation for thousands of women from places as far flung as Jakarta, Indonesia; Seoul, Korea; Stockholm, Sweden; Mexico City, Mexico; Singapore; Sydney and Melbourne, Australia; and Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and on and on.

From Toronto to Dallas and every place in between, no matter where I’ve gone, I’ve never had to change my topic of discussion. I don’t even have to do extra research because the cosmetics industry is so universally crazy, the advertisements so entirely deceptive, and the claims so utterly bogus all over the world that women ask me the same questions wherever I go. They want to know why a product they bought didn’t work. Why their wrinkles didn’t go away. Why their scar didn’t fade. Why their skin color didn’t change. Why they’re still breaking out or just starting to break out. Why they still have dry, flaky skin after buying so many products promising to change that. What is the best skin care ingredient? The exact same questions all over the world!

What almost always happens during my presentation is I see women get a look of understanding come over their face as they grasp how they have been duped time and time again by the cosmetics industry. There isn’t a part of the world where the cosmetics industry works any differently, or the products are any better (not in France, India, Japan, or anywhere), or the claims are any less farfetched. What all women want is to take the best care of their skin and look great as a result. Unfortunately, what most women fall into is the trap of believing the falsehoods propagated by a vast part of the cosmetics industry. Because of that,I am more than happy to get the truth out there and let women worldwide know what really does work to improve their skin.

Economic times are hard now. However, in the midst of all the bad financial news an uplifting study released by the Center for Women’s Business Research caught my attention. The following statement was simply very exciting: “As of 2008, there are a total of 10.1 million firms owned by women, employing 13 million people and generating $1.9 trillion in revenues.” (Source: http://www.womensbusinessresearch.org/assets/1059_pressreleasewomenown20per.doc)

I am proud to be part of that statistic. I was born an entrepreneur. I have worked for myself since 1980. A potent mix of genetics and personality has shaped my career as far back as I can remember.

In essence, I’ve just always wanted to be the boss. Just ask my family. Just ask my boyfriend. Just ask my employees.

Tedious rules and onerous work environments have always fit me like a pair of one-size-fits-all panty hose, and let me tell you, those only go up to my knees.

There are three phenomenal things about being a business owner. The first is being able to steadfastly adhere to my philosophy about skin care without having to compromise my values, integrity, or ethics.

The second is that I can create the kind of office environment I want to work in. I treat all my employees as valued partners and everyone else must do the same with their coworkers. No job is trivial and no job is more important than someone else’s.

And last, I have the freedom to create a dog-friendly office. There are eight dogs who come to work every day with their owners. While some companies have coffee breaks we have doggie breaks with our coffee. It’s spectacular fun and always a breath of fresh air when we need it most.

Don’t get me wrong, it isn’t easy being an entrepreneur. It has been quite a journey, with ups and downs, successes and failures. But beyond any shadow of a doubt, it has always been worth every minute of the effort it takes to keep going. Being a woman business owner is my identity and for the years that I have been able to stay doing it, I am truly, truly blessed.

I am used to reading criticism of my work. What I write about is controversial so it is completely expected. I also love the challenge. It keeps me on my toes and helps me rethink my position, learn something new, or dig further to see what I may have missed.

What does really get me riled is when someone criticizes my work with utter nonsense or fabrication. A recent example just made me scream (okay, I scream a lot when I read the endless insanity bandied about the beauty industry, but this one was just so silly and it was about me).

My work was being compared to other “beauty” authors who happen to be physicians. The challenge was why believe me versus them. Someone wrote that my work was more believable because I substantiate what I write by citing the studies and journals I’ve used as my sources. They viewed my work as more authentic and credible (which I thought was particularly an astute assessment and exactly why I do that where most other beauty authors don’t, including physicians). The response from someone else said that physicians don’t have to substantiate what they write because they are physicians and they just know all that stuff. What utter rot!

All medical journals are filled with citations of studies physicians use to substantiate their conclusions. All physicians and scientists know better than anyone that an opinion is meaningless and useless unless it can be substantiated. I cite scientific literature because I hold myself to the same standard physicians and scientists use, something most of them leave out when writing about beauty.