I was struck by an ad I saw in a magazine for Clinique. The copy asserted their products were tested on thousands of people and if even one of them has an allergic reaction they would reformulate the product. I don’t doubt Clinique’s advertisement, assuming a gigantic company the size of Lauder (Clinique is owned by Lauder) could easily get caught up on something like that. So is it true? Have thousands of people never had an allergic reaction to a Clinique product after or before it launches? It can’t possibly be true. Everyone can be allergic to something. That’s a fact; just think of how many people you know who are allergic to bees, pollen, dust, dogs, cats, sesame seeds, shellfish, milk, wheat, lanolin, peanuts, and on and on and on and on.

Taking this into account in light of Clinique’s claim that they reformulate even if one person had an allergic reaction, there would be a strong likelihood that someone else or many people would be allergic to the new ingredient change when they retested the product. In other words, Clinique would be continually going back to the drawing board, forever trying to create a product that absolutely no one has an allergic reaction to—a feat that simply isn’t possible.

Though I am extremely skeptical of Clinique’s claim (and that is truly an understatement), giving them the benefit of doubt, how could this claim be true so it could be boldly states in a magazine ad? I couldn’t get an answer from Clinique as to what kind of testing they used to support this boast so let me postulate a few theories:

Most cosmetic testing for allergic reactions is done by an occlusive patch test on some part of the body other than the face. After three days to six weeks of putting the ingredient or product on, say, the forearm, they uncover it and see if a histamine reaction was elicited. While that kind of information can be helpful, not all parts of the body react the same way to the same substance. Facial skin reacts very differently than skin on the arm does. So the arm doing well with this patch test doesn’t tell you how the face would’ve done under the same conditions.

Let’s take it a step further and assume Clinique did the test on thousands of faces and no one had an allergic reaction (again that’s really stretching, but without proof one way or the other, we’re working on their claim as true premise) does that translate to better products for your skin? Not in the least. It would be nice if a formula was free of producing histamines but an allergic reaction isn’t the only reaction you need to be concerned about. What about ingredients that cause skin damaging irritation? And at the other end of the spectrum what about ingredients that offer no benefit at all. An allergy test would be completely meaningless for those important concerns.

An allergic reaction is only a small part of a cosmetic’s impact on your skin. Irritation from fragrant plant extracts (which Clinique occasionally uses), synthetic fragrance, highly alkaline ingredients, preservatives, alcohol, and harsh abrasives would seriously damage skin and that has nothing to do with allergies. And what about skin care routines that don’t offer sun protection? Again, no allergic reaction, but you would be exposing your skin to a risk of skin cancer and a 100% guarantee of premature aging and wrinkles.

Beneath cosmetic claims lurks curves and turns you have to watch out for. Think twice and then a third time before you absorb and accept the information cosmetics companies want you to believe. More often than not, they are fraught with half-truths, misleading information, and, surprising amount of time they’re little more than out-and-out lies.