I stopped by the Clinique counter at our local Nordstrom yesterday to purchase their new Even Better Clinical Dark Spot Corrector so I could review it for www.beautypedia.com. Even Better Clinical Dark Spot Corrector is a reformulation of Clinique’s Even Better Dark Spot Corrector (the change is the addition of the word Clinical). Both are supposed to fade discolorations, including marks from acne. The Clinique Consultant, decked out in the usual white lab coat, told me they had not received the new Clinical version yet but if I pre-order it now they’ll include some goodies as a thank you for being patient. I thought, “why not?” and went ahead with the pre-order.

While she was filling out the paperwork, I asked if she had used the new Clinical version (Clinique salespeople typically get new products in advance so they can use them before they’re sold to the public). “Oh yes,” she said. “In fact, I’m surprised at how fast it worked to lighten some dark patches on my cheek. They’ve already faded in less than two weeks! I keep looking at where the spots used to be and wonder if I’m imagining the improvement!” I told her that her skin looked great but noted she was wearing enough foundation to hide minor discolorations. In turn, she asked me if I had used their existing Even Better (non-clinical) product, the one that launched about a year ago. I said I had tried it but didn’t notice any results that made continued use worth it (hey, why not be honest?).

After my admission she happily exclaimed, “Yes, the original Even Better didn’t work all that well for most people. That’s why Clinique created Even Better Clinical! It works much faster on discolorations than the original version and has lots more antioxidants!” Her comment about the original correlates with our review of this product (though I’m sure when the original version launched she wasn’t sharing this with her customers). We stated the 0.5% salicylic acid was too low and the pH of 4.4 too high to permit exfoliation to occur. Exfoliation can definitely help improve skin tone and assist with fading discolorations, but Clinique’s Even Better wasn’t good enough.

I asked the Consultant if the original Even Better (which I noticed still lining the shelves behind her) was going to be discontinued. “No, at least not yet. Clinique doesn’t want to disappoint the people that like this product, and, you know, it hasn’t been around that long—it would look odd if we suddenly took it away.” What an admission.

Long pause. “But wait,” I said. “Didn’t you just tell me that Even Better Clinical works much faster and is, for all intents and purposes, a much better formula than the original?” Her response was, as expected, “Yes.” With a confused look on my face, I asked, “But you’re still going to sell the one that doesn’t work that well?” She nodded. “OK,” I said, “but I’m still confused….who wouldn’t want the version that lightens their dark spots faster?” This assumes, of course, that the new Clinical version really does have a better formula than the original.

At that point, all she could do was hand me my pre-order receipt, smile, and move on to the next customer. It was so odd. I knew she agreed with me, that my logic wasn’t lost on her, but she really didn’t have a plausible explanation as to why the company is keeping an inferior version of their product around. She also couldn’t explain why the new version works better; instead, she just stated that it did. It’s true that some Clinique customers may like the original version of Even Better, but why not train the Consultants to sell them on the benefits of the (allegedly) improved formula? If anything, it seems Clinique agreed with our original assessment of Even Better’s inability to improve skin tone and discolorations; otherwise, why launch a new version so soon?

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.