The world of cosmetics is one of cheering and shouting from clever marketing people for whom it is a delight to cut corners as quickly as possible. Screaming slogans of one hundred percent this and zero percent that, which are mainly based on fresh oven air. Barbara Geusens gets the back and forth, she says.
The heart of the bioengineer and doctor of dermatology – and entrepreneur with her own cosmetics line, but more about that at the end of this conversation – bleeds when once again someone claims that his product is 100 percent safe – “no one can do that scientifically.” make hard”. “Another one: free from parabens (agents that ensure that products have a longer shelf life, ed.). Of course that is true, those dangerous parabens are banned.” Geusens calls it “an unrelenting wave of scaremongering. To make people feel like they are part of a conspiracy. The Cosmetics Conspiracy.” Behold, the title of her book.
“Those Tiktokkers are basing themselves on a bad, out-of-context study, with the result that we run the risk of a generation that no longer wants to use the sunscreen.”
Barbara Geusens
Doctor of dermatology
All those nonsensical slogans and claims are usually not only unscientific, they can even be downright dangerous, she says. Because there is a particularly bad trend coming, which is coming from the Netherlands. “I call it anti-SPF conspiracy. SPF stands for Sun Protection Factor – the sun protection factor that can be read on every sunscreen. Videos are circulating on YouTube and Tiktok in which so-called skinfluencers (influencers who mainly promote care products, ed.) claim that the sun filters in those creams cause cancer and that you should therefore not use them. That makes me angry.”
“A sunscreen is a good way to protect you against one of the most common cancers, skin cancer. But they are waving suggestive studies from 20 years ago that would show a possible link between organic sunscreens and endocrine disrupting properties, with a possible link to cancer. The scientific community has refuted those studies. They were poorly designed in terms of methodology, in terms of statistical analyzes and so on. And yet there are people who fall for that.”
Isn’t such nonsense easy to refute?
“Of course, but people like to remember the negative. It’s pure scaremongering. The cosmetics industry is really not out to poison everyone. The guidelines and legislation in Europe are so strict that you can rest assured that everything that comes onto the market here is safe. But those Tiktokkers then base themselves on a bad, out-of-context study, with the result that we run the risk of a generation that no longer wants to use the sunscreen. That is definitely dangerous.” (Read more below the photo)
You yourself say that we can rest assured that no unsafe product will come onto the market in Europe. Then why did you write that book?
“Because people still don’t know that. And because everything that is not regulated – the ‘claims’ and ‘terms’ – is massively exploited. If I claim tomorrow that I have a so-called Clean Beauty brand, then that is allowed. No one will stop me and ask where the certificates are and the studies to make that claim. Because that is not regulated. That’s why I wrote this book. I am a scientist and I want to make it clear to people that they should not just accept everything.”
“Overly facile scientific or environmental claims are used that make no sense. Sciencewashing and greenwashing are commonplace. People then read that something is 100 percent plant-based or vegan. Sounds good and environmentally conscious. But actually it’s nonsense.”
“There is no such thing as 100 percent natural. In any case, extracting something from a plant requires a chemical process. Such claims are misleading”
Barbara Geusens
Doctor of dermatology
How so?
“Look at it scientifically. Man is a mammal. Our skin therefore also consists of animal fats. We can get ingredients from the plant world that look somewhat similar, but skin is not a plant. I understand that people don’t want anything animal-unfriendly, but they should also know that no product has been tested on animals since 2009. Moreover: 100 percent natural does not exist. In any case, extracting something from a plant requires a chemical process. Such claims are misleading.”
Skin-friendly advice from Barbara Geusens
- Use an oil or milky cleansing product at night. Avoid sulphates if you have sensitive skin
- Hydrate sparingly
- Buy face cream in airtight and lighttight packaging with a pump, not in a jar
- Sun protection is indispensable, a day cream with sun filter is insufficient. Reapply this protection every 2 to 3 hours
Yet everyone goes along with it smoothly. The average consumer spends 175,000 euros on cosmetic products throughout his life. Do we all spend so much money to be fooled and counter the perfectly normal natural processes?
“Not always. Our skin cannot cleanse itself or protect itself from sunlight. We have to do that ourselves. It is definitely useful to support them. Remember that our skin is our largest organ and the only one exposed to the outside world. You don’t want to destroy that. If you obsessively apply all kinds of products to your skin – with the best intentions – you can disrupt those natural processes, with all the consequences and problems that entails. Do we really need those ten or fifteen products that we are being told?”
“The price of a product says nothing about how good or bad it is”
Barbara Geusens
Doctor of dermatology
And do they have to cost so much? Expensive is not always better, you write. There are ointments and creams in the supermarket that work at least as well as their very expensive brothers.
“The price of a product says nothing about how good or bad it is. You should always look at the company behind it. In addition to their top range, the large groups also have a cheaper line. There isn’t much difference between the two. They often change a few ingredients and that’s it.”
Have you ever looked at an ingredient list like this? You have to be a bioengineer or doctor of dermatology to understand it.
(laughs) “And even then. I usually can’t deduce much from it either. It is difficult to determine exactly what is contained in which concentration. I think that could be more transparent. I also understand that those companies want to protect their intellectual property. They invest a lot of money in research and development. But a little more clarity would be nice.”
“An example: “With Vitamin C”, it says large on the packaging. That sounds good, provided it is applied in the right concentration, the right form and the right formula. But none of that can be found on the packaging. The effect of half a percent of vitamin C is negligible. But the consumer can be misled by this.” (Read more below the box)
Stop these four unnecessary beauty rituals and save your money and skin problems
Greenwashing and sciencewashing, is that something of recent years?
“I think it’s always been there. ‘Dermatologically tested’, ‘clinically tested’… That inspires confidence. But what was the outcome of that test? It says nothing about how the study was set up, who it was tested on and whether it is sufficiently scientifically substantiated.”
“Greenwashing has been on the rise in recent years. We are all becoming more environmentally conscious. But there is still a lack of regulation in that area. There are now private initiatives that are filling that gap. Ecocert, ISO certificates… A clear response to the fact that there is not yet an unambiguous framework. That is positive in itself, but it remains something commercial.”
“I don’t want to tar all skinfluencers with the same brush and say that they are only guided by commercial gain. The problem is with those celebrities who claim anything”
Barbara Geusens
Doctor of dermatology
But the kings of commerce are the skinfluencers. Those aren’t your best friends, are they?
“Look after. Within those skinfluencers you also have dermatologists or people who have studied cosmetic sciences. I don’t want to tar them all with the same brush and say that they are only guided by commercial gain. The problem is with those celebrities who claim anything.”
I’ll just say her name: Gwyneth Paltrow. American actress and not the most savvy skinfluencer, I understand.
(nods) “So her. She says or does something and people believe her, even though they don’t even know what she’s talking about – and neither does Paltrow himself, I suspect. But she does have a huge influence and millions of followers. What she says often makes no sense. In a video she shows how she believes sunscreen should be applied. A little under the eyes and on the cheeks. As if you are protected. Nobody stops those people. Perhaps because the regulatory authorities have too much other work. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not have unlimited resources. Their priority is of course medicines. Cosmetics just follows along.” (Read more below the photo)
The influence of these skinfluencers on their target audience, often young people who are easily influenced, is very great.
“I often wonder how this social media generation will ever be able to distinguish right from wrong. Those influencers are literally sitting next to them. And every time they click on an app, they are bombarded by advertisements and fake news. Who could always resist that? With my book I want to arm people with knowledge against this.”
Do you ever Google yourself?
(surprised) “That was a long time ago…”
I did it just for fun. You are the founder of Nomige, a brand that sells facial care products based on DNA. Customers send a saliva swab and you have it analyzed. Your own Wikipedia page literally states: “However, there is doubt about the effectiveness, while the procedure is expensive.” Aren’t you guilty of the practices you denounce in your book?
“It is true that knowledge about this is still very limited. It is extremely complex and I am the first to admit that. But in my defense, I was able to publish a peer-reviewed, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study on the matter. That strengthens me.”
“I understand why you make that comment. There isn’t enough research yet. But the results that I – and my clients – see are there.”
It’s not exactly cheap either. 400 euros and more, I read. A Dutch professor of clinical genetics says: “When you look in the mirror, you know where you have a problem on your skin.”
“But in that mirror you can’t see what the cause of that problem is. Is skin oily because it is naturally that way or because you use too much or the wrong cream? Through the DNA you get an objective, scientifically based answer. DNA does not say everything. It is also the living conditions that determine what your skin needs. Smoking, for example. Or someone’s diet. I try to remove the subjectivity and work as scientifically as possible. There is still a long way to go, I dare to admit. I am working with various academic centers to see which tests we can add to work as accurately as possible. And rest assured, it will never be a brand that will just play along and shout along with the rest to get some attention.”
The cosmetics conspiracy’ by Barbara Geusens, published by Borgerhoff & Lamberigts, 192 pages
