The Importance of Truthful Advertising in the Skincare Industry
Concerns about false advertising in the skincare industry have been ongoing for quite some time. Everyday consumers are sometimes unsure about the purposes of the law: should it prohibit what’s unacceptable for majority citizens? Or should it foster changes that allow society to undergo healthy evolution?
When it comes to personal care, there is somewhat of a consensus that products should not harm and should have favorable effects when administered. However, this consensus disappears when it comes to the advertising of these products. False advertising can be a problem, and regulatory agencies often find themselves in uncharted waters.
In the skincare industry, companies commonly use creative language to advertise their products. This can be problematic when it comes to governmental regulatory agencies, as these agencies are tasked with preventing false information and misleading the public. In one example, an executive of a major marketing-driven company learned about biorhythms and chronobiology, and asked research and development teams to find ingredients active in this field. Research complied, and provided an appropriate ingredient which was then advertised with something like “This product puts the internal clocks of your skin back in register.” However, this humorous advertising line was banned by a British regulatory agency that found it to be false and misleading.
In another example, L’Oreal is a technology-driven company that spent several years analyzing the chemistry and biochemistry of antioxidants for skin care products. When it was decided to go with antioxidants, researchers came up with a derivative of vitamin C that was stable and had a long shelf life. This derivative was converted into ascorbic acid upon topical application, by the action of stratum corneum esterases and phosphatases. The Lancôme product containing this precursor of vitamin C was advertised as R&D had explained. However, an Italian regulatory agency felt that since imaginative advertising was allowed more tolerance in small cosmetic companies, a serious company such as L’Oreal should not indulge in fantastic advertising because it could be easily believed. Therefore, the Italian agency demanded that the company withdraw the advertising. This led to confusion between the marketing department and the regulatory agency. The marketing department felt that the advertising was appropriate because of its efficacy, while the regulatory agency believed that it was misleading.
The use of vitamins and antioxidants in personal care products has been a point of contention for regulators. In the 1990s, Lancôme launched Primordial, a vitamin E-containing product. The then-head of L’Oreal USA asked Paolo Giacomoni to change his presentation of the product. The head of L’Oreal stated that according to Giacomoni’s presentation, vitamin E would be considered a drug by the FDA, which would prohibit its use in cosmetics.
Giacomoni’s defense was that the vitamin E exhibited anti-aging properties, and he had published several papers in peer-reviewed international scientific journals on the efficacy of vitamin E with cultured cells and human volunteers. His research showed that the application of vitamin E after exposure to UV radiation hindered or removed cell and tissue damage. As aging is the accumulation of damage, Giacomoni concluded that vitamin E is an anti-aging factor. However, the FDA considered vitamin E a drug and would prohibit any advertising or use in a cosmetic product.
This shows that regulatory agencies are often uncertain about the use of certain compounds in personal care products, and much of the time become obscurantists. They foster false advertising and can sometimes promote potentially unsafe ingredients. Therefore, it’s essential that companies take responsibility for the claims they make.
The skincare industry is particularly vulnerable to regulatory intervention as sunscreens, for example, are considered drugs in the United States. They must be manufactured according to rigorous guidelines that provide evidence of their efficacy according to rigorously described experimental protocols, and they must satisfy strict criteria of safety both for the “patients” as well as the environment.
UV filters were originally displayed in a “positive” list, meaning that the 15 to 20 molecules on that list were the only allowed molecules that could be used to manufacture sunscreens. However, because the safety data of many of these filters are considered insufficient, the positive list was reduced to two filters: zinc oxide and titanium dioxide. Despite ZnO and Ti2O being potent generators of singlet oxygen – a very reactive form of oxygen that can do much harm – when exposed to ultraviolet radiation, the FDA does not recommend that manufacturers ensure singlet oxygen won’t be generated from the application of the two filters when they are applied topically to the skin.
It’s clear that current ad campaigns can be based on trendy, overhyped ingredients rather than efficacy, resulting in misleading information on the ability for products to improve overall skin health. This is particularly dangerous in the skincare industry, as many consumers are willing to pay extra money for skincare products, assuming that a higher price tag equates to more efficacy in the product.
There needs to be a shift in emphasis on the decency and transparency of skincare advertising. Companies must be transparent about the science behind their products and the claims that they are making. It’s essential that regulatory agencies continue to monitor and control advertising claims, as well as continue to review the scientific evidence for the emerging cosmetic trends.
In conclusion, it’s important that skincare companies focus on science-based advertising and avoid potentially misleading claims. Additionally, regulatory agencies must continue to ensure that scientific evidence is required for beauty claims and scrutinize skincare advertising. Ultimately, the responsible advertising of skincare products must ensure that consumers are provided with accurate, honest and helpful information to make informed decisions when it comes to skincare, as well as ensuring legitimacy in the industry.
