Products I do not use (as a chemist)

Main ideas / lessons

• The speaker (Michelle, a chemist) disputes generic “avoid everything” beauty advice and instead explains which specific products/ingredients she avoids—and why—based on:
  • Irritation risk
  • Rancidity/stability concerns
  • Poor labeling/regulatory compliance
  • Insufficient evidence or safety concerns
• She repeatedly emphasizes that:
  • “Natural” or “traditional” does not automatically mean “safe.”
  • Safety and efficacy should be judged with evidence and toxicology, not marketing, virality, or broad claims by doctors.
  • Ingredient labeling and compliance are a practical signal of whether a brand can be trusted.

Products/ingredients she avoids and why (grouped by topic)

1) Toothpaste containing SLS (Sodium Lauryl Sulfate)

• What it is: SLS is a surfactant, used widely as a cleaning/foaming agent (e.g., in toothpaste, face cleansers, and car wash liquids).
• General properties: SLS can be harsh/irritating on its own.
• Why it’s often tolerated in skin cleansers: Skin cleanser formulations can use multiple surfactants and formulation strategies to reduce irritation (often alongside moisturizers like glycerin).
• Why toothpaste is different (her concern):
  • Toothpaste may not “balance” SLS with gentling strategies.
  • Oral tissues are described as more fragile than skin.
  • Exposure to mucous membranes is possible, and SLS may be more relevant because it can be swallowed.
• Personal example: She is prone to canker sores/mouth ulcers, and avoiding SLS toothpaste reduced her ulcer frequency.
• What she recommends instead: Switch to toothpaste without SLS (example mentioned: Sensodyne, chosen because it “happens to not have SLS”).

---

2) Beauty products with too much unsaturated oils (especially omega-rich plant oils)

• What she means by unsaturated oils:
  • Oils high in omega-3/omega-6 are more chemically reactive due to double bonds.
• Main concern: oxidation/rancidity
  • Double bonds can react with oxygen, producing rancid-smelling degradation (like old cooking oil).
  • Oxidation risk varies by oil’s fatty-acid profile; more linoleic/linolenic acid tends to oxidize faster.
  • Antioxidants can slow oxidation but don’t necessarily stop it.
• What the problem looks like:
  • Often odor changes; sometimes texture changes (e.g., becoming sticky or lumpy).
• Acknowledged upside:
  • Omega fatty acids are essential for skin and deficiency may correlate with dry/itchy skin.
  • Diet-focused evidence often finds them not inflammatory.
• Her practical stance:
  • She avoids these oils in beauty products unless she can use them up quickly.
  • She avoids them especially in unfragranced products (fragrance may mask smell).
  • She avoids them even more in lip products since odor is near the nose.
• What she uses instead for lips: More occlusive ingredients that form a protective layer and trap water—she emphasizes using occlusives rather than certain “natural oils.”

---

3) “Wrong ingredient list” / poor labeling or questionable compliance

• Core principle: Correct ingredient lists are comparatively easy. If a brand can’t get labeling right, she assumes the product may be less reliable in performance or stability.
• Claims about ingredient list rules:
  • Ingredient names must be comma-separated.
  • Names must use official INCI nomenclature.
  • INCI names can be checked in an EU database: CosIng.
• Examples of issues she points out:
  • MCT oil incorrectly listed (should be caprylic/capric triglyceride).
  • Vague/non-ingredient claims like “lake sourced minerals” (not a proper ingredient name; may conceal what it actually contains).
  • “Shea butter” allegedly should use a more formal INCI/Latin naming convention.
  • Preservatives listed incorrectly (including placement/handling issues—example: “Geogard ECT”).
  • Failure to use correct Latin names for plant ingredients.
  • “Vitamin E” should be tocopherol (proper naming issue).
  • Misuse of label claims inside the ingredient list (e.g., “fragrance, phthalate free, love”).
• Notes on “phthalate-free” claims:
  • She notes some phthalates are suspected endocrine disruptors, but argues “phthalate free” can be an illegal/denigrating claim depending on context and regulation.
• Key takeaway instruction: If the ingredient list looks sloppy, she treats it as a red flag for manufacturing quality and trustworthiness.

---

4) “Natural hair removal” oil: Cyperus oil (viral TikTok trend)

• What’s being claimed: It’s promoted as better at removing hair than laser.
• Evidence/effectiveness critique:
  • The claim is based on two studies by a single author, with limited supporting research.
  • Red flags she mentions:
    • Presentation concerns in the main study (e.g., repeated numbers in a table—possible typo/poor review quality).
    • Earlier study in a “dodgier” journal plus duplicated before/after photos (reported by Mo Skin Lab).
    • Inconsistent timelines/results between the two papers.
    • Highly improbable statistics: many P-values reported as 0.00, which she says is not typical in real human studies.
• Safety critique:
  • She says cyperus oil is claimed to be anti-androgenic (works against male hormones).
  • She worries that reducing hair growth via deep follicle activity could imply systemic effects:
    • possible endocrine disruption, since hormones act broadly in the body.
  • She notes anti-androgens can increase risk for some cancers (example given: certain breast cancer types).
  • She stresses the lack of robust safety data and controls compared to regulated drugs.
• Why she challenges “what’s the harm?” thinking:
  • Traditional/natural does not guarantee safety.
  • If it works by being biologically active, it may also produce harmful effects at effective doses.
• Brands/availability concern: Some new brands reportedly sell cyperus oil; buyers may receive variable products from sites like Temu/Amazon.

Alternatives she recommends for hair removal

• Laser or IPL
• Home versions of laser/IPL (she says they work “pretty well”)
• Electrolysis
• Shaving/waxing/depilatory creams (remove hair at/near the skin surface)
• For PCOS-related hair growth: anti-androgen medications like spironolactone (properly checked/regulated)
• For reducing hair growth: she mentions a “real, tested drug cream” (no specific name given in the provided subtitle text)

---

5) Solid bar conditioners

• Why they may fail for very damaged hair (her explanation):
  • Conditioners work by forming a thin, smooth coating that reduces breakage and tangling.
  • Hair has an outer oily layer called the F layer; it stays more intact for less-damaged hair.
  • Heavy chemical processing (she mentions bleaching to white) removes more of the surface oils/layers.
  • On heavily damaged/bleached hair, standard conditioners may not adhere well.
  • She prefers conditioning ingredients like amodimethicone.
• What she claims about many market bar conditioners:
  • They “don’t have the right ingredients” for her level of damage.
• Conditional conclusion:
  • Bar conditioners may work for others—especially with less damage or shorter hair.
  • For her, she sticks to liquid conditioners.

---

6) Estrogen cream on the face for anti-aging (TikTok trend)

• What’s claimed/promoted: Estrogen cream is presented as a miracle anti-aging product.
  • She notes early promotion included medical doctors; later, more doctors warned.
  • She argues evidence is not strong enough for general use.
• Efficacy concerns:
  • Might help some post-menopausal skin changes, but not everyone.
  • She emphasizes aging isn’t purely hormone-driven.
  • She discourages use for those who haven’t gone through menopause.
• Risk concerns: hyperpigmentation and melasma
  • She claims estrogen can worsen dark spots, hyperpigmentation, and melasma (noting some promoting dermatologists deny this).
• Safety concerns: systemic absorption + vulnerable groups
  • People reportedly use vaginal estrogen cream on faces.
  • Potential estrogen exposure can be higher than expected.
  • Telehealth/companies may not screen properly.

Included medical commentary (Q&A style) and her interpretation

• She consults Dr. Jen Gunter (OB/GYN), who provides evidence-based cautions:
  • People report complications such as vaginal bleeding, but true frequency is unknown due to limited studies.
  • Literature is described as patchy, with few high-quality long-term studies.
  • She distinguishes between:
    • Compounded products (often estriol) with variable ingredients.
    • Vaginal products applied to the face—there’s insufficient quality data to generalize safety across body parts.
• Discussion of Alloy’s compounded M4 estriol cream:
  • Promoters claim it doesn’t absorb into blood, reducing cancer risk.
  • Dr. Gunter and Michelle argue doctors may not interpret raw safety data appropriately.
  • Michelle explains the cited safety study reportedly measured estrogen levels only:
    • at baseline and again at 12 weeks
    • without enough intermediate data to prove safety across the timeframe.
  • Compounding variability:
    • different pharmacist mixing,
    • batch strength variability,
    • stability/absorption uncertainty.
• Telemedicine screening concerns:
  • Example described where a dermatologist tested Alloy’s screening by entering breast-cancer history and still got prescribed estriol cream quickly.
• Cancer-risk mechanism noted by Dr. Gunter:
  • Estrogen without adequate progestogen protection can increase risk of uterine lining precancer/cancer.
  • For breast-cancer survivors—especially ER-positive—safety is even more uncertain due to absorption concerns.

Her conclusion and alternatives

• She argues that companies promoting these products should fund proper research if they truly believe they’re safe.
• She recommends safer options with broader evidence/safety:
  • Sunscreen
  • Tretinoin
  • Mentions MEP (a safer estrogen derivative), described as acting like estrogen in skin but becoming inactive once in blood.
• Closing warning: don’t follow influencer/prescription-related advice without solid evidence—especially if cancer doctors have warned against it.

Speakers / sources featured (as named in the subtitles)

• Michelle (speaker; chemist / beauty science educator)
• Mo Skin Lab (toxicologist / safety assessor; YouTube + Substack)
• Dr. Andrea Love (biologist; cancer research)
• Dr. Shereene Idriss (dermatologist; promoted/clarified the cyperus oil trend; viral)
• Dr. Jen Gunter (OB/GYN; provided estrogen-cream safety commentary)
• Alloy (company referenced for compounded estriol cream and telehealth sponsorship)
• Nutrition Made Simple (referenced as a source for omega-related videos)
• CosIng (EU database referenced for checking INCI ingredient names)
• European Union / EU regulation (referenced generally; no single person)
• Temu and Amazon (platforms referenced as purchase sources for cyperus oil)