“Anti-pollution” claims in cosmetic products
Nowadays, it is possible to find in the market several cosmetic products with claims like “anti-pollution protection”, “pollution shield”, “against pollution damage” and similar ones. But how can a company test and prove this type of allegations?
Marta Pinto

Marta Pinto

Regulatory Affairs Associate

EU LEGAL FRAMEWORK REGARDING CLAIMS 

According to the European Cosmetics Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009, “in the labelling, making available on the market and advertising of cosmetic products, text, names, trademarks, pictures and figurative or other signs shall not be used to imply that these products have characteristics or functions which they do not have”. 

Claims of cosmetic products have the goal to inform the users about the characteristics and qualities of those products. The Product Information File (PIF) of the cosmetic product should contain proof of the effects claimed for such cosmetic (when justified by the nature or the effect of the cosmetic product). 

The EU Commission Regulation (EU) No. 655/2013 lays down the common criteria for the justification of claims used in relation to cosmetic products. Its main goal is to guarantee a high level of protection for end users, in particular from misleading claims in relation to cosmetic products.  

Claims made about cosmetic products that are available in the EU market must also follow the provisions of Directive 2005/29/EC. The purpose of this Directive is to protect traders against misleading advertising and the unfair consequences thereof, as well as, to lay down the conditions under which comparative advertising is permitted. It also has the purpose to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market and achieve a high level of consumer protection.

POLLUTION VS. SKIN 

Air pollution poses a major threat to health and climate. The World Health Organization (WHO) states that 9 out of 10 people breath air containing high levels of pollutants. Inhaled or ingested pollutants can be distributed through the whole body through the systemic circulation. Pollutants may reach the superficial and deeper skin layers by transcutaneous and systemic routes, which makes the skin one of the main targets of these compounds.   

Pollution may cause a wide range of effects on the skin, e.g. allergy, dull complexion, dark spots, premature ageing (wrinkles), cancer and others. Pollutants may activate cutaneous metabolism and inflammatory pathways and induce oxidative stress (lowering the levels of antioxidants present). UV radiation is also a known source of oxidative stress and a main factor on skin ageing. 

The main goal of cosmetics when fighting pollution is to avoid the entrance of pollutants through the skin barrier, inhibit reactions on skin surface (e.g. sebum peroxidation) and to prevent or correct metabolic reactions in skin cells.  

“ANTI-POLLUTION” TESTING 

These days, in vitro/ex vivo testing is crucial to prove “anti-pollution” properties and efficacy, and consequent cosmetic claims. The state of cells and tissues can be evaluated by quantifying important biomarkers. Examples of such biomarkers are the following: 

  • DNA damage markers;  
  • Lactic acid content; 
  • Antioxidant defence markers;  
  • Mitochondrial proteins;  
  • Inflammation mediators;  
  • Stress proteins;  
  • Antioxidant and detox enzymes;  
  • Lipid metabolism biomarkers; protease activity;  
  • Proteins associated with pigmentation;  
  • Adenosine triphosphate; 
  • Interleukin IL1a; 
  • Tissue oxygenation.  

For example, pollution stress (like cigarette smoke, heavy metals, volatile organic compounds, and others) can be applied directly in cell culture media or by spraying the pollutant on skin tissue in a chamber.  

In vivo testing, like skin barrier test or evaluation of lipid peroxidation of sebum on volunteers, may also be done to access anti-pollution efficacy of cosmetics. However, this is not common and is more difficult to perform and evaluate objectively. 

There are no international regulated or standardized and reproducible anti-pollution tests, as well as there is no agreement on which biomarkers are best to prove the efficacy of anti-pollution products. 

At the end, different factors need to be considered and the cosmetic company should choose the correct testing depending on the intended claims. Testing the right pollutant can be a tricky question and it is important to be suitable to the different factors inherent to the region (climate, most common pollutants, skin type, etc) where the cosmetic is marketed. 

References: 

  1. Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on cosmetic products. 
  1. Commission Regulation (EU) No 655/2013 of 10 July 2013 laying down common criteria for the justification of claims used in relation to cosmetic products. 
  1. Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market. 

further
reading

cosmetic products

Creating a “Zero Waste” Cosmetic Industry. Is it possible?

Climate changes, pollution, waste management, recycling are some of the terms we see frequently on the news and tabloids. Consumers are concerned with the planet and are demanding more innovative and sustainability ideas (“eco-friendly”). Cosmetic and personal care products have been the target of some criticism by its users. Both the cosmetic industry and governments are starting to adapt and take action with the ultimate goal of reducing plastic waste. New ingredient and packaging alternatives are being developed and more sustainable products are starting to appear on the market.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Cannabis-Derived Ingredients in Cosmetic Products

Cannabis-derived ingredients are popular and interesting compounds. There is specific EU and national legislation regarding cannabis-derived ingredients, identifying which extracts and derivatives may be used in cosmetic products. There are several aspects to consider to ensure compliance when adding these compounds to your cosmetics and personal care products.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Cosmetic Claims in the European Union

Claims are an important part of a cosmetic and represent a powerful and essential tool of marketing. It is crucial to know which claims are allowed in cosmetic products in the EU and also how can they be substantiated.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Cosmetic companies obligations under REACH Regulation

REACH is a regulation of the European Union (EU) that stands for Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals. All chemical substances manufactured and market in the EU, whether used in our daily lives (e.g. clothes, cleaning products, cosmetics) or industrial processes, are regulated by REACH.

Read More »
cosmetic products

May Butylphenyl Methylpropional be used in my Cosmetic Products?

Butylphenyl Methylpropional, also known as Lilial, is a fragrance ingredient that has been used for years in several cosmetic and non-cosmetic products. Nevertheless, some concerns have been expressed regarding the use of this ingredient and its risk to consumers. The use of Butylphenyl Methylpropional shall be prohibited in cosmetic products from 1st March 2022.

Read More »
cosmetic products

RAPEX System 2020 Report

The rapid alert system (RAPEX) for dangerous non-food products enables national authorities to quickly exchange information about dangerous products. The European Union Safety Gate European RAPEX 2020 annual report was published in March this year. It lists the alerts and follow-up actions taken, per country, product category and risk notified.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Silica – a nanomaterial?

Notification of a cosmetic product containing nano-form ingredients can be complex and involves more costs for the company (cosmetic product owner). The best way to simplify the notification process is to make sure that the Silica and related ingredients used do not fall to the nanomaterial category.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Screening Assessment of Talc by Health Canada

In Canada, Talc was identified as a priority substance for assessment, so the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health performed a screening assessment of this compound. Regarding inhalation and perineal exposure, Talc may constitute a potential danger to human life or health.

Read More »
cosmetic products

New Revision of the SCCS Notes of Guidance

The SCCS has issued a new revision of its notes of guidance for the testing of cosmetic ingredients and their safety evaluation. This 11th revision was adopted at its plenary meeting on 30-31 March this year, and it updates the 10th revision that was published in 2018.

Read More »
cosmetic products

Is Propylparaben still considered Safe by the SCCS?

Propylparaben has been assessed several times by the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS). Last year there was a request for scientific opinion concerning the evaluation of a list of ingredients, including Propylparaben. On March, this year (2021), the SCCS issued the requested opinion on this ingredient.

Read More »
cosmetic products

China – the end of Animal Testing Requirements for Cosmetics?

Animal testing of cosmetics is already prohibited in the European Union for several years but, until now, it was mandatory to perform animal testing when making available a cosmetic product in the Chinese market. From 1st May (2021), animal testing will no longer be a requirement for ‘general’ cosmetics imported to China.

Read More »