SerumScoop: Tips, tricks and news
Have you ever heard someone conjecture that cosmetics are safer in Europe because they "ban over 1,000 dangerous ingredients and the U.S. only bans 8?" As usual, the truth is a lot more complicated, and in fact cosmetics in the U.S. are effectively just as safe as their European counterparts.
Our colleagues over at The Beauty Brains teamed up with a U.K.-based cosmetic chemist Colin Sanders to explain the ins and outs of the relatively new cosmetic laws in the E.U. vis-a-vis U.S. FDA regulations.
Read more about it here:
RevivHair is a cosmetic. As a cosmetics company, we are legally bound by U.S. FDA rules and regulations. And the FDA's definition of a cosmetic: a product that is "for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance" and does not "affect the structure or any function of the body" which would make the product a "drug."
When developing products we often have to walk a fine line when it comes to formulating for efficacy and marketing claims. We cannot say that, for instance, a product "will grow hair." We have to be very specific about terminology. In fact, in general we don't use any specific claims for a particular product. Any claim verbiage we use is strictly related to the individual raw ingredients we utilize, and we use only major manufacturer data -- who are also under U.S. FDA regulations about what they can claim and what they cannot. Our manufacturer claim data is legitimate, bonafide, and accurate (and googleable).
So while we of course cannot say that RevivHair will "grow hair," we can say it may very well help provide the optimal environment for strong, healthy, thick hair. That may sound like marketing gobbledygook, but it's the law.
But what about "cosmeceuticals?" Aren't they a "drug?" From our colleagues at The Chemist Corner:
One other classification of products is cosmeceuticals. The oft-controversial but significant contributor to our field, dermatologist Dr. Albert Kligman, coined the term cosmeceutical almost 30 years ago. He defined cosmeceuticals as topically applied products that do have a physiological effect on the skin. The industry was quick to respond because the potential regulation of cosmetics as drugs could cripple innovation due to time and cost. Kligman, however, intended to draw attention to the potential biological effects of all cosmetics that did not just merely camouflage or add color. In fact he said it was “scientifically silly to pretend that cosmetics did not do anything” and that cosmetics might actually be doing a lot of good.