March 2003
Dear Paula,
Have you found some new information about antioxidants that you haven't passed along? According to the latest edition of The Beauty Bible, you don't seem to think that they work or, at best, nothing has been proved. If antioxidants don't work, why have you brought out the Super Antioxidant Concentrate. There are antioxidants in the new formulation of your sunscreen as well.

I have read that the Federal Trade Commission regulates "deceptive" and "unfair" advertising by cosmetics companies. However, in your book Don't Go Shopping for Hair Care Products Without Me, you intimate that there is no regulation for deceptive advertising and that "companies do not have to substantiate claims or prove efficacy of any kind." From what I have read, the FDA does not regulate unproven claims, but the FTC does. The major hair-care companies have legal and claim departments that accumulate evidence to substantiate their claims in a scientific and legal manner. However, I don't know if their information is based upon in vitro or in vivo data. Any further information you can provide would be helpful.

Tracy, via email

Dear Tracy,
Your comments are well taken. Yes, the FTC and the FDA do differ in their regulations, but that doesn't necessarily help the consumer when it comes to claims about cosmetics. It is true that the FDA does not have efficacy or safety requirements for cosmetics, but neither does the FTC; they merely rely on information provided by the cosmetics company.

The purview of the FTC is to be concerned about deceptive or erroneous advertising claims. "When the substantiation claim is express (e.g., ‘tests prove,’ ‘doctors recommend,’ and ‘studies show’), the Commission expects the firm to have at least the advertised level of substantiation" (Source: FTC Policy Statement Regarding Advertising Substantiation, ftc.gov). That means all the FTC cares about is that some kind of "study" for claims does exist, but that doesn’t have to be a published study and it doesn't have to meet any scientific standards; it just needs to comply with some level of "our studies show." A study showing a moisturizer reduces lines is often done by stripping the skin with alcohol and then applying the so-called astounding formulation. Any skin, after being dried up and irritated with alcohol, would look better when a moisturizer is applied. Or if a study states that skin looked 80% better, that is almost always the subjective opinion of the observer, who is someone hired by the company to conduct the study. That can pass the FTC standards for proof of claim, but it doesn't help the consumer in any way, shape, or form.

Further, an advertising claim (skin looks younger, repairs hair, non-irritating, reduces free-radical damage, broad-spectrum protection, contains vitamins, lifts skin, fights gravity; is all natural, etc.) is not the same thing as whether or not a product is effective, worth the price, safe to use (whether or not it contains irritating or sensitizing ingredients), really can protect from the entire UVA spectrum, how it compares to other similar products, or how much of an ingredient a product contains.

Plus, exactly what deceptive means is up for debate, which is why the FTC doesn't act on cosmetic advertising issues very often. For example, if a hair-care product claims to protect from sun damage, the FTC guidelines aren't concerned about whether the product does or doesn't contain an SPF, or whether the product only contains enough active ingredients to warrant an SPF of 2. When a hair-care product claims to repair hair or a skin-care product claims to repair skin, the FTC doesn't take issue that the "repair" claim is a temporary or aesthetic comment and that the actual structure of hair or skin hasn't really been changed. Even more to the point are claims that skin-care products can reduce fine lines or firm skin or that hair-care products can strengthen the hair. Exactly how firm, how reduced, or how much stronger is not enough to raise red flags for the FTC.

If major hair-care companies have legal and claim departments that accumulate evidence to substantiate their claims, I have yet to see any of that evidence. My team has called every cosmetics company whose products we've ever reviewed asking for proof of their claims, and over the years have received almost none (I can count on one hand the number of studies cosmetics companies have sent to me).

One more point: it is interesting to note that there are definitely times when the FTC has made companies alter their advertising claims (I read about these all the time in the industry newsletter The Rose Sheet). However, by the time the ad is pulled or rewritten, the consumer has already been deluged with the frivolous claims, which are neatly planted in their thoughts before the reaction and retraction takes place.