The ‘clean beauty’ industry has boomed in the past few years, and continues to rise as consumers prioritise ‘non-toxic’ and ‘chemical-free’ formulas. But if our bodies are composed of chemicals, why do we avoid them in our skincare?
Nowadays, the words ‘clean’ and ‘beauty’ seem entirely synonymous with one another.
TikTok has seen the rise of the ‘clean girl’ trend, whose proprietors are slicking back their hair, combing their brows, and wearing minimal makeup atop flawless skin. Consumers are placing more emphasis on their appearance as part of the wellness craze, complete with kale smoothies and Tik-Tok-style house-cleaning routines.
The ‘clean’ phenomenon has done to the beauty industry what veganism did for diet trends. Everyone is cracking down on the ingredients inside their skincare products, calling out ‘toxic chemicals’ as the cause of everything from acne to gut inflammation.
This narrative has seen certain brands thrive, those using scientific wording in their marketing touch-points draw in hundreds of thousands of consumers year-on-year. ‘Drunk Elephant’ is one such example, basing their entire brand identity around avoidance of the ‘suspicious six’, a selection of six supposedly ‘toxic’ ingredients such as chemical sunscreens and SLS.
But the definition of ‘clean’ in this context has remained ambiguous, triggering criticism from skincare experts and beauty influencers alike.
The problem is that there’s no scientific data to back up these claims, despite what many brands will have you believe. ‘Clean beauty’ has a misinformation strategy that stems from the word ‘clean’ itself. As Anita Bhagwandas has pointed out, this terminology implies that anything not dubbing itself ‘clean’ must be dirty and even dangerous to our health.
Such connotation has driven hundreds of brands to adopt the ‘clean’ catchphrase in an effort to retain customers, making the concept more ubiquitous and thus more meaningless.
Hollywood A-listers have been a large factor in ‘clean beauty’s success. Gwyneth Paltrow – known for her health-obsessed wellness platform ‘Goop’, caused controversy last year after a video of her applying sunscreen went viral.
The actress, known for her stringent views on chemical sunscreens and other supposedly ‘toxic’ skincare ingredients, showed Vogue Online viewers how she placed sunscreen on the tip of her nose and cheeks, ‘the area where the sun really hits’. Medical professionals were quick to slam the advice, deeming it at best misleading, and at worst ‘dangerous’.
The capacity for those with such a huge platform to share grossly inaccurate information comes down to the lack of regulation surrounding skin-care rhetoric. Within the beauty industry, the definition of ‘clean’ products is still hotly debated, and the use of intimidating language like ‘non-toxic’ and ‘harmful chemicals’ has done little for consumer clarification.
What really constitutes ‘harmful chemicals’? It seems nobody truly knows nor cares to elaborate, the words themselves are deemed enough to turn you away from products ostensibly ‘unworthy’ of the ‘clean’ label.
Those citing clean beauty as the fountain of eternal youth – and health – often refer to the EWG (Environmental Working Group). The organisation’s ‘Skin Deep Database’ is an extensive list of beauty products rated from ‘worst’ to ‘EWG Certified’, a badge of honour awarded to products that meet the EWG’s self-proclaimed ‘strictest criteria for transparency and health’.
When searching EWG’s website for more information on what this criteria actually is, you’re met with the same sweeping statements that plague the rest of the industry.
According a video on the company’s website, many beauty products still contain ‘harmful chemicals that were introduced decades ago’ and said chemicals are known to cause ‘cancer and asthma’. But the EWG has no sources to back up these heavyweight statements.
‘Due to secretive supply chains and unregulated terminology, the beauty sector is facing a backlash from consumers who are seeking honesty, efficacy and simplicity. So as the consumer continues to scrutinise what’s in the products they put on their skin, clean beauty has become a new standard in the industry.’
Like other trends, ‘clean beauty’ has no parameters or governing body to regulate its claims. Netflix documentary ‘Toxic Beauty’ explored the lack of ingredient regulation in the US, where the FDA only prohibits 11 ingredients from being used in beauty products.
‘Toxic Beauty’ suggested that certain chemicals being used in skincare and makeup could be linked to infertility and cancer. But these hypotheses are ultimately scaremongering, causing consumers to right-off chemicals all together.
Ultimately, just because something is labelled ‘clean’ doesn’t mean it’s better for you or your skin. Dermatologist Dr Anjali Mahto states that many ‘clean beauty’ products don’t have clinical studies like engineered ingredients do, and so products often won’t perform to the standard customers are expecting.
So next time you find yourself reaching for something that says ‘clean’, ‘non-toxic’, or ‘honest’, remember that the brand behind that product may be ‘clean-bombing’ you into spending your money. Do your own research into ingredients you may be worried about – but ensure you cite medical professionals rather than celebrities or influencers.
The language of clean beauty may be attractive, but it remains meaningless in an industry laden with empty words and promises.
I’m Flo, (She/Her) a Senior Remote Writer at Thred. I recently completed a Masters in Visual Anthropology, and seek to interrogate the ways digital spaces can amplify marginalised voices in the arts and cultural sectors. Follow me on LinkedIn or ping me some feedback via email.
Women joining the carnivore trend might look like a rebellion against diet culture, but the motivations, the messaging, and the results people chase still fall along familiar gender lines.
In his New York Times piece about ‘the Men Who Eat Meat’, Steven Kurutz prefaces his exploration into the carnivorous diet trend by contrasting it with ‘Girl Dinner’.
In case you missed it, the internet trend involves women documenting themselves curating...
A modern twist on work-life balance encourages a more ‘realistic’ and fluid approach to juggling our daily commitments.
From the moment we start working, the question of balancing that work with our personal commitments becomes a lifelong fixation. And as modern capitalism demands more labour, time, and skills for comparatively less compensation, the chasm between our work and non-work selves seems only to grow.
Navigating that gap feels impossible for many...
From getting outside to tweaking your routine, these small changes make a big difference.
Every year, winter rolls around and smacks me in the face. I know it’s coming – and yet I remain naive to its impact on my mental state.
I’ll be half way through December before I realise the nagging sense of doom I’m feeling isn’t just ‘me’. My body’s been contending with dwindling sunlight, freezing temperatures, and a...
A study involving 10,189 participants of a variety of ages, genders, cultures, and ethnicities showed that the key to curbing anger is reducing physiological arousal – not indulging in it by venting.
From time to time, we all feel the urge to vent about a problem that’s been weighing heavy on our minds.
My dearest colleagues could tell you about the numerous times I’ve asked: ‘can I just say something?’ paused...
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.
0 comments
